Hypocrisy and the Duggar Scandal

It's been quite awhile since my last post, and all this media outcry against the Duggar family has motivated me to dust it off.   Before I go any further, I want to make it abundantly clear that I do not condone or excuse Josh Duggar's actions. In fact, I think what he did was reprehensible.  Also in the interest of full disclosure, I have never watched a single episode of the Duggar's show nor do I agree with many of their beliefs and values.  My interest in this controversy has little to do with the Duggar family and everything to do with the hypocrisy and false outrage by the media and left leaning organizations. The response to this story exposes some really disturbing trends in our society.

I'm going to start with the elephant in the room. As I already mentioned, what Josh Duggar admitted to doing 12 years ago is sick and terribly wrong. He made terrible mistakes and has to live with the knowledge of what he did for the rest of his life.  However, his transgressions are in no way unforgivable in the eyes of God. The media and other liberal organizations are crowing and cheering at this story and claiming that it exposes the hypocrisy of his Christian faith. That claim is completely and totally bogus. Josh Duggar could be accused of hypocrisy ONLY IF he claimed that he has lived a perfect life. To my knowledge, he has never said anything of the sort and has accepted responsibility for his mistakes. A fundamental truth in Christianity is that God will forgive ALL sins when confessed with a repentant heart.  Mercifully God isn't like humans who want to pick and choose which sins are forgivable and which are not. The Bible is littered with stories of people who committed so called "big sins" but were forgiven and further used by God to advance His kingdom.  Christians fail to live up to God's standards every day, and in God's eyes a little white lie is just as much of a sin as Josh Duggar's transgression. God will forgive and forget all sins when we truly confess and repent.  However, that does not mean that we are not left with the consequences of that sin, as I'm sure Josh Duggar has learned over the past decade,  The bottom line is that Christians are sinful, fallible human beings which is exactly why we need the grace and mercy of the cross of Christ.  The media and the left try to use the mistakes of Christian public figures to discredit Christianity.  In reality, the failures of Christians and God's forgiveness of our mistakes should be one of the most appealing aspects of Christianity.      

The second issue I have with this whole debate is the fact that those on the left, particularly those who advocate and push the LGBT agenda are gleefully embracing this scandal to vilify those who simply choose to believe differently from them.  The media has been successful in convincing our society that if I disagree with someone then I must hate them.  That attitude is one reason our country is in this period of gridlock and contempt for one another. This attitude is pervasive across all aspects of life, including religion and politics, and it is patently false. We ALL have the freedom to choose what to believe and how to believe.  I have many friends whose personal and political beliefs are different from mine, and there is nothing wrong with that,  I don't dislike or disrespect them because they choose to live differently than I do.  I respect the rights of all Americans to choose to live their lives the way they want, and I, along with other Christians, simply ask for the same consideration in return. The left accuses conservatives, and especially Christians of intolerance when they are the ones who are intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them.  Many people on the left side of the aisle have done many abominable things, but we hear almost nothing about it because it won't advance their cause so it gets brushed under the rug.   Ironically, liberals and LGBT advocates have been openly hostile towards Christians who do not share their political views or condone their lifestyle, but strangely enough, this is not considered hate speech when it is directed at Christians. This double standard is both appalling and completely unfair.  The Duggar family, my family, and other Christian families have the same rights and freedoms within the law as liberals to choose how to live our lives and raise our families.  I can't speak for the Duggars, but I can speak for myself and many other Christians I know. We do not under any circumstances hate gay people nor do we think that God hates gay people.  We simply have prayerfully studied and considered the issue and believe that the homosexual lifestyle is not God's design for the family. There is absolutely nothing hateful about that.  All we ask is that we are given the courtesy to choose what to believe without being attacked and having the liberal agenda shoved down our throats. Ironically those who scream so loudly at us to be loving and tolerant are themselves full of hate and intolerance towards us.  

My final issue with this whole controversy stems from our society's desire to publicly judge and try everyone in the court of public opinion.  From George Zimmerman, the shooting of Michael Brown, the death of Freddy Gray to Josh Duggar.  Between the constant 24 hour news cycle and the proliferation of social media, we have turned into judge, jury, and executioner when we have little to no facts about these situations.  We treat each other shamefully as we hide behind the anonymity on the internet.  We need to stop and think about how we would feel if we were in the same situation and our past mistakes were being broadcast for everyone to see.  How would we feel if we were going to be tried in the justice system but the media had already decided on our guilt before we ever set foot inside the court room?  How would we feel having to read vile and hateful comments directed towards us?  How is it that those who preach love and acceptance are so quick to fail to offer it to others?  

