The question is, if a Fact Tree falls in Leftist Forest, does it make a sound? While celebrations of vindication are beginning to stir among the Right and people are beginning to speculate on the political fallout for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and others who were complicit in abandoning four Americans to die and then lying to the American public about it, I have to wonder what difference, at this point, does it make? When has the Left cared for facts? When has the Left embraced reality?

Indeed, the “coverage” in the mainstream media has been mostly devoted to smearing the whistleblowers and running cover for the Obama Regime. Since the “blame an obscure YouTube video” narrative has failed, the Left is now pretending it’s rational to blame sequestration (never mind the fact that it took place nearly six months after the attacks) for inadequate security though the State Department confirmed “budget cuts” had absolutely nothing to do with it. The Left in this country and their pet media will stop at nothing to ensure Obama and Clinton face no consequences for their corrupt, deadly actions.

The sad fact is, though it is imperative that the truth come out, we no longer live in a country where truth matters. While there was once a time that scandals of half this magnitude brought down presidencies, the Benghazi debacle will be but another notch in Obama’s belt of scandals he’s emerged from unscathed.

Still, all is not lost. While the impeachment he’s earned is little more than a pipe dream, we can use this disaster of a president to motivate us to crush the evil that is leftism. We can do the job the media refuses to, and hammer home the reality of the corruption, the devaluing of life, and the abandonment of Americans and American values that has been the hallmark of this presidency. We can remind midterm voters in 2014 and presidential voters in 2016 of what came to light today in addition to Obama’s countless other failures in hopes that, perhaps, it will eventually make a difference after all.

Some internet “vandals” saw this as an opportunity to deface, in a way, the Wikipedia page of Senator Menendez.

The Screen capture is below, with the “modifications” highlighted in red. The photo of Senator Menendez was changed to one of Mike McQueary, who was a key witness in the Penn State University child sex scandal.

___

Follow me on Twitter: @_TJThompson
___

On Sunday, her husband placed one call, and Jill placed a second call later, requesting “diplomatic protection” from the police because reporters are camped out on their lawn.

These are the 911 recordings.

—start video at right at 1:46—

The Daily Caller is reporting that two women from the Dominican Republic told them that Bob Menendez, Democratic Senator from New Jersey, had paid them for sex.

During the interviews [WATCH VIDEO BELOW] they spoke through a translator with attorney Melanio Figueroa present as well.  The women claim that they met Menendez in an area called Easter at Casa de Campo where they claim Senator Menendez agreed to pay them $500 for sex acts.  The women allege that, after everything was over, they only received $100 each.

Both women requested that their identities be concealed because they fear backlash in the Dominican Republic.

READ THE REST OF THE STORY AT THE DAILY CALLER BY CLICKING HERE

___

Jack Abramoff

There’s nothing like spending 43 months in prison for fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy in connection with Congressional influence–peddling to make you an advocate of political contribution reform.

Notorious Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff is back on what the late Watergate scandal participant, John Ehrlichman might term a “modified limited hang out” book tour.

Abramoff contends that Washington equals swamp and the only reason he went to jail, for what he claims is standard operating procedure, is Jack made the mistake of raising his head too far above the scum line.

Jack’s obvious continuing pride in his accomplishments on behalf of his clients is cause to doubt sincere contrition on his part. And Abramoff appears blissfully unaware that the reputation he earned and scandal he created are in large part responsible for the GOP losing the House in 2006 — or if not unaware, he’s certainly unrepentant.

Still, Jack took advantage of the “me time” the feds gave him in Cumberland Prison to propose two reforms to clean up some of the mess he reveled in before his unfortunate incarceration.

First, he recommends that lobbyists, recipients of federal contracts and anyone who benefits from public funds be prohibited from making contributions or providing gifts to those in power. This alone covers everyone from General Dynamics to residents of Section 8 housing. Then he adds to his impossible dream by calling for a lifetime ban on lobbying by Members of Congress and their staff.

