Monday, May 11, 2009
Watergate brought president Nixon the threat of impeachment and ultimate resignation for his attempt to cover up the break-in of the Democrat headquarters in the Watergate building.The media drove the story to Armageddon proportions to rid themselves of a president they hated.And if they had their way they would do the same thing to president Bush over the “water boarding” fiasco.
Fast forward to today and I believe we have a scandal of real potential criminal proportions that occurred in the recent past.
President Obama and his merry band of “enforcers” are reported to have brought extortion into the White House numerous times. The most recent dastardly act involves the White House and the State of California.
The illegal influence appears to have occurred over the decision in Sacramento, Ca. to cut the wages of the The Service Employee International Union (SEIU).
SEIU was among the second biggest financial donor to President Obama’s presidential campaign, contributing $33 million. The union is also consistently among the biggest donors to Democrats in Sacramento and aggressively fought wage cuts during state budget negotiations.
The state of California is fiscally bankrupt, and the cuts were part of an attempt to balance an extremely bloated budget that is heavy on social and welfare benefits.
But the president is apparently not busy enough trying to socialize the country with the take over of the auto industry, banks and our medical care. He was compelled to get involved in a matter of states rights. Of course this is just another pay back to another union who put him in the Oval Office. First there was his attempt to give the auto workers union 33% share in Chrysler corporation in the bankruptcy settlement, and now he is paying off his debt to SEIU!
The following is a direct quote from the Los Angeles Times, and it illustrates the Chicago like tactics that the Obama “mob” in the White House are using to get their way whenever anyone crosses one of “their own”!
“Officials in the governor’s office say a politically powerful union may have had inappropriate influence over the Obama administration’s decision to withhold billions of dollars in federal stimulus money from California if the state does not reverse a scheduled wage cut for the labor group’s workers.
The officials say they are particularly troubled that the Service Employees International Union, which lobbied the federal government to step in, was included in a conference call in which state and federal officials reviewed the wage cut and the terms of the stimulus package.
California Secretary of Health and Human Services Kim Belshe said she could not recall another instance in which the federal government invited a significant stakeholder group into such government-to-government negotiations.
“The involvement of a stakeholder in this kind of state-federal deliberative process is unusual at best,” she said. “This was really atypical and outside any norm I am familiar with.”
In addition to several state and federal officials, participants in the April 15 conference call included an SEIU associate general counsel in Washington, a lobbyist for SEIU in California and a representative from SEIU’s policy staff in California, according to a list provided by the Schwarzenegger administration”.
Does anyone have a problem with “pay for play” when it is transacted by a union who intends to force a state to continue paying high wage rates to its members while using its influence with a President to threaten to hurt all the citizens of the state?
I have a real problem with a President who picks and chooses winners depending on whether they supported him financially during the election, as if he were a corrupt Chicago machine alderman, as opposed to say the President of the United States who is supposed to represent all of us?
I have a problem with Boss Obama who threatens and extorts to meet his goals (see Chrysler cram down or his comment that he was the only one standing between Wall Street banking execs and the pitchforks). He has expressed his desire not to quell the people’s anger but to “channel it.”The problem is the channeling is all one way!