Yes, Josh Duggar did a bad thing and he has to live with that. However, God is a god of forgiveness and second chances, and every single one of us is in need of that forgiveness and freedom.  Christians deserve the same freedoms and respect as those who choose to believe differently.  Those who militantly push acceptance and tolerance need to practice what they preach.  We as a society need to stop publicly humiliating people who fail because we all make mistakes, and one day it could be us in that situation.  We need to turn away from this hatred and anger in society and remember to treat each other with decency and remember our shared values and humanity.    

The Political Spin Machine vs. Hobby Lobby

One of the most disappointing things surrounding the Supreme Court ruling is how yet again our politicians will quickly lie and spin the facts to get a sound bite on TV.  Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the ruling “jeopardizes women’s access to essential health care” and that “your boss should never be able to make your health care decisions for you”.  Neither of those statements is remotely true based on the actual Supreme Court ruling.  I have already shown how the ruling stated that companies like Hobby Lobby ought to be included in the accommodation made to other religious groups which has absolutely no impact on the women that work there.  Also, Hobby Lobby has never had any intentions of making health care decisions for employees and that is a ridiculous assertion.  Frankly I find it rather ironic that politicians like Harry Reid and President Obama are howling about bosses making our health care decisions for us when what they really want through the ACA is the government to make our health care decisions for us!  Harry Reid also said “it’s time that five men on the Supreme Court stop deciding what happens to women”.  That statement doesn’t even attempt to reasonably debate the issue- its only purpose is to be inflammatory. These politicians want women to think that Hobby Lobby and conservatives who support them don’t want them to have access to any birth control when they know that is absolutely false.   As is typical with this administration, President Obama couldn't manage to stay above the fray either.  His spokesman made the same false statements as Harry Reid and other Congressional democrats.

Another political spin statement that has been tossed about in the media is that Hobby Lobby wants to impose their religious beliefs on their employees.  That is also patently untrue.  Hobby Lobby’s position on this issue in no way seeks to force their beliefs on contraception on their employees.  No one has claimed that Hobby Lobby is attempting to ban their employees from using these methods of birth control.  Hobby Lobby is simply asking that they not be required to pay for something when they have a strong moral and religious objection. 

On this blog I continually try to point out hypocrisy by our politicians on both sides of the aisle.  On an issue as important as this one, it’s disappointing and shameful that our politicians and media continue to play their spin games and knowingly mislead the American public for their own gain.  Americans, please take responsibility and do your own research!  Do not rely on the media and certainly not the politicians for accurate information about important issues.  I think there are few things more important than the issue of religious freedom and how far the government can go in inserting itself into our daily lives to have a fair and reasonable debate.  At some point we the people have got to start demanding fair treatment and reasonable debate by our media and our politicians.  Otherwise I hope we like how our government is functioning today because it will never improve and never get back to reasonable debate and compromise.  

Hobby Lobby and the Supreme Court

On June 30, 2014, the U. S. Supreme Court issued a ruling on the case “Burwell, Secretary of Health and Human Services Et al. v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., et al.” in regards to whether private companies can be forced under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to provide all forms of birth control when ownership has a religious objection.  In a 5-4 ruling, the Court ruled that closely held for-profit corporations, which is defined as 50% or more of the shares being held by 5 or less individuals has rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA). 

There is a lot of misinformation and political spin in the news about this ruling, so I will clarify some points based on the actual ruling and clear up some incorrect facts around what Hobby Lobby does and does not want to provide as part of their health care coverage.  I think rather than read all the sensationalist media reports with false or misleading information coming out on both sides of the debate, Americans should actually read the Court’s ruling on the case and interpret it for themselves.  I will also provide my opinion on this subject but I will not debate the validity of Hobby Lobby’s claims that these methods of birth control are equivalent to abortion.  The owners of Hobby Lobby have the same right as everyone else to wrestle with the questions of the beginnings of life and their opinions and beliefs on the subject are no less valid than anyone else’s.  The court addresses this directly and says that “it is not for the Court to say that the religious beliefs of the plaintiffs are mistaken or unreasonable”. 