Conservatives automatically suspect any contribution prohibition because contributions are a form of speech. Yet I’ve never been entirely sold on the idea that semi–Socialist George Soros’ speech should forever be exponentially louder than mine, given the disparity in our bank accounts.

Counter–balancing conservatives like the Koch brothers grant what little peace of mind I have. (For conservatives the best of an uncertain situation would probably be to return to the unlimited contributions regime that existed before the “reforms” with the addition of unlimited and immediate disclosure of the donor.)

Campaign contributions from companies and individuals that take government money are inherently incestuous. It’s quite possible that most of the money that comprises the contribution originated as tax dollars before it was washed through the contractor’s accounts.

That’s one reason I like the idea. The other is the restriction is voluntary: don’t take the government check and you can contribute to your heart’s content. Even those affected by the ban face only a limited imposition on political speech. They can still give to state and local candidates, they can give to parties and they can spend their money on independent expenditures.
Speech bans already exist without undermining the Constitution. For example, individuals with a Top Secret clearance are prohibited from discussing the secrets in public, which is a limit on speech. Judges aren’t allowed to discuss cases while the trial is in progress, which is another voluntary limit on speech. So how does the prohibition on contributions differ?

Precedent for the equally voluntary lobby ban already exists in a limited form. Congressmen, Senators and staff are currently required to wait one year before they can board the lobby gravy train. Abramoff’s idea just extends the time limit to forever.
Politicians become lobbyists after leaving office because they’ve been captured by Washington and joining the permanent political class just seems like the thing to do. The constituents, who were fine as long as they were providing votes, are no longer up to snuff when it comes to being neighbors.

This voluntary rule — combined with term limits, which has also has a new supporter in Abramoff — would do much toward ridding us of the professional politician who’s only goal in life is serving in big government where he can “be a positive force for change.”

Three good ideas, regardless of the source, that have as much chance of being enacted as Ron Paul does of being President.

Frank is morally, politically and ethically corrupt. This Democrat party leader helped produce a nation that’s economically crippled and morally adrift. He may be the Congressman from Taxachusetts, but everyone is enjoying his legacy.

When the first warnings regarding the housing bubble were sounded Frank was rabid in his defense of federally supported Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s ‘come one, come all’ lending practices. Frank stated, “I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing.”

What Frank didn’t say was that he had used his influence as a member of the House Financial Services Committee to land his homosexual lover a job at Fannie Mae. So while Frank was rolling our dice his boyfriend was one of the croupiers.

Herman Cain may have been squeezin’ the Charmin while he was head of the National Restaurant Association, but I guarantee he didn’t twist arms at Denny’s to get them to hire his sweetie.

Unfortunately, Frank’s roll of the dice came up snake eyes for the rest of us as we continue to endure the Great Recession.
Are foreclosed homes lowering your property values and contributing to the decline of your neighborhood? Thank Barney Frank.

Are you having trouble refinancing because loan documentation is causing you to jump through hoop after hoop? Is getting a loan to buy a new home impossible because down payment requirements have skyrocketed? Or is selling your home difficult because every appraisal is low–balled? Thank Barney Frank.

Are your annual dues increasing while your homeowner’s association is simultaneously cutting back on services due to budget deficits caused by foreclosures? Thank Barney Frank.

Is your retirement nest egg now your retirement embryo after your 401k tanked? Thank Barney Frank.
Lacking any moral compass, Frank doesn’t feel any shame over what his advocacy and legislative record caused. He doesn’t fade into the background. Instead, as Chairman of the Financial Services Committee, he co–authors the Frank–Dodd financial reform legislation that’s supposed to repair what he’s destroyed.

Only in Democrat party politics does the master of the disaster get to write the legislation that’s supposed to clean up the mess. At least the captain of the Titanic had the decency to go down with his ship. Frank would have demanded a seat in the lifeboat so he could direct the rescue.

