Gay Patriot Header Image

If Obama Were a Republican, This Would be a Scandal

The more I followed the 2008 campaign, the less I believed Barack Obama’s rhetoric, his mellifluous voice and telegenic presence notwithstanding, that he was some new kind of politician, committed to ideals of open government, immune to the pull of special interests — particularly those with lots of cash to spread around.

He cut his teeth in the hardscrabble world of Chicago politics and never once showed any inclination to buck the machine.  He was — and remains — a loyal team player.  He didn’t do anything to take on corrupt politicians nor did he support their challengers in primary elections.

So, it comes as little surprise that his Administration did a favor for a campaign contributor:

Turns out Barack Obama has gotten more money from British Petroleum than any other American politician. Not just that, but BP spent $15.9 million lobbying the Democrats and Obama last year.

The result of all that money to Obama? The Obama Administration exempted British Petroleum from an environmental drilling study.

What the odds?” Doug Ross asks, “Obama biggest recipient of BP cash in last 20 years; U.S. exempted BP’s Deepwater site from environmental oversight in ’09“.  Now, I’ll grant that more investigation is warranted, but there is more evidence here of pay-for-lax enforcement than of collusion between the Bush Administration and Halliburton.

When I checked the home pages of the New York Times, Washington Post and Yahoo!, none reported the link.  If this were a different Administration, they would have already ran stories similar to those we have seen on right-of-center blogs and have dispatched their top reporters to research this matter.

The one who uncovered the scandal would be sure to win a Pulitzer Prize.

UPDATE:  Right after posting, caught this on Instapundit:

GOVERNMENT REGULATORS GAVE BP A PASS: “The Interior Department exempted BP’s calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental-impact analysis last year, according to government documents, after three reviews of the area concluded that a massive oil spill was unlikely.”

I had linked the original WaPo version of this below, but, strangely, that link now goes to a completely different story. So here it is again. Thanks to reader Joseph Nunke for pointing out this odd behavior at the Post, and for sending the new link. We saw similar behavior from The New York Times with a critical story about the Administration the other day. Hmm. Anybody at the WaPo or the NYT want to explain this? ‘Cause it looks pretty bad.



  1. If Bush had given oil companies the same pass, the left would already be demanding impeachment.

    Comment by American Elephant — May 6, 2010 @ 3:45 am - May 6, 2010

  2. Come on guys. This is exactly what our resident socialist dreams of.

    “It shouldn’t be too hard to recognize that the best way for our democracy to work is to have a competitive private sector working cooperatively with an organized public sector.”

    Got to love government co-operation!

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 6, 2010 @ 7:27 am - May 6, 2010

  3. Maybe this proves we should move to publicly funded election and take out of the influence of money from unions and corporations all together.

    Comment by darkeyedresolve — May 6, 2010 @ 7:41 am - May 6, 2010

  4. Meanwhile, Chris Matthews is stuck on claiming Cheney is the villain.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 6, 2010 @ 7:57 am - May 6, 2010

  5. To Darkeyedresolve RE: public funded elections.
    John McCain already tried that. He even had a written agreement with Barack Obama that the presidential campaign would only be publicly funded. Of course, once Obama realized he he could raise more money privately by blocking credit card security codes, it was the end of publicly funded elections. Since this is an issue you apparently feel strongly about, I suggest you complain to the One who destroyed the possibility.

    Comment by Louise B — May 6, 2010 @ 8:59 am - May 6, 2010


    But how could that be? Government is all-wise, all-seeing, all-loving. All good things flow from government. It is instituted by God. Its motives are perfect. Especially when headed by a Democrat. Oh, wait – the reason must be that we simply haven’t found the right Democrat; we need a Democrat that will be more of a strong(wo)man and crush people harder.

    Yes, it’s a caricature, but a good caricature resembles its subject and some people think along those lines – little though they may wish to have it stated so baldly.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 6, 2010 @ 9:37 am - May 6, 2010

  7. Maybe this proves we should move to publicly funded election and take out of the influence of money from unions and corporations all together.

