Obama Miracle is White House Free of Scandal: Jonathan Alter

There are moments that stop you dead in your tracks. Moments when you are simply frozen in complete and total disbelief.

I had one of these when I saw this at Drudge…then I read it and just got angry.

Jonathan Alter is apparently serving a role as the court concubine for Obama. I have no other explanation.

President Barack Obama goes into the 2012 with a weak economy that may doom his reelection. But he has one asset that hasn’t received much attention: He’s honest.

He’s honest? As compared to who – OJ? Didn’t he just lie about meeting Robert Baroz?

The sight of Texas Governor Rick Perry tumbling out of the clown car recently as a “birther” (or at least a birther- enabler) is a sign of weakness, not just for the Perry campaign but for the whole Republican effort to tarnish the president’s character.

Ahhhh. The Republicans are clowns. Such incisive political analysis is rare…

Although it’s possible that the Solyndra LLC story will become a classic feeding frenzy, don’t bet on it. Providing $535 million in loan guarantees to a solar-panel maker that goes bankrupt was dumb, but so far not criminal or even unethical on the part of the administration. These kinds of stories are unlikely to derail Obama in 2012. If he loses, it will be because of the economy — period.

Alter breezes by one major scandal and dismisses it as “dumb” – but wasn’t Alter one of the people telling us how super-smart Obama was?

Even so, the president’s Teflon is intriguing. How did we end up in such a scandal-less state? After investigating the question for a recent Washington Monthly article, I’ve been developing some theories.

For starters, the tone is always set at the top. Obama puts a premium on personal integrity, and with a few exceptions (Tim Geithner’s tax problems in 2009) his administration tends to fire first and ask questions later. The best known example is Shirley Sherrod, the Agriculture Department official who was mistakenly fired by her boss over a miscommunication that led higher-ups to believe — wrongly — that she had made inappropriate racially tinged remarks. In several other cases, the decision to give staffers accused of wrongdoing the boot was made within hours, taking the air out of any possible uproar.

Premium of personal integrity?

Charlie RangelMaxine WatersEric HolderBill Richardson

Maybe integrity by extension and his lack of involvement in cleaning it up.

Alter’s column is unbelievable in it’s willful and transparent attempts to list the scandals and pass them off because Obama is just so darned honest that he couldn’t possibly be involved…

For a dose of sanity, I’ll turn to Victor Davis Hanson:

The media finally conceded the Obama administration to be inexperienced and inept, reminiscent of the Carter administration — but, they maintained, not possibly involved in any corruption. Then suddenly scandals erupted on nearly every conceivable front: the crony-capitalist half-billion-dollar loan guarantee to a now bankrupt Solyndra; the Fast and Furious gun deal, in which, in lunatic fashion, the U.S. government sold deadly automatic weapons to Mexican drug-cartel killers; the administration’s pressure on a four-star general to fudge his testimony as a favor to a big campaign donor whose suspect company, LightSquared, was doing business with the Pentagon; and the politically inspired dropping of investigations by the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.

The administration got itself into these messes because it customarily counts on a medieval notion of compartmentalized exemption. In the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama’s loud and welcomed hope-and-change promises to end insider influence, lobbying, and earmarks were essential to his well-crafted image of the outsider reformer. Once that liberal narrative was embraced by the media, few seemed to care whether the other, cynical Obama was the first candidate in the history of public financing of presidential campaigns to renounce the program — in order to maximize his campaign stash, much of it pouring in from firms like Goldman Sachs and BP.

It is pretty easy to be “scandal-free” when a compliant media refuses to investigate.

More propaganda from Obama’s extended PR department in the media.

Professor Jacobson is soliciting funds for the “Jonathan Alter Obama Scandal Education Fund” and finds that Alter is a victim of the Incredible Lightness of Obamalove in which, back in February of this year, I wrote:

Liberals still retain so much blind Obamalove that if he walked out of a Rose Garden cookout with a skewer of barbecued babies in one hand, a teenage prostitute’s decapitated head in the other, was wearing a cloak made of Michelle’s skin and a bloody paper hat made of the original U.S.  Constitution, it would still be the Republicans fault. To them, he’s as much purity and light as Bush was evil and darkness.

