Ethically Challenged? What Does the Richardson News Say About Obama?

By Andrea TantarosRepublican Political Commentator

Who needs network reality TV when you can watch the Democrats disgrace themselves in a show I like to call "Pay to Play." The latest episode features New Mexico Governor and Obama-pick for (ironically) Commerce Secretary Bill Richardson, who withdrew his nomination amid reports he is under investigation for another seemingly all too common political quid pro quo.

From Governor Rod, to Rangel, to Rezko (I could go on) a theme is developing: Obama's got some ethically challenged friends and Democrats don't bring reform, they bring scandal.

Obama is a product of the deeply corrupt Illinois political machine. Have we ever heard him emphatically point the finger at its moral failings?

I'm not saying this is strictly a partisan problem but it's certainly distracting and tarnishing the president-elect, his brand, and gives the appearance that he's the steward of a culture that America has no tolerance for.

[caption id="attachment_4170" align="aligncenter" width="196" caption="President-elect Barack Obama is seen after speaking about Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich on Dec. 9 (AP)"][/caption]

Obama is a product of the deeply corrupt Illinois political machine. Have we ever heard him emphatically point the finger at its moral failings? No. Was his gut reaction to chastise his pastor, spiritual mentor and "uncle" Reverend Wright for white hate, sexism and anti-American rants? Nope. Has he called for disgraced Congressman Charlie Rangel to step down from his powerful committee chairmanship? Not once. It took him days to denounce Blago and when he did he was "saddened." His response to Richardson? More melancholy. --This is the future office of the presidency not a Hallmark "After School" special!

Does this make Obama a criminal? Not technically. But it is criminal, and cowardly, that he is not standing up to these offenders.

By locking the door and pulling down his shades when trouble arises, Obama reveals his ambivalence to ethics and an obvious aversion to conflict. When the going gets tough, the tough...are bummed? Obama doesn't represent change at all. He represents emotional impotence.

Obama's victory wasn't a vote against the GOP. But it also wasn't a re-alignment of the country to the center left, either. It was a vote against the incumbent(s). Obama wasn't part of a political dynasty or related to a former political power player. He was billed as an outsider and the mainstream media ignored any questions about his past that might have revealed any sort of a shady past. He was packaged and sold to the American public as a politician who was immune to impropriety. Now we know he's just unwilling to stop or stand up to it.

For all the pretty language Obama fed us during his campaign about change, things have only gotten worse. And we're still weeks away from his actual inauguration and the beginning of unilateral Democratic control of Congress. In the meantime, America continues to tune in to the show "Pay to Play," filled with Democratic debauchery, hoping desperately, for the sake of the nation, that this is one show that won't be renewed for another season.