creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Michelle Malkin
Michelle Malkin
25 May 2012
Obama's Land of the LOST

What's green and blue and grabby all over? President Obama's new pressure campaign for Congress to ratify the … Read More.

23 May 2012
Jaczko the Jerk: Harry Reid's Sexist Crony Gets the Boot

The embattled chair of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission resigned this week. It's a victory for … Read More.

18 May 2012
How the Gay-Marriage Mob Slimed Manny Pacquiao

Boxing champion Manny Pacquiao is guilty — of being true to his Catholic faith. The gay-marriage mob is … Read More.

The Year in Obama Scandals -- and Scandal Deniers

Share Comment

With 2011 drawing to a close, it is time to account. As an early-and-often chronicler of Chicago-on-the-Potomac, I am amazed at the stubborn and clingy persistence of President Barack Obama's snowblowers in the media. See no scandal, hear no scandal, speak no scandal.

Dartmouth College professor Brendan Nyhan asserted in May — while Operation Fast and Furious subpoenas were flying on Capitol Hill — that "one of the least remarked upon aspects of the Obama presidency has been the lack of scandals." Conveniently, he defines scandal as a "widespread elite perception of wrongdoing."

So as long as left-wing Ivy League scribes refuse to perceive something to be a scandal — never mind the actual suffering endured by the family of murdered Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, whose death came at the hands of a Mexican cartel thug wielding a Fast and Furious gun walked across the southern border under Attorney General Eric Holder's watch — there is no scandal!

Self-serving much?

Mother Jones' Kevin Drum likewise proclaimed: "Obama's presidency has so far been almost completely free of scandal."

This after the year kicked off in January with the departure of lying eco-radical czar Carol Browner. In backroom negotiations, she infamously bullied auto execs to "put nothing in writing, ever." The previous fall, the White House's own oil spill panel had singled out Browner for misleading the public about the scientific evidence for the administration's Draconian drilling moratorium and "contributing to the perception that the government's findings were more exact than they actually were."

The Interior Department inspector general and federal judges likewise blasted drilling ban book-cooking by Browner and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who falsely rewrote the White House drilling ban report to doctor the Obama-appointed panel's own overwhelming scientific objections to the job-killing edict.

In February, federal judge Martin Feldman in Louisiana excoriated the Obama Interior Department for defying his May 2010 order to lift its fraudulent ban on offshore oil and gas drilling in the Gulf. He called out the administration's culture of contempt and "determined disregard" for the law.

This spring saw rising public anger over the preferential Obamacare waiver process (which I first reported on in September 2010). Some 2,000 lucky golden ticket winners were freed from the costly federal mandates — including a handful of fancy restaurants in Aloha Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco district, the entire state of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Nevada, and scores of local, state and national Big Labor organizations, from the Service Employees International Union and Teamsters on down. Meanwhile, as The Hill newspaper reported last month, other not-so-lucky Republican-led states seeking waivers, such as Indiana and Louisiana, were rejected.

But it wasn't just Republicans objecting to the president's arbitrary Obamacare fiats.

In July, congressional Democrats turned on the monstrous federal health bureaucracy known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board. The constitutionally suspect panel — freed from normal public notice, public comment and public review rules — would have unprecedented authority over health care spending and an expanding jurisdiction of private health care payment rates.

Obama's health and human services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, faced separate legal questions over her overseer role in a hair-raising document-shredding case when she served as governor of Kansas. In October, a district judge in the Sunflower State suspended court proceedings in a high-profile criminal case against the abortion racketeers of Planned Parenthood. Bombshell court filings showed that Kansas health officials "shredded documents related to felony charges the abortion giant faces" and failed to disclose it for six years.

That same month, Bloomberg News columnist Jonathan Alter gushed: "There is zero evidence ... of corruption. Where is it?"

Alter's declaration of the "Obama Miracle" came just weeks after the politically driven half-billion-dollar Solyndra stimulus "investment" went bankrupt, prompting an FBI raid and ongoing criminal and congressional probes of the solar company funded by top White House bundler and visitor George Kaiser.