But why shouldn’t Frank feel entitled? His longevity is a product of a gerrymandered district that made him impervious to public opinion. Frank’s first scandal involved putting a live–in homosexual hustler and convicted drug dealer on his House office payroll. Frank used his position to fix parking tickets for his roommate and later lied to a Virginia prosecutor who was investigating the prostitution ring the hustler was running out of Frank’s townhouse.

Then Frank finds a new boyfriend and puts him on the job at Fannie Mae. Now Frank’s latest paramour is growing marijuana in their home, but who knows, maybe Massachusetts voters believe progressing from prostitution ring landlord to in–home illegal agriculture is progress.

Barney Frank’s personal and political record is a living endorsement of term limits. He survived for 30 years because his district was drawn to prevent Republicans from running and Democrat political insiders prevented primary opponents from challenging him.

Term limits would prevent much of that insider gaming of the political system. There is simply no reason for someone to be in Congress for 30 years.

And please spare me the “seniority means we have more clout” argument. Seniority rewards longevity, not productivity. If your elected representative is able, your district will have influence.

There is a perfect example near where I live in Virginia. Del. Jackson Miller (R–Manassas) was just elected Majority Whip by the Republican caucus in the House of Delegates. This puts him number four in the House hierarchy, yet he’s only been in office since 2006. Miller didn’t have to get arthritis in service of the public before his merit was recognized.

The average tenure of a CEO in business is six years; surely a Congressman can do enough to have a post office named after him in twelve.

Good riddance to Barney Frank. Now if only two or three hundred members would follow him out the door there might be a chance to change the incestuous culture in Washington.

West’s comments immediately went viral and became the subject of ire for many conservatives who felt West had betrayed Cain and fallen prey to the liberal media’s game of Republican bashing.  Several hours later West released this statement via his Facebook account:

“The media is trying to put me against Herman Cain. I guess its good for them to see two black men against each other. The facts are I am not telling Cain to step down. That is his decision and his only. What I said is the media focus on these incidents and “alleged affairs” are a distraction, and we as a country need to move on from this subject and get the focus on what the GOP contenders can seriously do for this country.”

With Republican and conservative voters already extremely sensitive about the primary race and the state of GOP unity in general, West and other politicians will be treading lightly in the coming weeks.

A memo prepared by GOP staff at the House Energy and Commerce Committee cites an October, 2010, email from an unnamed Solyndra investment adviser to another unidentified investment adviser. The email said DOE officials were pushing “very hard” to delay announcing the layoffs until November 3, 2010, – the day after the midterm elections. The email said, “Oddly they didn’t give a reason for that date.”

Solyndra CEO Brian Harrison told the DOE that he had “received some press inquiries about rumors of problems,” and also notified DOE that he wanted to tell employees about upcoming layoffs on October 28, 2010. According to the GOP memo, Harrison’s email was forwarded to Jonathan Silver, then head of the DOE Loan Programs Office, and to Energy Secretary Chu’s chief of staff. Silver forwarded the email to Ron Klain, then Vice President Biden’s chief of staff, as well as Carol Browner, then head of the White House climate change office.

An October 30, 2010, email in which an unidentified Argonaut executive tells Ken Levit, director of George Kaiser’s charity, “No announcement till after elections at doe request.” was released by the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s oversight subcommittee. Argonaut Private Equity, BTW, is the investment firm that backed Solyndra and is owned by Obama fundraiser George Kaiser.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said last week that GOP lawmakers have “cherry-picked” documents, trying to create controversy over a decision-making process that the White House insists involved no political influence.

While The Washington Post, no bastion of conservatism, gave front-page coverage to the latest Solyndra scandal development, the MSM ignored the layoff delay request. ABC, CBS, and NBC all ignored this latest Solyndra development in their November 15, 2011, evening newscasts, and on their November 16, 2011, morning programs. Both Fox’s Fox and Friends and MSNBC’s Morning Joe commented on the lack of coverage.The MSM has a history of ignoring Obama scandals.

