Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Obama's Ethical Performance Breakdown

What does a "chief performance officer" do? Well, according to the Washington Post's analysis of the new position created by the Barack Obama presidential transition, one of the responsibilities is governmental transparency and accessibility:

Releasing information publicly will help engage the general public in the work of government, as well as allowing measurement experts in academia and business to parse data and offer ideas to improve federal management. Transparency also creates an incentive for agencies to do a better job of collecting and using data.
The Post's essay is dated January 7, 2009, and the article specifically mentions by name Nancy Killefer, President Obama's nominee for the position.

So today's news that
Ms. Killefer has withdrawn from consideration as the chief performance nominee ought to really tell us something about both the competence and integrity of the new boss in Washington and the Democratic "values" that have taken over the town.

Was Ms. Killefer taking the appointment seriously when the transparency of her very own credibility was at stake, her credibility as the administration's top officer charged with governmental transparency? Did it take the media's amazing snap from its Obamessianic slumber - with the growing attention in the press this last week to the slew of ethical fiascos among a host of Obama appointees - for her to see the light?

It seems not too long ago that the Democratic congressional majority was championing a new ethics of responsibility in Washington, and throughout campaign 2008 the online left routinely scourged the GOP for its corruption, starting with Vice President Dick Cheney on down to the lowest congressional backbencher. But now where is the left on what's emerging to be a banana republic's version of governmental propriety?

Tim Geithner got a pass at Treasury, but his chief of staff's a long-time lobbyist doing deals inside the Beltway. So much for those
lobbying standards President Obama established when he announced a new day on the Potomac? Maybe the Geithner Treasury's ethical end-run was a bit much, as it now seems that Thomas Daschle's bid for health secretary is sailing into some stormy waters. With the New York Times editorial board calling for Daschle's name to be withdrawn, it's pretty obvious that the bloom is off the roses along the corridors of power of the new Democratic era.

Actually, it's breaking that Daschle's now withdrawing himself (and I wasn't going to bet on it), so perhaps folks on the left are noting the clarity of hypocrisy that's now finally coming into focus just a couple weeks after our national holiday from reason that was the Obama presidential inauguration.

George Packer, at the New Yorker, is warning that President Obama "
can’t afford hypocrisy." But that's a bit like saying Kurt Warner can't afford to throw an interception. What's done is done now, and the country's already living with a reign of impropriety, and the train's barely left the station. There's no second chance for Warner's Hall of Fame bid, and we're barely into the first 100 days and Obama will be lucky to win a second term the way the Democratic scandals are already rocking the administration.

No worry for the online fever swamps of the left, naturally. They'll just
give the finger to anyone who's got the temerity to point out the hypocrisy of the president, his campaign, and his party. Meanwhile, that much touted "transparency and accessibility" is going down the memory hole faster than you can say Zoƫ Baird.


Average American said...

He should have picked more Republicns. He's had no trouble with their credentials!

The Vegas Art Guy said...

That's because those silly laws and rules only apply to the GOP....

Righty64 said...

Don't forget Bill Richardson having to withdraw his name for Commerce Secretary!

cracker said...

Ya know, Ive paid all my taxes...and then some...

Hell! , I'm callin up Obama right now and get me a job, fella's

(Hmmm I wonder if commenting on "American Power" is gonna cause a glitch?)

Norm said...

Daschle was such a poor choice. The past two years he has received income, mainly from 6 figure speaker fees, from the organizations he was supposed to regulate !! Why would anyone pay Daschle 6 figures for a 30 minute speech unless it was a payoff for pushing certain legislation while he was in the Senate? Not a conflict ?

El Jefe Maximo said...

This is all worth a definite chortle or five, particularly Puff Daschle getting hoist on his own nomination petard. He used to have such fun with Republican judges.

But more seriously, you have to wonder if these clowns have the slightest idea what they're doing? Do they do any vetting at all?

The Obamaites really need to get into the game: because the kaffee klatch and sit-in time is about over. The Iranians put up a satellite today. Time to quit the fun and games and get serious.

Anonymous said...

We have a new word for our lexicon: Democrisy. It kind of says it all!

But the best came from White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who said, “I think they both recognized that you can’t set an example of responsibility but accept a different standard in who serves.”

Now, how could Mr Gibbs say that with a straight face after Tim Geithner has already been confirmed as Secretary of the Treasury? Doesn’t he realize that he just said that the new Secretary of the Treasury has accepted a different standard when it comes to himself?

Tom the Redhunter said...

No no no, you folks have it all wrong.

Obama is shooting for a "new politics" with his choices; rather than wait for his choices to become corrupt while in office, he'll pick ones that are already breaking the law.

Saves time.

Law and Order Teacher said...

If you want some enjoyment watch Gibbs's daily briefings. They have fast become must-see TV. Most of the time he looks like a guy looking for a quick way out of the room. Wait until the media get tired of his act and really start to whack on him. Pop a beer and enjoy.

Ron K said...

what is really interesting if you work for the IRS and you don't pay your taxes you don't have a job anymore.