As Solyndra and an avalanche of other ongoing green subsidy scams erupted, so did the LightSquared debacle — a federal broadband boondoggle involving billionaire hedge fund managers and Obama donors Philip Falcone and George Soros. In September, two high-ranking witnesses — William Shelton, the four-star general who heads the Air Force Space Command, and National Coordination Office for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation and Timing Director Anthony Russo — exposed how the White House had pressured them to alter their congressional testimony and play down concerns about LightSquared's interference threat to military communications.

The White House continues to block efforts to gain information about the Federal Communications Commission's approval of a special waiver for the company, even as new government tests this month showed that the company's "signals caused harmful interference to the majority of ... general purpose GPS receivers."

The Obama White House closed out the year with Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri demanding a probe of the smelly $443 million no-bid smallpox antiviral pill contract with Siga Technologies — controlled by big lefty donor Ron Perelman. Then there was the small matter of massive voter fraud in Indiana, where a Democratic official resigned amid allegations that "dozens, if not hundreds," of signatures were faked to get Obama on the state primary ballot in 2008. And while Americans busied themselves with the holidays, White House and Democratic campaign officials were dumping more than $70,000 in contributions from another deep-pocketed contributor — scandal-plagued pal and former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, who oversaw the collapse of MF Global.

All this — and so much more — yet erstwhile "conservative" journalist Andrew Sullivan of Newsweek/The Daily Beast scoffed, "Where are all the scandals promised by Michelle Malkin?"

There's none so blind as those who will not see.

Michelle Malkin is the author of "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2010). Her e-mail address is malkinblog@gmail.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM


Comments

9 Comments | Post Comment
Sorry, but I haven't seen a greater scandal in my entire life than the war against Iraq, and the total capitulation of the media in the enablement of the myth that we were going there to stop a country that was on the verge of deploying a nuclear weapons capability.

Now we have an Iraq on the verge of being a client of Iran, which could have been and was predicted when Bush embarked upon that sorry adventure, the consequences of which we and many, many Iraqis (not to mention Israel and a lot of other folks in the Middle East) will be suffering from for a long time to come.

Not a peep out of Ms. Malkin was heard about any of that, which makes all of her whining about her pet boogeyman Obama a bunch of meaningless noise
Comment: #1
Posted by: Masako
Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:21 PM
Re: Masako
Iraq was only a scandal in your universe, my friend. If you bothered to read any of the captured documents from Saddam's Oval office, you would realize this. He had active bio and chem programs, still thought he was at war with us, and had violated every term of the cease-fire from the first Gulf War - so there already existed a state of war between us. The only reason he didn't have an active nuke program, is he was buying off the shelf from NKorea; I'm not sure why that gives you comfort.
Freeing 50million people from under a brutal dictator is a messy business, and the only thing I regret is that you Leftists were too partisan to show your support or at least keep your mouths shut... things would've gone a lot easier if you'd had.
And I think you underestimate the amount of hatred the Iraqis feel towards Iran. They fought a brutal war for over a decade... they aren't going to be friends anytime soon.
You libs have woven this incredible mythological tapestry about Bush; unfortunately, very little of it is based on fact. Malkin is referring to ACTUAL scandals, not just liberals with opinions.
Comment: #2
Posted by: jrobinson
Tue Dec 27, 2011 10:29 PM
I suppose everyone has a "pet boogeyman". Bush, three years out of office, is a favorite of the left. A sort of shield, Bush is brought up whenever the shortcomings of the current President are enumerated. Raising the Bush Shield is easier than addressing the issues mentioned in this article. Call it the sucker defense; "Barry, did you choke your little brother?", "He stole my sucker three years ago!"