An examination of Illinois court record’s reveals, however, that Zuckerman has bigger financial and legal problems than she does. Court documents (1:10-cv-07844 DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION) reveal that Zuckerman, on Sep 15th of 2010, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the Western District of Louisiana. His creditors include, among others, Stratford Center (with claims of $675,000.00), his ex-wife (with claims of $89,000.00), and the IRS (with claims of $50,000.00).

The lawsuit filed in Illinois, is an effort by Stratford Medical Center to recover funds from Stratford Pediatric, the practice owned by Zukerman. Documents in the case state that “In May 2010 (after the bench trial, but before the judgment was entered) Stratford Pediatric sold its assets to Central DuPage Hospital for $333,000.00 in cash. This money was mostly transferred to Zuckerman’s personal accounts. He soon went on a gambling and day trading spree and lost all of the money. In July 2010, Zuckerman moved to Louisiana.”

I am a serious person, seeking the opportunity to do a serious and very important job. Our nation has very serious problems, particularly of an economic nature, and Barack Obama does not have the skill, knowledge or will to solve them.

I do.

Unfortunately, the media-driven process by which one must seek this opportunity is fundamentally unserious. I have touched on this before – the emphasis on “gaffes,” gotcha questions and time devoted to trivial nonsense – and everyone knows the process only became further detached from relevance this week as the media published anonymous, ancient, vague personal allegations against me.

Once this kind of nonsense starts, the media’s rules say you have to act in a certain way. I am well aware of these rules. And I refuse to play by them.

There are several reasons for this. One is that, lest anyone forget, we actually have serious matters to talk about. Since the media went bananas over this so-called story, my schedule has not changed in the slightest. I have continued to make all planned public appearances. I have continued to answer questions about my 9-9-9 tax reform plan. I have continued to do everything else that our strategy proscribes.

Another reason I refuse to play by these rules is that, by doing it my way, I’m getting much better results. My fundraising has skyrocketed since all this nonsense began. Just this weekend, the Washington Post has come out with a new poll – taken since all this started – showing me in the lead nationally, with my numbers on the rise.

The media may be obsessed with this business, but the voters are not. And I am not.

But there’s another crucially important reason I refuse to play by these rules: These rules stink. Can the process by which we pick the leader of our nation be any more absurd? I’m not talking about the primary process or the role of the electorate. There is nothing wrong with that. I am talking about the media’s trivializing of such an important matter.

Consider: I held various executive positions in corporate America for several decades. I had thousands of employees working for me. I can’t even begin to recall how many conversations I had with people during that time, how many directives I gave, how much friendly banter might have taken place.

I also had to make tough decisions during these years. I turned around a poorly performing region for Burger King, then turned around a struggling Godfather’s Pizza organization. At some point during a career like this, someone will not like things you do, or how you do it. Someone will complain.

That is just the nature of things if you’ve ever done much in your life.

So once the editors of Politico started looking for people who would make claims against me, their chances of finding a few takers were probably about 100 percent. These people will not give their names. The so-called “witnesses” who purportedly corroborated their stories also will not give their names. That’s about what you would expect when people are engaging in a “hatchet job,” as it’s been described by Joseph Fassler, who was chairman of the National Restaurant Association board when I was there.

It’s easy to make accusations when, by virtue of your anonymity, you don’t have to be held accountable for the claims you’re making. It’s easy to publish them when, like Politico, you don’t follow basic rules of journalism by naming your sources or giving any details whatsoever about what supposedly happened.

But the process by which we choose our presidents has become so warped that, when something like this happens, the media and political strategists start grading you on whether you play an absurd game by their absurd rules.

When someone stops you on the street and hits you with an accusation like this, they subsequently write a story about the look in your eyes, and how many seconds it took you to speak some words in response. They go to “crisis management experts” who offer the usual sage wisdom about “getting all the information out” – as if you can get any “information” out (aside from telling them nothing happened, which they don’t want to hear) in response to allegations that are unsourced and nonspecific.

Then, when you haven’t “calmed the firestorm” – if only because the people wielding the blow-torches have no intention of putting them out – more experts are put on the air to say this proves you are “not ready for prime time.”

