What deals were made behind closed doors to assure the Senate's confirmation of an ACORN ally as the new head of the Corporation for National and Community Service?

In the wake of the US Senate's unanimous confirmation of Barack Obama's hand-picked nominee as CEO of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) lies a sordid tale of disgraceful political chicanery involving the unholy triumvirate of AmeriCorps, ACORN, and Barack Obama. However, the manner of dismissal of Gerald Wilpin as Inspector General of the CNCS, based on the lack of a full Congressional or MSM investigation, has apparently been accepted as SOP for the gang of Chicagoland mercenaries occupying the White House.

So, out of the morass surrounding the defamation of an honorable public servant arises Patrick Corvington, a person with undeniable ties to ACORN's Baltimore office (and we all know what an upstanding operation that is) as well as other dubious connections.

In light of all the revelations regarding the nefarious activities of ACORN (particularly its' Baltimore-based malfeasance,) I am compelled to ask: How in the name of Timothy Geithner did this guy get through the confirmation process? One would assume that so many red flags sprang up during the Senate hearings that Mr. Corvington should have felt as though he was skiing headlong down an Olympic slalom course into political obscurity. But no, with nary a whimper from the Senate HELP committee (at least none that the MSM reported on,) he is now the overseer of the $1.416 billion boondoggle known as the CNCS.

What must be seriously considered is Obama's role in all of this. I'm assuming that most visitors to this site are well aware of his flagrant disregard of decorum when it comes to the handling of political opposition, as should most of the republican members of Congress. This then, leads inevitably to the following questions: What deals were made behind closed doors to assure the unanimous confirmation of Mr. Corvington? What manner of political swag did Mr. Obama use to bedazzle enough Senate republicans to sellout on what should have been a vehemently opposed nomination?

I suppose only time will tell, but I‘ve got the sinking feeling that we're not going to like what it has to say.