At issue here is the requirement under the ACA that all nonexempt employers are required to provide coverage for 20 contraceptive methods approved by the FDA.  Many religious affiliated non-profit groups such as churches and hospitals, are opposed to only 4 of the 20 required contraceptive methods because these methods prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. Religious non-profit organizations have already been exempted from this mandate by HHS.  The exemption requires the insurance company to exclude coverage for these 4 contraceptive methods from the employer’s plan; however the insurance company must provide the plan participants with separate payments for these services without burdening the employer or its insured employees with these costs.  Hobby Lobby has the same objections to these 4 methods of birth control, so they petitioned the court to be exempt as well.   Many in the media would like people to believe that Hobby Lobby does not want to provide coverage for any method of birth control, but that is patently false.  Hobby Lobby’s insurance plan provides coverage for 16 of the 20 methods, so access to birth control is widely available to their female employees. 

The court said that the RFRA was intended to provide very broad protection for religious liberty.  One of the arguments made against this ruling is that the RFRA should not cover corporations as “persons”.   However, I believe the Court correctly states that since prior rulings under the RFRA have allowed non-profit corporations protections under the RFRA that it is inconceivable that an individual and a non-profit corporation meet the definition of “person” but a for-profit corporation does not.  Also, given that HHS has already exempted religious non-profit organizations from this requirement and accepted alternative arrangements, the government cannot now claim that this accommodation is unacceptable if applied to a for-profit corporation.  

My opinion on this issue goes far beyond potential religious objections to certain contraceptives.  I think we as a country need to actually have a focused debate on whether health insurance is a right or a benefit.  Too many people have quickly made a decision one way or the other without really stopping to consider the Constitutional issues.  This is not the time or place to have that debate; however in my opinion I believe our current system leans towards its being a benefit.  Medicare and Medicaid aside, the vast majority of people in this country receive health care coverage as a benefit provided by their employer.  Given that health insurance is considered part of the benefits package of any job, I believe that all companies have the freedom to choose what type of health care coverage they can afford and would like to provide to their employees.  If companies want to choose their coverage partially based on their religious beliefs, that is their right.  If companies want to choose their coverage based on attracting and retaining the best talent, then by all means they should be able to offer the highest quality insurance available.  If some companies are unable to afford more expensive coverage and can only provide catastrophic insurance policies, that should be within their rights as well.  As American citizens, no one tells us where we have to work.  I am not forced to stay at a job if I don’t like their health care policy.  I’m free to go work for a company that has an insurance policy that works better for me and my family.  Many, many Americans have made this choice over the years.   Ultimately that is part of competition in the marketplace.  Just like salary and bonus and 401k match programs, the company health care plan is one way for companies to distinguish themselves and attempt to attract and retain talent.  Companies that offer high quality health care plans will almost always be able to hire and retain staff better than companies that offer lower quality insurance.  

The Polarization of the American Republic

The title of this blog post came from a conversation with a longtime friend about how completely polarized and dysfunctional our government has become.  The greatest experiment in government has now become completely incapable of doing anything.  A two party system of government only works when both sides accept the need to work together and compromise to reach a mutually agreeable solution.  Both parties have to give and take.  Neither party should be forced to give up everything in discussions, but they do need to be willing to give up on some things.   They actually have to listen to each other and talk to each other instead of just talking about each other on news shows.  For most of 200 years, this worked.  Obviously throughout our nation’s history we have had partisan divide, but America would have failed a long time ago if the partisan gridlock were this bad.  Now our politicians, starting with President Obama, absolutely refuse to compromise and work together.  They are more interested in getting sound bites on 24 hour news that accuse and vilify the other side to bolster their own party’s election chances.  They are arrogant, inflexible, and absolutely incapable of doing the job the American people have elected them to do.  They say “my way or the highway” and only talk about their colleagues instead of talking to their colleagues across the aisle.  They pander to the few instead of working together for the many. 