Maybe that would matter if I was trying out for the cast of Saturday Night Live. But this should be a slightly more serious undertaking than that.

Contrary to the belief of experts, so wise and learned in the ways of politics, I do know what the established rules say I am supposed to do. I simply refuse to do it. That’s because the rules are ridiculous, and they produce leaders like Barack Obama, who play the political game like experts but govern like complete incompetents.

The nation needs its tax structure reformed, its spending brought under control, its debt reduced and its overall governing structure made far more responsive to the needs of the people. The nation needs many other problems addressed. If it’s OK with the American people, I would like to address them.

If the media want to continue talking about nonsense, that’s fine. I’m not going to join them. It doesn’t look like the citizenry plans to join them either.

In September, 2011, I posted an article about Solyndra, the government’s rush to back loans, its bankruptcy, and the beginning of the investigation into its activities. I now propose to update the investigation. However, my update may not be current since new revelations are uncovered literally daily.

Details of the Scandal

President Barack Obama is treating the entire Solyndra scandal as an irrelevant non-event, and is being (uncharacteristically for him) very silent about it. Records show that Obama was briefed about Solyndra and other “green” projects, indicating that he was specifically warned about the hazards of expediting the “green energy” loan program. Among those warning Obama were Larry Summers and Tim Geithner (see below), but he ignored their advice and green lighted the loans.

Obama Knew About Solyndra

Before Solyndra went bankrupt, President Obama was warned of risks of the Department of Energy (DOE) loan guarantee program. At a meeting with Obama in late October, 2010, Lawrence H. Summers, Steven Chu, and Timothy F. Geithner expressed concerns that the selection process for federal loan guarantees wasn’t rigorous enough. Chu wanted less scrutiny from the Treasury Department and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Still, the Obama administration went ahead with loan guarantee program as part of the 2009 stimulus law, despite disagreements on the program.

Administration officials took their opposing views to President Obama in October 2010. A memorandum, drafted by Lawrence Summers, explained different concerns and options to fix a “broken process” for getting loans approved. A July, 2010, report by the Government Accounting Office (GAO) found that DOE committed to back loans without completing required studies of market, legal, and technical issues.

White House e-mails show Obama aides discussing Solyndra’s finances and fears that the loan could be a political embarrassment. One e-mail suggested that DOE appeared “ill-equipped” to identify worthy “green” companies.

DOE Loan Guarantee Program Head Resigns

Jonathan Silver, head of DOE’s loan program announced on Thursday, October 6, 2011, that he was stepping down. DOE officials said that Silver decided to leave the job in July because funding for the loan guarantee program was expiring. Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee said that Silver’s resignation failed to address concerns that other troubled loans may be among 38 projects the program that he led has funded.

Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-CA) asked Silver why the government chose to invest in Solyndra’s “thin-film” solar-panel technology. Solyndra’s technology is one of the most complex and riskiest forms of solar technology. Silver dodged the question, then said, “I’m not a solar technical analyst.” Solyndra’s “thin-film” technology, said Bilbray, is rare and still in the early stages of development, making it a risky investment, but that fact didn’t stop DOE from putting taxpayer dollars at risk. Silver argued that the US needs to invest in solar energy in order to “keep up with China.” While China subsidizes its own solar industry, almost none of the Chinese funding of $30 billion per year goes to thin-film technology.

Solyndra Executives Plead Fifth Amendment

Solyndra CEO Brian Harrison and CFO W. G. Stover repeatedly refused to answer questions about Solyndra’s DOE loan guarantee, citing the US Constitution’s fifth amendment. Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) asked, “I want to ask Mr. Harrison if he thinks the American people who invested over a half a billion dollars deserve to know what happened to that money?” Harrison and Stover declined to answer, invoking their Fifth Amendment rights. The CEO and CFO of bankrupt Solyndra sat before a Congressional committee and invoked their Fifth Amendment rights, rather than explain how they blew through $535 million in taxpayer money.

