Phony Scandals?

[candycorn]

Says more about the ratio of tea baggers to Liberals on this message Board

That being said, the mainstream media has dropped the phony scandals, and even FOX NEWS is mostly ignoring them.

That leaves FOX Hate Radio carrying the water for the tea party ....

I think you underestimate the Tea Party if you didn't you wouldn't keep bring them up.
I also think some but not all liberals and maybe democrats in general have concerns with these scandals including some democrats in congress.

MSM never give the scandals in the Obama administration a second thought as they will protect Obama at all cost. That is one reason readership and viewer are down. But I am glad you keep informed by watching FNC.

I have never heard of FOX Hate radio, enlighten me? The only reason you are against the Tea Party is because they are a threat to you and your agenda.

That's it. And if the Obama supporters CARE that the media sucks or people are being killed and rights are being violated or huge amounts of money are being wasted, they sure don't act like it. I am certain you're right that some Democrats care about the scandals because of the remote possibility it might screw up their re-election chances. Sadly some Republicans only care about the scandals because of the remote chance it might help theirs.

But for those of us out here in fly over country, it breaks my heart. Not only that it is going on, but because so many people don't care.

The reason nobody cares is because there is nothing new here....

Gee an Ameican was attacked in the Middle East. If I looked hard enough, I could probably find an attack every year since 1982. And, politically, yes, the only reason anyone cares is because it happened under Obama and his SoS who is the presumptive nominee for President. As was pointed out ad nauseum, Bush had 10 attacks and there was nary a peep. Nobody cared then for the same reasons nobody cares now; there is nothing new despite the faux concern displayed on this thread.

The IRS scandal was actually a scandal. There was professional malfeasance involved But since it didn't bring down the government, you think nobody cares. It was investigated, we had resignations (which was more than we had on the 9/11/01 attacks by the way). What more do you want?

The other items are just figments of the right wing looney bin imiagination and wouldn't go anywhwere in the most favorable of climates.

 

[depotoo]

and this -
IRS Commissioner: I Did Not Mislead The Committee | RealClearPolitics

Ah okay. Brain fart. I didn't link the name. But you are right.

I did watch Miller's testimony before Congress though and, while quite unsatisfying as most of these things are, there was one remarkable revelation. While other forms of government inappropriate behavior targeting conservative groups go back to 2008, remember that the Tea Party and Patriot groups didn't start organizing until late in 2009 after the unconscionable appropriations bill, the stimulus package, the takeover of the auto industry, and the introduction of Obamacare. The intentional harrassment of conservative groups began in 2010, just as the mid term elections were gearing up. Steve Miller testified before Congress that he was briefed on the practice in May 2012, however he did not advise the Congressional oversight committees of the situation even though members of Congress sent at least eight letters to the IRS over the two year period asking about complaints from conservative groups and he had at least one sessions with the House Ways and Means committee.

When he was asked last month why he had not advised the appropiate oversight committees, he simply said he had answered all the questions that were asked, and technically no laws had been broken.

So how do the Obama supporters feel about that? They shrug and don't care. It wasn't their groups being targeted and it's now over, supposedly, so let's move along. Nothing to see here.

How do the Obama supporters feel about four Americans being murdered, dozens of others injured, and to this date we don't know who the injured people are, where they are, or why the administration has a gag order on everybody associated with the Benghazi attack? They shrug and say it's now over. That's old news. So let's move along. Nothing to see here.

How do the Obama supporters feel about Congress and federal employees wasting mega millions, even billions, of tax payer dollars on fun and games in this time of super high unemployement, underemployment, and economic stresses we haven't seen since the Great Depression? They shrug and don't seem to care.

How do the Obama supporters feel about the Justice Department harrassing a reporter for no reason other than he asked questions reporters ask? About going after private information from AP reporters? From stockpiling the private records of millions of American citizens? They don't seem to get excited or care about that at all either.

It makes you wonder just how much the current administration will be allowed to get away with before anybody will stand up and say stop!!! Unfortunately, it appears they have a blank check to do any damn thing they want to do to anybody.

Does that mean we are already a totalitarian state?

Heck, they don't care about any of those things and that is truly sad. It just makes me bristle when I see any of them say, 'move along, nothing to see here'. We both know if this were under of Rep President they would be having protests every weekend, calling for impeachment, etc., etc., etc. I know i called out some of Bush's policies I didn't care for, saw others on the right do so as well, yet not one seems to ever break rank on the left when policies are bad, or someone within the government perpetuates fraud, lying to cover up, etc., etc. as long as their man or woman is in office. They would let this country and themselves run off a cliff, as long as one of their own was doing the directing.
Scary. I would say that a little over a third of this country has been totally brainwashed.

 

[Foxfyre]

and this -
IRS Commissioner: I Did Not Mislead The Committee | RealClearPolitics

Ah okay. Brain fart. I didn't link the name. But you are right.

I did watch Miller's testimony before Congress though and, while quite unsatisfying as most of these things are, there was one remarkable revelation. While other forms of government inappropriate behavior targeting conservative groups go back to 2008, remember that the Tea Party and Patriot groups didn't start organizing until late in 2009 after the unconscionable appropriations bill, the stimulus package, the takeover of the auto industry, and the introduction of Obamacare. The intentional harrassment of conservative groups began in 2010, just as the mid term elections were gearing up. Steve Miller testified before Congress that he was briefed on the practice in May 2012, however he did not advise the Congressional oversight committees of the situation even though members of Congress sent at least eight letters to the IRS over the two year period asking about complaints from conservative groups and he had at least one sessions with the House Ways and Means committee.

