Monday, June 17, 2013

Obama Scandals Have One Thing in Common–2012 Election (Part II)

There have been several surveillance type scandals. First, the DOJ tracked the phone records of several AP and one Fox News reporter (James Rosen). The DOJ said it wanted to find a leak in the State Department, which yielded national security sensitive material to the media. However, the DOJ never tracked reporters at the New York Times which printed several leaked stories which contained national security sensitive material. Why did this happen? Once again, targeting the AP and Fox was politically motivated since the NY Times leaks made the President look good (Cyber warfare against Iran nuclear program, the bin-Laden killing, etc.). Secondly, the Obama administration has expanded the Bush administration’s metadata analysis of American citizen phone calls to also include internet and email surveillance. The issue here is that Bush was transparent about what the administration was doing, Obama was doing it secretly. And let’s not forget how Senator Obama condemned Bush over this program calling it an overreach of power. This is the reason Obama was doing this secretly, he did not want his leftist supporters to know he was a hypocrite. Obama said no US phone conversations were ever listened to. I find this hard to believe because if the metadata analysis detects a potential wrongdoing – then those people will face wiretaps. Besides, in the past few months in commencement and campaign like speeches Obama talked about “rejecting the voices that warn against government tyranny” and “The war on terror is over”. Once again, this is just more hypocrisy and lies. This may not sound like a big deal, but Obama may have potentially obtained an unfair advantage over the Romney campaign with metadata analysis on Romney campaign workers (we already know the Obama campaign worked with Google employees to pirate private information [I believe illegally] on US citizens to identify potential backers).

Changing the talking points on the Benghazi attack was also politically motivated. The administration did not want the public to know our Benghazi embassy was attacked by al-Qaida terrorists. This would not look good eight weeks prior to an election especially when the President’s narrative was al-Qaida died along with bin-Laden. Obama proclaimed we will learn from our mistakes, unfortunately, dozens of US embassies around the globe have inferior security. A recent report states our embassy in Beirut has some glaring security lapses.

And let’s not forget the Fort Hood shooter has gotten his wish to defend himself in a civilian court. Major Nidal Hassan not only continues to get paid, but will now be able to preach his ideology to the public while confronting the people he maimed in a court of law instead of a military tribunal. Obama refused to call Nidal a terrorist to deceive and win support from his Left base, even though his actions about Benghazi, media targeting, and citizen surveillance tell a different story.

When Nixon and conservatives wiretapped Democratic National Headquarters people went to jail and the President was forced to resign (and rightfully so). Nixon’s paranoia got the best of him because he won reelection in 1972 by a landslide. In 2012 the IRS and EPA targeted conservative political groups, the DOJ targeted conservative media outlets, the administration lied about a terrorist attack, and the administration covered up its US phone and internet surveillance program – And Obama wins a close election (needed to change about 250,000 voters in Florida, Ohio, Virginia, and Colorado). Still nobody has gone to jail and the President claims to be ignorant about all these happenings – which incidentally must be a coincidence.

I am perplexed as to why Obama still has fairly high approval ratings despite all of these scandals. Even if the president was as he claims – not in the know about most of these scandals then that raises another question. Why wasn’t Obama, Clinton, and Holder aware of any of these scandals? If true, it says government is too big and it also says the Obama, Clinton, and Holder are incompetent and failing to do their jobs. So why are people outraged by all these scandals, but at the same time continue to give Obama, Clinton, and Holder a pass? Maybe public opinion will turn against Obama once all of these scandals are tied to winning the 2012 election.


  1. “I am perplexed as to why Obama still has fairly high approval ratings despite all of these scandals.”

    These are the 47%’ers that Romney was talking about. They are people with limited consciences, who put their own interests before that of the nation. They are not bothered by the Obama scandals because they are as corrupt as he is. This is why I am so disheartened so much of the time and why I and other talk about how close we are to “the tipping point.” When that 47% number gets to 51%, it’s all over for this country.

  2. It is a sad state of affairs for this country.