Rev. Wright, Dr. Whitaker and Obama’s wide stance

I’ve been reading about the bribe to keep Rev. Jeremiah Wright quiet during the 2008 campaign (although I personally think he enhanced Obama’s resume for many radicals) and now the contract for about $6 million that the Chicago medical center v.p. who offered the bribe got from the administration (Dr. Eric Whitaker) the same medical center that appointed Michelle to its board with a fat salary after Obama became senator, and I’m wondering how this is so different than the John Edwards scandal, taking money for his mistress that was intended for the campaign and lying that the baby was produced by a campaign staffer. A bribe is a bribe is a bribe.

Also, now that Newsweek has announced that we have a gay president and we know that some of the gay PACs were pressuring him to flip flop yet again (first he was for it when running for Senate, then against it when running for President, now he’s for it) and we know Axelrod was orchestrating first the “leaks” about his girlfriends before the gay support, then put Biden out there to test the waters of the west coast, then the eastern establishment, so Obama could do his graceful flip into that messy sludge, why is a “wide stance” in a men’s restroom rumor enough to get a Republican run out of office, when openly soliciting money from the gay demographic is supposed to be a strong reason to reelect the president for evolving to a position we all knew he held?

I know we’re supposed to believe campaigns today are just as down and dirty as the 18th century when sexuality rumors were standard fare, but I do think the Obama campaign has scraped the bottom of the smelly, rotting offal barrel. And all this to distract from an expanding war, weakened borders, and a flagging economy?