You’d think that once the primaries disposed off, Obama & comp would stop with the blame Clinton already.
But not when they are in defensive mode. Faced with accusations that they provide perks for donors, their first defense is
Democratic and White House officials shrugged off the documents as part of normal “donor maintenance” (oh, what a concept!) that does not provide contributors with any quid pro quo. And they insisted that current donors are getting fewer perks than they did during Bill Clinton’s term, when nights in the Lincoln Bedroom became controversial.
Which is a great defense considering that once the big clamor to get the list of guests who slept in the Lincoln bedroom, no connection with actual donors was found – so the story eventually died of lack of air – not that anyone retracted or apologized. In fact, it was W who lavished influence on his donors – even if the media duly covered it up.
Which makes this other story a study in hypocrisy
When does a President stop blaming his predecessor and start taking responsibility for his own actions? To be fair, that has been an eternal question in the American context, but it does seem as though Barack Obama has a crutch that he refuses to put aside. Economy? Blame Bush! Media? Blame Bush! Afghanistan?
I have to laugh – as throughout the first term, W never ceased blaming “his predecessor”. They even tried to move the date the recession started from March 2001 to March 2000 for this purpose. So, whiny as it makes Obama look, it’s a bit karmic too. Until of course, he joins the “blame Clinton” chorus.
7 comments
October 28, 2009 at 8:33 pm
DeniseVB
I know some of the conservative blogs, like Hot Air and RedState are waxing nostalgic for the Clinton years now. Much like some of us are even thinking GWB may not be “worst President ever” afterall.
Strange times, but I know I don’t want to spend the next 8 years “hating”, but probably smacking myself in the head a lot. Heh.
October 28, 2009 at 8:45 pm
edgeoforever
Oh, I am not in the W is not the worst camp – he still is unparalleled. And considering the vicious attacks on Clinton during his presidency and after, I find the nostalgia hypocritical at best.
October 29, 2009 at 8:45 am
We were going to correct that! « Not Your Sweetie
[...] The Jokers: Jr and Jr.jr Obama & Comp: we are not bad like Clinton was [...]
October 29, 2009 at 9:39 am
Buttered
FYI
October 29, 2009
Pay to play ambassadorships
Ed Lasky
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/10/pay_to_play_ambassadorships.html#at
The pay to play nature of how Ambassadorships are chosen (big donors are among the small pool of people who are tapped to be Ambassadors) has long been a disgrace, practiced by both Republicans and Democrats. But the hypocrisy when Barack Obama engages in the practice is glaring. In this example, he taps Alan Solomont – a big donor from Boston – to be our Ambassador to Spain.
The nominee, Alan Solomont, served from April until recently as chairman of the Corporation for National and Community Service, whose former inspector general, Gerald Walpin, was fired by the White House on June 10. Mr. Solomont, a Massachusetts health industry entrepreneur, helped raise at least $500,000 for Mr. Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and was among a group of top fundraisers, elected officials and others invited to a St. Patrick’s Day party at the White House.
Alan Solomont, a generous benefactor of Barack Obama (and before him, John Kerry) is someone who has long been a bit of a sugar daddy to Democrats. He knows how pay to play works – and so does the Chicago team in the White House.Does he even have any diplomatic experience or connections to Spain? None that I see. Do we know if he even speaks Spanish? Yet, Spain is a very important ally: one whose cooperation we may need, for example, should war break out in the Middle East, and we need over flight authority.
October 29, 2009 at 9:39 am
Buttered
Another FYI from American Thinker
ObamaCare and the art of distraction
W. A. Bussey
It’s a trick, and the citizens of this country are going to fall for it. It is not a new trick; magicians have used for hundreds of years. It’s called sleight of hand — one hand is the one we watch while the other (the one you don’t watch) is the one doing the real trick or hiding the pea under the shell.
In the case of the healthcare bill, the “hand” we are watching is the public option and we are focused on it while the other hand we are not watching is the one that will fool us. While we are focused on the hand creating a big fuss and constant news about the public option, there is the entire health bill with all its really obnoxious ideas and costly provisions that is the “hand” we are not watching and is the one doing the active trick — that is bringing health care under government control.
Ignore the public option debate; the provision will probably not happen. But the rest of that terrible bill will, like the magician’s rabbit, be pulled out of the hat by the hand we are not watching. Be vigilant and don’t let the magician fool you. Fight the entire bill, not the public option alone.
Hat tip: Urgent Agenda
October 29, 2009 at 11:40 am
Nunly
Exactly! Thanks for this.
October 29, 2009 at 11:39 am
Nunly
I have no idea why Bill or Hillary Clinton put up with Obama and his team with their constant whining and finger pointing. Obama called them racists, immoral, corrupt, and more…and yet they still stump for the guy. I don’t get it.