When compared to Bill Clinton, that is.
President Obama visited the Jersey Shore Tuesday, where Gov. Chris Christie presented him with a stuffed bear at an arcade and the two declared the shore open for business after seven months of post-Hurricane Sandy repairs. It played as a nice respite for the president after a couple of weeks of getting hammered in Washington by Republicans and members of the press. But the reality is that no matter how fierce the arguments in Washington about the triad of administration scandals, none of them reach even the level of the Clinton scandals of the 1990s, let alone some of the other stuff they are being compared to.
The main difference is this: In contrast to the highly personal nature of the Clinton scandals, none of the so-called Obama scandals involve direct actions by the president or his wife, let alone their romantic or financial dealings before or during their time in office. Instead, the controversies swirling around the administration all involve the conduct of individuals within the federal government overseen by Obama as the head of the executive branch.
The above presidential foot nuzzle by the dutiful lapdog is both pathetic and amusing. First, those of us who remember the press reaction to the Clinton scandals know that we were told back then that they were no big deal precisely because they were personal. Now that’s what we’re supposed to remember as being condemning? Obama is so important to the MSM right now that this writer is willing to do some negative revisionist history on a Democrat icon, and that never happens.
Second, enough with the “other people did it” nonsense. These drooling idiots in the press just spent two years telling the American public that Obama killed Osama bin Laden. He’s the cool, hands-on, in charge of everything guy, right?