Ingen blir så fornærmet over anklager om maktmisbruk som liberalere. De reagerer med et «how dare you», som om bare det å mistenke dem for maktmisbruk er en majestetsfornærmelse. Barack Obama er flink til å legge avstand til skandaler slik at bare tanken på å knytte ham til dem er noe man rygger tilbake for.
Slik kan publikum unngå å se det som utspiller seg rett foran øynene deres. For Obama-tilhengere har i lang tid gått etter Obamas motstandere, hengt dem ut som tvilsomme som fortjener ekstra årvåkenhet.
Obama har selv spilt dette spillet. Det har vært et signal til etater som IRS om å skride til verket. De har ikke trengt noen ordre fra presidenten. De har hørt ham. Loud and clear.
Kimberley A. Strassel skriver i WSJ.
Mr. Obama now professes shock and outrage that bureaucrats at the IRS did exactly what the president of the United States said was the right and honorable thing to do. «He put a target on our backs, and he’s now going to blame the people who are shooting at us?» asks Idaho businessman and longtime Republican donor Frank VanderSloot.
Mr. VanderSloot is the Obama target who in 2011 made a sizable donation to a group supporting Mitt Romney. In April 2012, an Obama campaign website named and slurred eight Romney donors. It tarred Mr. VanderSloot as a «wealthy individual» with a «less-than-reputable record.» Other donors were described as having been «on the wrong side of the law.»
This was the Obama version of the phone call—put out to every government investigator (and liberal activist) in the land.
Twelve days later, a man working for a political opposition-research firm called an Idaho courthouse for Mr. VanderSloot’s divorce records. In June, the IRS informed Mr. VanderSloot and his wife of an audit of two years of their taxes. In July, the Department of Labor informed him of an audit of the guest workers on his Idaho cattle ranch. In September, the IRS informed him of a second audit, of one of his businesses. Mr. VanderSloot, who had never been audited before, was subject to three in the four months after Mr. Obama teed him up for such scrutiny.
The last of these audits was only concluded in recent weeks. Not one resulted in a fine or penalty. But Mr. VanderSloot has been waiting more than 20 months for a sizable refund and estimates his legal bills are $80,000. That figure doesn’t account for what the president’s vilification has done to his business and reputation.
Er det atmosfæren fra krigen mot terror kombinert med nidkjærheten til politisk korrekte som har avstedkommet en slik bruk av statens midler?
Obama har selv navngitt grupper som samler inn for republikanerne som tvilsomme. Selv har han samlet inn større beløp enn noen annen kandidat.
The same threat was made to conservative groups that might dare play in the election. As early as January 2010, Mr. Obama would, in his state of the union address, cast aspersions on the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, claiming that it «reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests» (read conservative groups).
The president derided «tea baggers.» Vice President Joe Biden compared them to «terrorists.» In more than a dozen speeches Mr. Obama raised the specter that these groups represented nefarious interests that were perverting elections. «Nobody knows who’s paying for these ads,» he warned. «We don’t know where this money is coming from,» he intoned.
In case the IRS missed his point, he raised the threat of illegality: «All around this country there are groups with harmless-sounding names like Americans for Prosperity, who are running millions of dollars of ads against Democratic candidates . . . And they don’t have to say who exactly the Americans for Prosperity are. You don’t know if it’s a foreign-controlled corporation.»