• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Anyone notice the lack of scandals under Obama?

It's easy to forget it seems, that we've normally had a ton of scandals, and this has been the most scandal-free period I remember in American politics.

There's an old saying that groups like blacks or women have to 'do twice as well', but in scandals, Obama seems to be doing that.

People often yearn for Clinton - now, in hindsight - but of course he had not only adultery, but things like 'wag the dog' accusations of using the military for political purposes.

Heck, the right accused him of 'selling top military secrets to China'.

Iran-Contra, CIA smuggling drugs into the US, S&L scandal, Plamegate, for just a few examples - you can go back before that - forget about Nixon and things like his links to Bebe Robozo and corrupt connections to Howard Hughes - to things like Bobby Baker with LBJ.

That hasn't stopped Republicans - the head of the committee who would investigate such scandals, Darrl Issa, said Obama is "one of the most corrupt presidents in modern times."

They have tried to create fear by chanting about 'czars' which have confused some citizens who think it means actual czars outside the power of the presidency.

I thought there might finally be a whiff of the unsavory over Solandrya, but investigation is finding that's hardly a 'scandal'.

It's not getting much attention, but this is a remarkably scandal-free period - the link below on the topic says scholars say it's a record.

So, other than being a Kenyan Muslim communist socialist who likes to pal around with terrorists and is trying to put the country under Sharia law, he's avoided much scandal.

Actually, it's his Republican challengers who already have much bigger records of scandal before any time in the presidency - adultery, ethics fines, lobbyist connections and more.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ma...eatures/scandal_in_the_age_of_obama032995.php
 
Last edited:
Are you kidding? Fast Furious and Solyndra are far worse than any scandals under GWB.

edit: I'd add that Plamegate, as you call it, was much ado about nothing. Certainly fair less serious than the two issues that I mentioned or Iran Contra.
 
Last edited:
Anyone notice the lack of scandals under Obama?

No. (E.g., Solyndra, Operation 'Give Guns to Mexicans Gangsters', or whatever the heck it's called.)

But I have noticed the lack of cooperation by his admin any time something gets investigated.

Fern
 
Fast and Furious

Solyndra (contrary to your deflection)

LightSquared

Three pretty significant 'scandals' involving blatant lying, cover-ups, and deflection from the highest levels of government. One of which involving the cover-up of a murder of a US citizen.

Poor little Craig... still swimming in the shallow end of the pool...
 
He tried to arm drug cartels.

No, he didn't. First, it wasn't a 'scandal' in the sense of any bad motives - the worst accusation is it being a well-intended policy that was misguided.

It's not clear what if anything Obama knew about it; the head of the agency has resigned IIRC; it's hyped in that it's hardly as if the cartels wouldn't have guns without these.

As I posted when it happened, I'm actually pretty sympathetic to the effort, if not to how well it was implemented - it's not easy to infiltrate these cartels.

It's an easy politicial criticism to say 'this program helped the bad guys!', but when you look at the potential benefits versus how much it changed anything badly, that changes.

This being the apparently worst scandal that can be alleged shows what a short list of scandals there is.

The real scandal about the drug cartels is the massive strength they have and the violence they do - we need to be aggressive in how we deal with that. Whether that aggression is in the form of legalization, or anti-consumer efforts, or directly against the cartels, something is needed.
 
No. (E.g., Solyndra, Operation 'Give Guns to Mexicans Gangsters', or whatever the heck it's called.)

But I have noticed the lack of cooperation by his admin any time something gets investigated.

Fern

Solyndra is already addressed in the link, cartels above.

I can't imagine why he wouldn't be more co-operative with a Republican Congress who has a history of the rabid pursuit of phony scandals against the previous president - wasting tens of millions on a partisan prosecutor who found nothing of the original alleged 'scandals' - and who say he's 'one of the most corrupt presidents' based on nothing, and who have declared defeating him their top priority, and have shown they're willing to hold the economy and national security hostage to hurt him.

I'm sure all their 'investigations' are appropriate and he should cooperate more.
 
That can be said of most scandals.

Agree nothing terribly huge yet.

I disagree, really - but in doing so I realize further clarification is needed, to contrast the level of harm.

There's a diffference between, say, the amount of harm from misguided good intent of 'have the CIA involved in smuggling large amounts of drugs into the US', or 'lie to Congress about sponsoring a terrorists army the Congress has outlawed funding', or for that matter 'misrepresent one guy who we're told is not reliable who is trying to get asylum in Germany who we've never met' as unquestionable proof justifying war, and 'sold some traceable guns in an attempt to infiltrate the drug cartels'.

All of the above contrast with scandal to hide personal acts - sex, crime, corruption, etc.

These are different types of scandals from ones with a more corrupt motive - from sex for Clinton to deceiving Congress and the people to get approval for war.
 
Solyndra is already addressed in the link, cartels above.

It's addressed but not in a compelling way. The author makes a lot of excuses but barely addresses the crucial question. Did Obama give preferential treatment to donors in getting federally backed loans or not?
 
Yes, it is refreshing that Obama has so far done a good job.

I am so sick of "identify with" candidates. That was Bill Clinton and George W Bush.
 
Anyone notice the lack of scandals under Obama?

It's easy to forget it seems, that we've normally had a ton of scandals, and this has been the most scandal-free period I remember in American politics.

Don't forget the biggest scam of all time on the entire world, Bush's false war in Iraq for imaginary Weapons of Mass Destruction.
 
By the way - I'm not saying Obama is 'scandal free'. I'd nominate him for his excessive compromises on healthcare - you have to try to decide what was 'well intended' in his feeling he had to partner with corrupt companies who could defeat the bill, and how much was closer to corruption - and the facts between his being a Wall Street money recipient while the Wall Street crims have gone unprosecuted. There's just no 'smoking gun' on that to make it more of a solid scandal, but it's a problem.
 
Fast and Furious

Solyndra (contrary to your deflection)

LightSquared

Three pretty significant 'scandals' involving blatant lying, cover-ups, and deflection from the highest levels of government. One of which involving the cover-up of a murder of a US citizen.

Poor little Craig... still swimming in the shallow end of the pool...

What is the scandal with LightSquared? I am unfamiliar with a scandal that involves LightSquared and the government.
 
By the way - I'm not saying Obama is 'scandal free'. I'd nominate him for his excessive compromises on healthcare.....
-snip-

You may wish to clarify your definition of scandal.

IMO, bad policy doesn't equate scandal. I think the HC bill was bad policy, but I don't consider it a scandal.

Fern
 
You may wish to clarify your definition of scandal.

IMO, bad policy doesn't equate scandal. I think the HC bill was bad policy, but I don't consider it a scandal.

Fern

I would say buying directly buying votes in the senate with federal money wold constitute a scandal.
 
How could we forget the great DVD and Fancy Mustard scandals that will tear down this administration?
 
Last edited:
As the GOP will throw the future of the American people under the bus, just to make Obama look bad.

Is that what it will take to make every one in America happy, as we swirl down the toilet together while blaming each other as the idiot who flushed the toilet.

Tell me again, how this will redeem us all when we all end up in the same waste water treatment plant as toxic waste?
 
And let us not forget the 200 billion dollar a day trip over seas that had 38 warships following in tow....

And that little matter of the Birth Certificate...

\what yu hide Obam!?!
 
Back
Top