Dec 23 2008
Obama’s Biggest Mistake: Dishonesty
So I’ve posted this in several comments on other people’s blogs. Those people usually get all upset, and often misunderstand what I have said. They say that Obama and his cabinet (as Obama claimed a few weeks ago) had not discussed the Senate appointment with Blagojevich at all. I say that this is highly unlikely, and that Obama should never have said that. Instead, he should have come clean about what was said, because inevitably, a link between Obama and the corrupt Illinois governor. One blogger (I forget who, but I think it might have been Len from First Door on the Left ) then challenged me to find any link between Obama and Blago or any other corrupt members of the Chicago political machine. I did so. He then said something along the lines of “Being associated, or having these conversations, does not mean Obama or his advisors did anything wrong. You have not proved that they did.”
To which my response was that I never claimed that he did anything wrong. I claimed that there was a very good chance that he was much more intimately connected to both Blago and the appointment scandal, than he made it appear. And I was right. The New York Times reported today that the new White House counsel released a report which stated that Emanuel had, in fact, discussed the appointment with the governor.
I don’t believe that Obama has done anything wrong, but consider that that report was based off of the “recollections” of Obama’s advisors themselves, not off of the wiretapped conversations. This is not the last we will hear of it. Worst case scenario, Obama or somebody close to him will be discovered to have been more involved than they acknowledged even this time. Best case scenario, the facts are exactly as Obama described them. But there will still be rumors and discussions and speculations. Obama has now changed his story three times:
1) An aide said Obama was involved in discussions regarding the appointments.
2) Obama says he and his campaign/aides have had no contact with the Governor about the issue.
3) Obama’s counsel releases a statement saying that Obama and aides were involved in discussions regarding the appointments.
And all of this before any real evidence comes to light. And before Obama has taken office. If what was said in the report is true, Obama should have said, flat out, from the get go, “My chief of staff and I have been involved in discussions, but were not involved in any improper or inappropriate discussions. No proposals were considered by myself or my aides which would have resulted in exchanging the seats for benefits to the Governor.” Period. The truth can’t hurt if somebody has done no wrong. Obama is making himself look like another Bill Clinton (”I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”) before he even gets elected.
To your conspiracy theory, I say so what. Who cares if Obama talked to Blago? We already know Obama to be a man of great character. Even Blago admitted on wire tap all he would get would be a thank you for the appointment if Obama had a hand in it.
If you were giving up your seat, you might have a say in who you want to get it. That is only normal. Anyway, you have at least four years to find something wrong with Obama and his actions. Good luck.
ndefenceofobama- Thanks again for coming by and commenting. As I said, I don’t really think anything improper happened. I don’t think there is a big conspiracy. I think they’re both Chicago politicians and, as you said, it would make sense for Blago to at least ask Obama for his advice/opinions on filling the seats. He’s obviously done fairly well for himself and the Chicago machine. He has also just surpassed “Da Mayor” as the most powerful PUBLIC figure in Chicago politics. It is only polite to ask him what he thinks.
On the other hand, as the new President, from the same party whose last President said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” about a woman who (apparently without his involvement) got a mysterious stain on her blue dress, wound up with a cigar in an inappropriate place, and performed oral sex on him, it’s not a politically wise move to try to mince words and lie to the nation before you even take office.
He should have been up front about him and Axelrod’s, and Emanual’s, and Jarrett’s, and everyone else’s involvement up front. Period. There’s no conspiracy theory in that.
Also, you should really read my blog (including my relocated and not-yet-relocated) posts before you make a statement about me trying to find faults with Obama and his actions. I am glad that Obama will be our next President, although I think he is far from perfect (as were all the candidates, and as we all are). It’s not trying to find something wrong when you point out what he’s already doing wrong. It’s being fair, unbiased and honest with not only my readers, but also myself.
And if the Democrats don’t want to be sorely disappointed by their choice 4 or 8 years from now, it might be a good idea for some of them (especially in the blogging world) to start being honest with themselves. You can be a good (and certainly better than Bush) President without being the Messiah that Obama is expected to be.