Recently former President Bush #41 has been in the news as one of the recipients of the John F. Kennedy Profiles in Courage Award.  The Profiles in Courage Award recognizes politicians who have risked their political careers for the good of the country.  President Bush received the award for his 1990 budget agreement with the democrats.  President Bush was concerned with the increasing deficits and knew something needed to be done.  He had famously pledged “no new taxes” during his campaign, but he had to give in to democratic demands to raise taxes in order to secure democratic concessions on entitlement programs and discretionary spending.  His efforts to work with Congressional democrats and his willingness to accept the give and take negotiations lead to the passing of a successful bill that formed the basis of the prosperity of the 90s.  President Bush knew when he agreed to raise taxes that he was likely risking his chances at reelection.  However, he recognized that his job was do what was right for the country, and passing a bipartisan bill to reign in deficit spending was the right thing to do for the good of the country.  President Bush realized that even though he was President that did not mean that he could refuse to compromise and demand that Congress acquiesce to all his demands.  President Bush #41 is certainly not the only recent example of a President and a Congress willing to work together.  President Reagan and House Speaker Tip O’Neill managed to both work together and be friends.  President Clinton worked with Congressional republicans to pass the welfare reform bill.  President Bush #43 came together with Ted Kennedy to pass the No Child Left Behind legislation.   

Sadly in the last term of the Bush #43 presidency, the democrats began opposing and obstructing anything proposed by President Bush or the republicans.  It has gotten far worse under President Obama with both parties making no attempts to compromise and work together.  As President, Obama should take a cue from his predecessors and lead negotiations with republicans.  Instead, as we saw with the health care law, debt ceiling increases, and budget bills, President Obama chooses to either completely ignore republicans or invite them to forums and speeches and lecture them.  He demands bills that are exactly to his liking.  He seems to think that because he is President, Congress only exists to do his bidding.  He refuses to negotiate in good faith with republican leadership as evidenced by the disastrous budget and debt ceiling talks.  He publicly disrespects republicans by saying they need to sit in the back of the car or inviting Congressman Ryan to a speech on Ryan’s proposed budget and then absolutely ripping it to shreds in his speech.  I have never before seen a President who so frequently dismisses and disrespects the other party. 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is clearly following Obama’s example.  The Senate has done basically nothing in six years.  Senator Reid repeatedly refuses to bring up any republican sponsored legislation for a vote.  Even beyond that, he refuses to allow republicans the opportunity to amend bills when they come up for a vote.  Never mind that since its inception, the Senate has allowed amendments to bills from both parties.  Never mind that democrats would be just as upset as republicans are now if the situation were reversed.  Harry Reid still runs the Senate like a dictator.  Is he so afraid that a bill might get passed that isn't full of 100% liberal democrat approved ideas?  The most recent example of the Senate’s dysfunction is the Energy Efficiency Bill and Keystone XL Pipeline approval.  Harry Reid wouldn't even let legislation with wide bipartisan support through the Senate, and the American people lost out yet again.  What makes this latest Senate failure even more damning is the fact that the Energy Bill had broad support across both parties and numerous democrats have joined republicans in calling for the immediate approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.  Apparently, even on the rare occasions when the two parties come together, Harry Reid will do whatever it takes to squelch compromise.  If the Senate can’t even pass this, there is no chance of actually addressing major problems like the deficit, entitlement spending, the economy, etc.  The problem isn't just in the Senate.  While the House actually has passed a lot of bills, very few of them were compromise bills with bipartisan support. 

Lest anyone think I hold democrats entirely accountable for the failures, the election of tea party candidates who explicitly campaign on their refusal to work with democrats just continues this cycle.  Many tea party legislators even refuse to compromise and work with other republicans!  I thought many of the founding principles of the tea party were valid, specifically limiting the growth and intrusion of government and expecting elected officials to listen to the people they supposedly represent.   I was just as angry and frustrated as the tea party that Obama and the democrats passed health care reform without including a single republican proposal and without a single republican vote.  That was completely unacceptable and wrong.  However, it’s rather ironic that the tea party wants to do the exact same thing.  Both parties need to remember that one party rule is either a dictatorship or a monarchy, and 238 years ago we decided we didn't like that form of government.  I certainly don't think many Americans these days would sign up for that again, but that's exactly what we'd get if one party had absolute power.

The grand and glorious American experiment envisioned and implemented by our founding fathers has worked for over 200 years.  It’s time “we the people” remind our politicians that compromise is a big part of what makes our great republic work.   It’s time we expect our politicians to act like adults, work together, and be willing to compromise rather than act like children who yell “no” and stomp their foot when they don’t get their way.  It’s time we stop electing candidates who say they will not compromise.  It’s time we elect leaders and public servants instead of politicians.  It’s time we elect men and women not only of conviction, but also of compassion and courage.  It’s time we expect our government to follow the example set for them 238 years ago when men from many different backgrounds, walks of life, and political philosophies boldly came together to form the greatest country in the world.  Those men risked everything because they believed that America could be great, and it’s time we stand up and preserve her greatness.  As we celebrate Memorial Day on Monday, I can think of no better way to honor the sacrifices of those who served our country than to begin to tear the walls of polarization and return the values of mutual respect, listening, and compromise to our government.  

