President Obama was right. He promised the most transparent administration ever and he kept his word. It is the most transparently political, transparently corrupt and transparently inept of any administration in recent American history, maybe in all American history.
It is becoming increasingly difficult to find an area of governance in which he or his minions have demonstrated competence. Perhaps that’s what comes of putting ideology ahead of competence when hiring and promoting.
O course, there is another explanation for the scandals that now roil the Obama administration. Eric Holder, Lois (I’ll take the Fifth) Lerner and the rest of the hierarchy just did what Boss Obama wanted done. All they had to do to get their marching orders was listen to his speeches. The President singled out Fox News for vitriol, even trying to ban them from the White House. And he made clear that he considered conservatives in general and conservative Republicans in particular “the enemy.” (Talk about hate speech.)
Then there is the Bill Clinton redux. Remember when Clinton debated the meaning of “is” to avoid admitting sexual wrongdoing? Well, now there is Eric Holder who told Congress, when questioned about his agency’s investigation of Fox News reporter James Rosen: “Well, I would say this, with regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of the material, that is not something that I have ever been involved in, heard of or would think would be a wise policy.”
That denial covered a great deal of ground, at least for anyone with a rudimentary grasp of English usage. Not only did he say he was not personally involved, he never even heard about it! Mark also that he said potential prosecution.
The attempt to weasel out of the charge that he lied to Congress was put forth in a letter from a DOJ underling who claimed that because no prosecution took place, Holder’s statement was factual. Yet, Holder personally signed a search warrant that named Rosen as a possible “co-conspirator ” in an espionage investigation. To now claim that did not indicate a potential prosecution is both feeble and ridiculous.
One is reminded of George Orwell’s essay, Politics and the English Language, in which two statements are germane: “… (P)olitical speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible… Thus, political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness.” DOJ’s pitiful defense of Holder fulfills Orwell’s criteria. Holder, on the other hand, must not have read Orwell or he would have known to obfuscate his denial.
Attempting to do so after the fact is…transparent.