How Solyndra Spent Tax Money

Bilbray, while in his office, questioned Solyndra’s choice of land on which to build its new facility. The site chosen was one of the most expensive pieces of land in the country. Solyndra chose to build on 30 acres of farmland in Fremont, Calif., on a site that was classified by the EPA as a “non-attainment zone,” meaning that air quality did not meet certain federal standards. He also questioned Solyndra’s decision to build a brand-new manufacturing facility, citing the availability of several buildings in the area. The going rate for industrial properties in Silicon Valley, where Solyndra built, is the fourth-most expensive in the U.S.

The new factory that Solyndra built with public money had a conference room with glass walls that turned a smoky gray to conceal the room’s occupants. Hastily purchased state-of-the-art equipment ended up being sold for pennies on the dollar, still in its plastic wrap.

As Solyndra’s new $344 million factory went up near its leased plant in Fremont, CA, workers watched as pallets of unsold solar panels accumulated. Former Solyndra engineer Lindsey Eastburn said, “After we got the loan guarantee, they were just spending money left and right. Because we were doing well, nobody cared. Because of that infusion of money, it made people sloppy.” Putting some work on a 24-hour, seven-day schedule, the facility was up and ready for equipment installation in 10 months. The project employed more than 3,000 union construction workers.

When completed at an estimated cost of $733 million, Solyndra’s new facility covered 300,000 square feet, the equivalent of five football fields. It had robots that whistled Disney tunes, spa-like showers with liquid-crystal displays of water temperature, and glass-walled conference rooms. The facility had 19 loading docks, four electric car charging stations, and landscaping of wild grass and a rock garden. An automated rail system moved parts through the assembly process. Robots that resembled “a big freezer with wheels” maneuvered around the factory transporting panels from one machine to another. The Disney tunes alerted workers of the robots’ presence.

Waste?

Tax-payer money wasted? It sure sounds like. And all at the alter of “green, renewable energy.” But this is what we have come to expect from the Obama administration.

But that’s just my opinion.

Operation Fast and Furious – established in 2009, and Project Gunrunner, established in 2005, were ATF programs aimed at stopping guns from getting into the hands of criminals in Mexico. As with many “projects” that this administration has been involved with have failed – so did this one. The goal was to track the flow of arms and determine how the market functioned, but yet again it has had an unsurprisingly disastrous effect.

This failed program allowed U.S. officials to permit “straw purchasers” to buy guns – hundreds of them at once, sometimes – and then to sell them to Mexican drug cartels while the ATF sat idly by, doing nothing to stop it. Oddly enough the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms (ATF) leads the way in another program that is called “Don’t Lie for the Other Guy.”

This program is aimed at stopping the very same act that the ATF themselves are involved in now – straw purchasing. The term straw purchase – is an illegal firearm purchase where the actual buyer of the gun, being unable to pass the required federal background check or desiring to not have his or her name associated with the transaction, uses a proxy buyer who can pass the required background check to purchase the firearm for him/her. It is highly illegal and punishable by a $250,000 fine and 10 years in prison.

The ATF program failed because they were unable to keep track of “all” the guns that they sold to the Mexican drug cartels. And now some of these guns have shown up in crimes, murders, etc., some of which Americans have been killed.

The Center for Public Integrity, reported that 1,765 guns were knowingly sold as part of “Fast and Furious.” Another 300 or so were sold before the operation started. Of these more than 2,000 guns, fewer than 800 have been recovered. Two of the guns recovered were found at the site of the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, in a region known as Peck Canyon, on the U.S. side of the border between Nogales, Mexico, and Tucson, Ariz.

Special Agent John Dodson of the ATF was among many field agents who advised superiors that the covert operation was unwise. Their concerns were not acted on, and the operation continued. After Terry’s murder, Dodson blew the whistle, first to the Justice Department, then to Republican Sen. Charles Grassley. Grassley has questioned Attorney General Eric Holder, and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Republican Darrell Issa, is now engaged in hearings on the case.