    Or… Maybe it proves we should abolish public funding and all other contribution rules except for those that require reporting on who contributors are, in order to restore free speech and the First Amendment. Maybe sunlight is the best disinfectant and, maybe since going in a direction of regulating election money (i.e., speech) has not been working all this time, maybe the desire to regulate itself is flawed and we should restrain it and try something different… like, oh, human freedom.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 6, 2010 @ 9:43 am - May 6, 2010

  8. I don’t think it would make a difference whether you have rules or not, money will get into the system regardless of how you chose to regulate it. Obviously the rules in place have done nothing to stem the influence or rampant spending by unions or businesses. Its just becoming a confusing mess and yea, maybe we should just leave rules in place that enforce reporting on the source of money.

    I’m not a advocate for it, and I am well aware of Obama making himself seem like the people’s candidate and then it comes out he is just as much in with corporations as those he was bashing for it. Its pretty gross, think everyone can agree on that.

    Comment by darkeyedresolve — May 6, 2010 @ 10:35 am - May 6, 2010

  9. ILoveCapitalism gets it.

    Comment by EssEm — May 6, 2010 @ 11:27 am - May 6, 2010

  10. No, we need more, stricter public funding to ensure true equity and a government of the people, not of the donors.

    Comment by Lloyd — May 6, 2010 @ 11:54 am - May 6, 2010

  11. Hmm, last time I checked, donors are people.

    Comment by The_Livewire — May 6, 2010 @ 12:14 pm - May 6, 2010

  12. #9: You beat me to the punch, EssEm. ILoveCapitalism DOES get it. The more government tinkers with something, the more irreversibly f’ed up it becomes. The federal tax code is a paper monument devoted to proving that axiom. The government has no business making up laws that presumptively decide the limit where one more penny suddenly transforms the act of donating from an act of Free Speech, to a criminal act of bribery. Of course, The One believes that ONLY government can make these determinations, just like he thinks government can decide at what point individuals have “made enough money” or “don’t need a tax break.” Naturally, his conclusion necessarily assumes that the system is under the control of him and his Chicagoland cronies. It’s only during those times when the levers are not under the control of Leftists that the “system is broken” and “needs reform now.”

    Consequently, the only logical, effective, and fair way to fix it is to give government only the power to enforce the full and complete disclosure of who received what, from whom, and how much. That is the solution LEAST likely to infringe on Constitutional rights because it gives the people the freedom to support the candidates of their choice to the extent they wish. It also leaves it to THE PEOPLE to answer the question, “how much money equals too much influence?” For every individual the answer will be different and individuals can make their own electoral decisions based on their own judgment. Of course, Obama believes the opposite–he thinks a federal government controlled by him and his cronies can better decide for all of us “how much is too much.”

    Of course, all of this is completely beyond Lloyd’s intellectual capacity (#10). Nothing new there–to him, MORE regulations and TIGHTER controls over how individuals and organizations express their support for candidates through financial contributions is the answer. It’s unbelievably illogical and obtuse–his “government of the people” is somehow going to be achieved by handing the power to determine how much individuals can “support” the candidate of their choice to government bureaucrats. His sick vision to “ensure true equity” is a federal bureaucrat telling me that my Constitutional right to support the political candidates of my choice expires at the precise moment I have donated X dollars and X cents. It’s easy to see where this kind of ignorance and stupidity (that Lloyd oozes) will lead: federal bureaucrats will decide that I have “made enough money” when my income is precisely X dollars and X cents (subject to change based on what the federal government “needs” during any given year).

    I’m always amazed by the Left’s relentless drive to strip themselves of freedom and hand it over to the whimsical judgment of government employees who just happen to be in charge at a particular moment. Lloyd is so convinced of the infallibility of Obama that he is willing to trust him with providing for his every need and desire in the future. Okay, fine, but is Lloyd so deliriously in love with Obama that he has lost the capacity to even consider what “the future” may hold? It’s baffling. As recently as 2006 there was a Republican in the White House and the GOP controlled both the House and Senate. And not only that, people like Lloyd didn’t just disagree with Bush–they literally believed him to be the human embodiment of pure evil–the kind of hellish demon that is evil simply for the sake of being evil. Does Lloyd think there will never be another Republican in the White House? Does he think that the GOP has lost the control of Congress forever? I honestly don’t get it.