This sort of thing works for suckers.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Tom
Wed Dec 28, 2011 6:32 AM
Well said, jrobinson, and it's about time we started publicly unravelling that tapestry. Thanks to people like Ms Malkin, these crooks just might get caught. Keep of the good work!
Comment: #4
Posted by: JIGuy
Wed Dec 28, 2011 6:33 AM
Obama said as a candidate that he was going to pull out of Iraq as soon as he was elected. 3 years later he didn't keep that promise and was kicked of the country instead of withdrawing. Its just as much obamas war as it was bush's. Speaking of not keeping promises obama said he would close gitmo ASAP. 3 years later and he just signed a bill extending the facility's use.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Wed Dec 28, 2011 9:30 AM
My friends, it all sounds compelling on yours side at first, fact-free blush, but the fact is we are about to go to war with Iran, and that is a direct result of the wreckage of the balance of power in the Middle East caused by the Iraq war.

And in case you think I am some kind of sympathizer with Iran, ditch that line of attack. They are and have been since the deposing of the Shah one of our, and most of the rational world's greatest enemies.

Iraq never was. It had a brutal guy running the show, but so do a huge number of other countries in this world. And we have no problem buddying up to them. None of you have advocated going to war with them.

War is not about documents, it is about reality. The reality, much as you want to resist considering it, is that the "threat" of Iraq was fabricated by a a poorly managed bureaucracy under the aegis of a well-intentioned, but incompetent president. Obama certainly has his incompetencies too, but not in this area. He inherited this particular headache.

Now we, and more importantly, Israel, have a real threat in Iran. This is not about your childish concepts of "liberals" versus "conservatives." We all need to grow up and get off of that.

Have any of you really pictured how you would have felt if you were an Iraqi, and had to put up with Bush's vendetta against their dictator? They may not have liked Hussein, but I doubt many were willing to give up their homes, their schools, their public services, their clean running water, and their very future (not to mention their lives, in the case of those who became "collateral damage") to side with some rhetorical crap about how making them ground zero was going to strike a blow for democracy.

Get real. Would any of you be willing to compromise your kids' future for an adventure like that? And where has that adventure gone? Do you think Iraq will be anything other than a client of Iran within a year or so, absent more big time war in that region?

I'm not a liberal, whatever that is, I'm a pragmatist. And I don't want some foreign country deciding for me and my kids who will run my country, especially when all the risks are borne by me and mine, not by the folks in the foreign country who are financing that cool-sounding experiment. I have an idea: lets experiment on you and all of yours and see what happens, and if it doesn't work out, well, YOU can bear the consequences, and I will go on living my normal comfy life here, far away from all the bombs, poisoned water, disrupted education and other institutions, and general destruction of everything I have known in my life.

That's what we did to the average Iraqi. If you can't admit that, you are no better than a bunch of dope-smoking junkies.

I do not like criticizing what my president has done. Bush did some great things with education here, and I believe he genuinely meant well in his efforts as a president. He was clean, he was not corrupt, and and he was better than many. But he made a huge mistake in Iraq, and the only way we can fix that is to acknowledge it and move on. The point is not to blame, but to figure out how and why we made the mistake and learn from it.

Why in the world can't you so-called conservatives get that?
Comment: #6
Posted by: Masako
Wed Dec 28, 2011 9:41 PM
I see nothing about "liberals vs conservatives" in this article or the comments. This is an article abour scandals, not the war. Just because Michelle dosen't mention the war dosen't mean these scandals should be ignored. We trust these people to act in our best interest and when they do illegal things and betray that trust they need to be held accountable no matter what side of the fence they're on. I want to see people go down for fast and furious, and if we entered the war on false info, I want to see people go down for that too.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Thu Dec 29, 2011 7:11 AM
Re: Chris McCoy. Well, somehow in her columns it turns out the only people who do bad things are liberals and her ultimate bogey man Obama. There's a little one-sidedness here.
Comment: #8
Posted by: Masako
Thu Dec 29, 2011 9:17 PM
Yeah, she's a conservative writer. A watchdog hounding the left. There are other talanted writers that do the same to the right. I read their articles and get equally infuriated. If you've ever listened the trials, these guys on trial are so arogant, they refuse to admit any wrongdoing, and they refuse to hand over evidance that would incriminate them.
Comment: #9
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:32 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Michelle Malkin
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

24 Sep 2010 How Privileged Democrats Pay for Their Houses

19 Feb 2010 It's All the Tea Party's Fault

2 Jul 2008 Interview with a Hollywood Patriot