Obama's Efforts to Initimidate Conservative Media

With the news of the proposed FCC "study" of news organization, Obama continues his Marxist methods of silencing his critics.  As if using the IRS to target conservative non profit groups wasn't bad enough, now he wants to use the FCC to bully news organizations.  This "study" wouldn't be so offensive if anyone believed that it would actually challenge the Obama media, aka the mainstream media.  However, it's really a guise to get into newsrooms and ensure coverage is favorable to Obama and the democrats.  Remember how Obama whined to O'Reilly about Fox News actually covering all the scandals in his administration?  This study will do absolutely nothing to change the overt liberal bias of most TV, radio, and print news outlets.  Rather it will allow Obama cover to silence his critics on Fox News and conservative radio.  

One of the FCC commissioners is absolutely right when he said that "the government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories".  What I find so ironic is the absolute silence from the mainstream media on this story.  The media rightfully got upset when they learned that Obama was spying on the Associated Press.  They were outraged for awhile, but just like on the rest of the Obama scandals, they quickly stopped talking about it and went back to their usual favorable coverage.  Why didn't they demand an investigation?  Why didn't they keep pressuring Obama and Holder until they got answers as to why they were targeted?  Why are they not worried that they are still being spied on by the government?  Why do they continue to ignore Obama's frightening power grabs even when it has reached their doorstep?  Why did they constantly challenge Bush on executive power and yet stay silent when Obama's overuse of executive power gets more and more intrusive and egregious?

While I certainly don't like most of the content that is covered on networks like MSNBC, NBC, CNN, and ABC, I definitely do not want the government, whether democrat or republican led, determining what and how stories get covered in the news.  If that happens, we are no better than countries like Iran and North Korea with their state owned media outlets.  At least now, there are print and TV news outlets that do attempt to hold Obama and other elected officials accountable.  There are reporters who will ask the tough questions and demand answers when leaders in our government find themselves embroiled in scandal and make questionable decisions.  

Thankfully there has been enough outcry from republicans that the FCC has backed off...for now.  Make no mistake, though, this won't be the last of Obama's attempts to censor his critics in the media.  We should all be worried that he will just revert back to spying on news outlets.  This will not stop his never ending efforts to undermine and ignore the Constitution. 

Obama and His Executive Orders

According to news reports, Obama is planning to announce a long list of executive orders, most notably raising the minimum wage for federal contractors, tonight in his State of the Union Address.  This is not the first time we've seen this president decide to unilaterally act when he can't get his way in Congress.  Obama has used executive orders on major issues such as environmental policy, gun control, and now the minimum wage.  I don't have an issue with the use of executive orders by Presidents; all presidents issue executive orders.  However, I can't remember a president who uses executive orders as a way to go around Congress like Obama is wont to do.  As we have come to expect with him, when he doesn't get his way, he blames others, stomps his foot and in many cases, decides to ignore the Constitution.  Obama has twice stood up in front of the American people, put his hand on a Bible, and sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States. The last time I checked, the Constitution gives the power to write laws to the legislative branch, aka Congress, not the executive branch.  However, Obama continues to show his contempt for the Constitution, and he continues to get away with it.  Oftentimes I think Obama considers himself King Obama rather than President Obama.  King Obama does whatever it takes to get what he wants and gives little regard to the Constitutional limits on his office.  

I'm tired of Obama's contempt for the Constitution.  I'm tired of Obama blaming republicans in Congress for not just rolling over and give in to all his demands.  I'm tired of Obama telling Congress and the American people that he will not negotiate. I'm tired of the media giving Obama a free pass on his actions.  Can you imagine the outrage and gnashing of teeth that would have occurred if President Bush had acted like this?  Senator Obama would have been the first one to cry foul if President Bush had tried this. 

Rather than ignore and circumvent Congress, the president needs to step up and be a leader.  He needs to lead by example and show a willingness to compromise rather than insist on his way or the highway.  Sadly, Obama continues to prove that he is anything but a leader.  A leader works with the opposition party and is willing to give and take in order to get bipartisan legislation passed.  A leader takes responsibility rather than assigning blame.  A leader engages in good faith negotiations.  A leader does not abjectly refuse to negotiate and threaten the opposition.  President Obama needs to learn that he is the leader of the entire country, not just the democratic party, and half this country does not want blanket approval of his policies.  Half the country wants him to engage with republicans, meet in the middle and develop compromise legislation that actually works for this country. 