    Comment by Sean A — May 6, 2010 @ 1:09 pm - May 6, 2010

  13. Thank you guys 🙂

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 6, 2010 @ 1:51 pm - May 6, 2010

  14. No, we need more, stricter public funding to ensure true equity and a government of the people, not of the donors.

    So since your Obama refused to limit himself to public funding and instead took money from donors, that means his government is not one of the people and instead is one of the donors.

    Now watch as Lloyd spins himself into a puddle explaining how the rules he establishes for others do not apply for his black Messiah.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 6, 2010 @ 8:47 pm - May 6, 2010

  15. I just want to know when the American peoples will collectively group together and take our government back?! We need a WAR here & now! We need to scrap all levels and institutions of government and create a new government with four to eight year terms in Congress in Senate, and a cap of no more than $45, 000 as an annual PUBLIC SERVANT POSITION.

    What the hell are we waiting for peoples???

    Let’s get rid of Obama, too, because he is absolutely no good. How can a thief acting as a state senator become President of the United States? Well he didn’t become the President from the voting election; I assure you that! In fact the election count was most definitely rigged. It amazes me that not once has the media mentioned the most obvious scheme of corruption. There is absolutely no way a total vote count, or anywhere near that, could have been summed up and endorsed a complete total of four hours after the polls closed! Why there wasn’t an outrage then and there I’ll never – NEVER – understand; why does reality have to be surreal?

    We need to completely overhaul this most corrupt government – who ARE NOT for the people, we need to deport all illegal Mexicans in this country, we need to stop supporting legal immigrants of all ethnic backgrounds; they must be able to afford living here upon arrival! Most people are not aware that legal immigrants are actually paid to live here; that’s right.. the government pays for almost everything – if not everything; the government gives legal immigrants YOUR hard earned money, and guess what.. for things you yourself cannot even obtain from the government! Our money is taken from a legalized mafia cartel that once was our government, but now the government that was intended to work for us has been working with and for the Non-federal reserves since Woodrow Wilson. Right now Obama is literally playing the role he has been groomed for since college, and you need to be aware of Obama’s contacts since his college years to know who he really is working for. If you don’t know already you need to do some research, because you should never dismiss the truth for lack of knowing.

    I applaud Arizona and judge California! The flag to me is not the point, but rather the complete and utter disrespect of these so called, “Mexican-Americans,” and in my opinion just because one is born here does not make them American; not when their parents were in our country illegally and gave birth! This needs to change, too! Why in the hell were these families not deported upon giving birth? We wouldn’t be having these problems if our government were doing the job they were designed for and hired to do. Congress and Senate.. you are Fired! You may not realize it will happen but it will… trust US, because we control you, and we will take the control back.. Got that?!

    Other than that… to me – right now – it would be embarrassing to where, or post, a flag representing the United States of America. The flag needs to be lowered, and not risen again, until we have taken back our country and overhauled this corrupt government!

    Comment by AmericanCitizen — May 7, 2010 @ 4:23 pm - May 7, 2010

  16. Oops…

    ***Other than that… to me – right now – it would be embarrassing to WEAR, or post, a flag representing the United States of America. The flag needs to be lowered, and not risen again, until we have taken back our country and overhauled this corrupt government!***

    Comment by AmericanCitizen — May 7, 2010 @ 4:30 pm - May 7, 2010

  17. […] the aftermath of Katrina while downplaying those after the oil spill.  They have all put ignored ties between tie between these Administration and BP, all but failing to investigate the exemption the Administration granted this Obama campaign […]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Obama’s poll numbers improve as Obamacare debate fades — May 12, 2010 @ 12:00 am - May 12, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.