So far, Holder has denied any knowledge of the program, but Republicans are wise to look for a smoking gun – literally. They’ve called for numerous documents relating to the operation. A person would think that someone had to know about this project, and if it’s the highest levels of the Justice Department, then heads there should roll.

This ordeal reminds me of a movie in the late 90′s called “Black Dog” a movie about illegal gun shipments. In the movie an ATF agent Tobolowsky really gets on the nerves of the FBI agents he’s working with. After FBI’s Agent Ford has had enough he say’s to ATF agent Tobolowsky “ATF. What does that stand for, anyways? Alcohol, tobacco, and f****-ups?” It’s amazing how the creators of the movie Black Dog, 13 years earlier hit the nail on the head.

Certainly performing acts of kindness for someone from whom you never expect a return is moral and good – even if it is a politician.  It gets dicey that when you do something expecting something or do something for someone important, to be made someone important.

Rod Blagojevish envisioned himself a President in 2016.  He had big plans and ideas.  In order to fill then Senator Obama’s seat in the Illinois legislature, Blagojevich wanted to make sure he gotsomething for giving something.  As he put it, “I’ve fot this thing and it’s f***ing golden .. I’m not just giving it up for f***ing nothing.”  Blago believed something was owed to him, he deserved it and was willing to do a favor for Obama to get it.

Of course, Blagojevich not only felt he deserved things he didn’t he also felt others owed him things they didn’t. He was working to shake down a Children’s hospital for campaign dollars  if they wanted their governmentdollars.  Maybe the hospital is starting to figure out what a lot of us already know – depending on the government for money will leave you just .. depending on the government.

Unless you’ve been under a rock, you are also aware of the offer to Sestak that rocked the media.  From MSNBC

Last summer, I received a phone call from President Clinton. During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background. He said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a Presidential Board while remaining in the House of Representatives. I said no. I told President Clinton that my only consideration in getting into the Senate race or not was whether it was the right thing to do for Pennsylvania working families and not any offer. The former President said he knew I’d say that, and the conversation moved on to other subjects.

The White House released a memo that supported this claim and Bill Clinton backed them up.  Then Slick Willie said he didn’t, while Obama said he did and now no one knows who said or did what.

Last we find that the Mayo Clinic has taken the return back scratch to a whole new level – they tried to give a man life itself.  Not any ordinary man, a man who had given them at least $1 Million as this article in the Dallas Morning News states.

In 2002, Baron was diagnosed with multiple myeloma. By October 2008, his doctors at the Mayo Clinic were telling him he had just days to live.

They also offered a glimmer of hope. Over the years, the couple had donated about $1 million to Mayo. The staff was especially diligent, Blue said. They tested an arsenal of drugs and finally discovered that Baron’s cancer responded surprisingly well, in the lab, to a drug called Tysabri.

Mayo had an ample supply, but the drug was – and still is – approved only for treatment of multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease. The manufacturer, Biogen Idec, refused to give permission, even under special “compassionate use” rules that protect a drug-maker from a black mark in case of an adverse outcome.

One can and should argue that Baron may not have given all that money in the hopes of getting special treatment in the end, but he certainly got it.  Guess who also jumped in to help:

Somehow – Blue (Baron’s wife) still isn’t sure how – Pelosi cajoled the FDA to find a legal justification that let Mayo administer the drug, even without Biogen’s consent.

“Nancy figured out a way,” she said.

The drug beat back the cancer for a few days, but not enough.

Blue has no illusion that a typical family could pull such strings.

I’m fairly certain I can’t.  And that is disturbing.  These real-life instances of the ruling class deciding who gets what should be especially concerning.  If only the “deserving” are given the special things, the better goods, the privileged services, where will individual freedom be left?

Our elitist ruling class has taken even more power amongst itself with Health Care and Finance reform.  No more are all the decisions in our hands.  We will become dependent upon the grace of the aristocracy for things as common as Health Care.  We will soon become the less equal of the animals at Manor Farm.