Unfortunately based on his first 5 years, I don't think we'll be seeing any leadership from this president.  We'll continue to see more the of same blame game, Constitutional contempt, and executive orders when he doesn't get his way. The question is how long are we going to let him get away with it before "we the people" demand that he honor, uphold and adhere to the Constitution? 

The Media Loves a Good Scandal...Or Do They?

Since last Thursday, I can't turn on any news channel without hearing about Chris Christie and "Bridgegate".  Last week, Chris Christie held an almost two hour press conference answering questions about the lane closures on the GW bridge.  Christie fired his deputy chief of staff and his advisor last Wednesday when he found out that the lane closures were in fact political payback against the Fort Lee mayor.  Christie firmly denied that he was involved in the lane closure decision and that his staff told him that the lanes were closed for a traffic study.  Unlike most politicians, Christie actually took responsibility for the actions of his staff, and I can't remember any time in recent history where any politician dealing with the fallout from a scandal actually stayed in a press conference until every question was answered.  CNN apparently reviewed hundreds of pages of documents related to Bridgegate, and apparently they have not found any indication that Christie was involved in this.  However, the media and many of the democrat cohorts just will not let this go.  There's talk of a federal investigation into the matter and now the feds are also investigating whether he misused Super Storm Sandy funds. It just seems like the media can't go a day without reminding the public that Governor Christie, a potential GOP frontrunner in 2016, is embroiled in multiple scandals.  

But there's nothing wrong with this, right?  After all, doesn't the media loves talking about scandals that involve politicians on both sides of the aisle?  We hear all about the potential scandals involving governors of all 50 states, democrat or republican, don't we?  I can guarantee you that if Governor Christie was not consistently polling well in the meaningless polls run by the media outlets that they would have moved on from this a few days ago.  But no, since he's a republican and he might run for president in 2016, the media is going to try their best to derail his candidacy before he even decides to run.  This shows how afraid they are of Christie and his decisive reelection in November thanks to broad support across many traditional democratic constituencies.  It also shows how hypocritical they are to beat this issue to death while discussing the potential for impeachment.  They sure didn't hold Obama or Eric Holder accountable for the gun smuggling disaster that was Fast and Furious.  They barely covered the attacks in Benghazi because it was way too close to the election to give much air time to a major failure and blatant lies by the administration.  They really didn't want to talk much about the IRS's targeting of tea party and other conservative groups, either.  Finally there's the health care rollout debacle.  The media hated having to talk about the failure of the website after spending months hyping it up.  However, I will give a little credit where credit is due- they finally started being harder on Obama after his "if you like you can keep it" lie was exposed.  But I think we get the picture here: democrats, particularly Obama, get treated with kid gloves while they do everything they can to ruin a republican.  Think back to how the media treated President George W. Bush.  Does anyone think they wouldn't have been calling for his impeachment after even just one of the scandals that have hit the Obama administration?  The other irony about their coverage of Governor Christie is that they aren't even giving him credit for taking swift action against those who were involved in "Bridgegate".  Does anyone remember Obama taking responsibility for ANY part of the scandals listed above?  No, he took no responsibility nor did he even bother to fire anyone involved in even one of these issues.  The best that the American people got was the resignation of a few people at the IRS.  

So let me get this straight.  Obama has at least 4 major scandals in two years, takes no responsibility for any of them but rather just blames others. He claims complete ignorance in all of those situations yet he doesn't actually fire any of the people he blamed?  Governor Christie immediately fires both people who were involved, stands up in front of the media and the American people and accepts ultimate responsibility for the actions of his staff, and stays there for almost 2 hours until he has answered every single question from the press corps and he is still getting crucified by the media.  If it is proven that Governor Christie was involved in the political retribution against Fort Lee's mayor, then he deserves all of this criticism.  However, at this point there is no evidence to support that, and frankly the media needs to back off and let him do his job.  They need to treat every public official the same instead of helping Obama and other democrats sweep their scandals under the rug. If anyone was still living under the delusion that the mainstream media is not completely in bed with the democratic party, their coverage of Governor Christie these last few days should shatter that fantasy.