12 thoughts on “Obama Miracle is White House Free of Scandal: Jonathan Alter

  1. Be fair, Utah, Alter has to soft-pedal criticism of the president if he wants to keep his lines of access open. Of course, you might say, what good are those open lines if reporters do nothing with them? And there my argument falls to the ground.
    Not that Alter is a reporter, he is management now. But that is the trouble with so much mainstream media, the reporters and editorialists are in the same clique as the pols, and way too chummy to be impartial.

  2. Mel- you mean like they soft-pedaled Bush? Bush lied and people died? War for oil? Those?

    Or when they called Reagan a “amiable dunce”? Investigated Iran-Contra (which he was cleared of)?

    Those?

    Or was it more like Clinton’s “it wasn’t really sex”?

  3. Bush was caught on tape calling a reporter an @$$hole, all the guy had done was ask questions. All things considered, Bush was treated with kid gloves. Only the McClatchey newspapers did any investigative reporting. Bush curtailed coverage of the returning bodies, and had his protesters cordoned off blocks from anywhere he appeared. Any criticism was cause for a campaign to silence said critic. Cheney was not properly registered to hunt quail, much less lawyers, when he shot Whittington, but that story was not pursued.

    Besides, Utah, the phrases you quote were not found in the NY Times or the Post, correct? It wasn’t in the MSM that those phrases were heard at all, except as being reported on, like Fox reported on the Tea Party in its early days.

  4. “Obama aides declined to comment on specific donors, but in a lengthy statement posted on the campaign’s website, spokesman Ben LaBolt accused the Times of “missing the forest for the trees.” The paper, he said, obscured Obama’s “long history of advancing ethics and government reform and brushing right past his opponents’ records with nothing but a shrug.”

    This in response to accusations that Obama is tied to “federal lobbyists”, yet he is “free of scandal”?

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-fundraisers-deep-ties-lobbyists-140751265.html

  5. if scandal is the rumor, no Potus is free of it. If it requires a conviction, even Nixon is scandal-free. Since I reached the age of eighteen, every scandal was going to bring down the Presidency at some point in the cycle. Only Nixon succumbed during his administration, Gore probably lost in part to the cloud over the Clinton White House.
    I doubt that we will ever find out that Obama is less than a model of probity in his personal life, if Michelle finds out first, we might well see a cut in the presidential staff. I can see already, however, that some of his advisors are going to leave stains on his legacy.

  6. It is ultimately his own doing, or undoing, I agree.He needed to hear different voices, especially the one that would have told him not to run in ’08. Biden would have been a better choice to run for President than an unseasoned junior senator who obviously is in over his head.

    • For what I believe he was chosen to do in the White House, I do not believe Obama is in over his head. Far from it. I think he has succeeded beyond his wildest imagination (and that of the majority of his handlers – just not those of his primary his benefactor).

      I believe what you and others now sense as ineptitude is the same problem Obama and those who think like him have always had: they think about how to tear down and destroy, but they give no thought to what comes next. This is – IMHO – the primary reason the OWS idiots can’t tell you what they want past their Christmas list.

  7. Replace Obama’s name with Dubya’s, and I could have written your reply in 2004.

    By the way, I saw a video of an OWS event, and Ms. Pliven was being introduced to the crowd, to wild applause. Either the crowd thought it was Jane Fonda, or you and Utah were right all along about her influence on the left. Now I gotta read her screed….

    Life was a lot easier when I could dismiss you guys as Merely paranoia-addicts who hated anyone left of Ollie North.

    • Greg,

      DO NOT make the mistake of believing they don’t know who she is or what she stands for. Pivon is a MAJOR player in this. She and her husband were in the reception line when Clinton signed the Motor Voter Bill – they were DIRECTLY behind him. That bill is connected to their ideology, but that can keep until after you come up to speed on her ideas and activities.

      Here again, save yourself some time. Go to the Blaze, search for Francis Fox Pivon and just watch HER tell you what she thinks and wants on video.

      As for the Obama/W comment, YES, you could have. I know you directed that at Utah, but it is connected to my argument that W is a Progressive. In that sense, the agenda was the same. This rabbit hole will take you straight to Carroll Quigley and “Tragedy and Hope,” IF you let it. But it is much more comfortable to remain ignorant (oh, how I remember the days when it was just the D’s vs the R’s) 🙂

  8. Pingback: No Drama Obama | The Rio Norte Line

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.