"Meant to create jobs and cut reliance on foreign oil, Obama's green-technology program was infused with politics at every level...Political considerations were raised repeatedly by company investors, Energy Department bureaucrats and White House officials." -The Washington Post
WASHINGTON - Anyone who follows the news, or who is unemployed, knows the lack of jobs in Barack Obama's economy and an exploding $15 trillion debt are two of the voters' top concerns this year, according to all the polls.
But a third issue has shot to the top tier of the public's priorities, even though it draws relatively little attention in the news. It is government corruption and Americans are angry about it, according to a recent survey by the Gallup Poll.
Gallup said "reducing federal government corruption" came in second, between "creating jobs" and cutting the budget deficit. A hefty 87 percent said it was "extremely" or "very important" among their list of current concerns.
I suspect this has a lot to do with one of the nation's costliest political corruption scandals in recent times: The president's boondoggle-plagued, green energy spending program to develop alternative energy resources.
An 18-month congressional investigation into Obama's $40 billion give-away program shows that it has been a colossal failure, riddled with embarrassing bankruptcies, favored treatment for Obama's rich cronies and campaign contributors, and political lobbying pressure to approve bad business deals that should have been rejected.
An investigation by The Washington Post concluded that Obama's guaranteed loans, tax credits and grant programs to well-connected supporters was "infused with politics" at virtually every level of the approval process.
Obama's re-election campaign has sharply attacked his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, for his investments in businesses that didn't work out in the end and led to job layoffs.
But Romney was using private risk capital in an effort to turn troubled businesses around, enterprises that do not always succeed -- though many if not most of them do.
Obama, on the other hand, was risking hard earned tax dollars on shaky, often politically-driven energy deals that in many cases were given thumbs down by government auditors whose advice was often overridden by politically-powerful deal-makers at the highest levels of government.
The lengthening list of bad business deals Obama and his advisers pushed, promoted and approved has been for the most part ignored by the mainstream media, especially the nightly network news programs.