When he was asked last month why he had not advised the appropiate oversight committees, he simply said he had answered all the questions that were asked, and technically no laws had been broken.

So how do the Obama supporters feel about that? They shrug and don't care. It wasn't their groups being targeted and it's now over, supposedly, so let's move along. Nothing to see here.

How do the Obama supporters feel about four Americans being murdered, dozens of others injured, and to this date we don't know who the injured people are, where they are, or why the administration has a gag order on everybody associated with the Benghazi attack? They shrug and say it's now over. That's old news. So let's move along. Nothing to see here.

How do the Obama supporters feel about Congress and federal employees wasting mega millions, even billions, of tax payer dollars on fun and games in this time of super high unemployement, underemployment, and economic stresses we haven't seen since the Great Depression? They shrug and don't seem to care.

How do the Obama supporters feel about the Justice Department harrassing a reporter for no reason other than he asked questions reporters ask? About going after private information from AP reporters? From stockpiling the private records of millions of American citizens? They don't seem to get excited or care about that at all either.

It makes you wonder just how much the current administration will be allowed to get away with before anybody will stand up and say stop!!! Unfortunately, it appears they have a blank check to do any damn thing they want to do to anybody.

Does that mean we are already a totalitarian state?

Heck, they don't care about any of those things and that is truly sad. It just makes me bristle when I see any of them say, 'move along, nothing to see here'. We both know if this were under of Rep President they would be having protests every weekend, calling for impeachment, etc., etc., etc. I know i called out some of Bush's policies I didn't care for, saw others on the right do so as well, yet not one seems to ever break rank on the left when policies are bad, or someone within the government perpetuates fraud, lying to cover up, etc., etc. as long as their man or woman is in office. They would let this country and themselves run off a cliff, as long as one of their own was doing the directing.
Scary. I would say that a little over a third of this country has been totally brainwashed.

President Bush did some things well which is why he enjoyed one of the highest approval ratings EVER for a short while. But of course the Left soon shrugged off the brief impulse for patriotism and returned to their hatred and denigration of anything Republican, conservative/classical liberal or traditional.

That isn't what brought President Bush's approval ratings down so much though. It was his indefensible support for entitlements, his indefensible proposed immigration policy, his indefensible energy policy, his support for environmental wackoism, and his willingness to capitulate to very wrong demands from the Left that brought down his approval ratings. We, those who elected him, felt betrayed and we railed against those things. The things he did well simply couldn't overcome what he did so poorly. Had he had a D after his name instead of an R, he would have been the exalted hero of the Left.

But now they have somebody who doesn't do ANYTHING well, who has no understanding of how the economy works or what creates jobs, and who embraces all the things we deplored about President Bush. And they adore and worship him and defend him against all criticism from anybody.

Which is why they trumpet the 'phony scandals' talking point.

And if this great nation does fall, that will be the reason.

 

[Foxfyre]

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I think you underestimate the Tea Party if you didn't you wouldn't keep bring them up.
I also think some but not all liberals and maybe democrats in general have concerns with these scandals including some democrats in congress.

MSM never give the scandals in the Obama administration a second thought as they will protect Obama at all cost. That is one reason readership and viewer are down. But I am glad you keep informed by watching FNC.

I have never heard of FOX Hate radio, enlighten me? The only reason you are against the Tea Party is because they are a threat to you and your agenda.

That's it. And if the Obama supporters CARE that the media sucks or people are being killed and rights are being violated or huge amounts of money are being wasted, they sure don't act like it. I am certain you're right that some Democrats care about the scandals because of the remote possibility it might screw up their re-election chances. Sadly some Republicans only care about the scandals because of the remote chance it might help theirs.

But for those of us out here in fly over country, it breaks my heart. Not only that it is going on, but because so many people don't care.

The reason nobody cares is because there is nothing new here....

Gee an Ameican was attacked in the Middle East. If I looked hard enough, I could probably find an attack every year since 1982. And, politically, yes, the only reason anyone cares is because it happened under Obama and his SoS who is the presumptive nominee for President. As was pointed out ad nauseum, Bush had 10 attacks and there was nary a peep. Nobody cared then for the same reasons nobody cares now; there is nothing new despite the faux concern displayed on this thread.

The IRS scandal was actually a scandal. There was professional malfeasance involved But since it didn't bring down the government, you think nobody cares. It was investigated, we had resignations (which was more than we had on the 9/11/01 attacks by the way). What more do you want?

The other items are just figments of the right wing looney bin imiagination and wouldn't go anywhwere in the most favorable of climates.

Another reason no one cares is because they see the ‘scandals’ for what they really are: a partisan contrivance, motivated solely as a means to attack Obama, not a desire to realize ‘the truth’ or ‘facts.’

What more do conservatives want?

They want to ‘get rid of Obama.’

 

[Katzndogz]

So far, the only thing phony is obama's closing the embassies for a phony terrorist threat.

 

[Gracie]

Is that true folks? Have people lost interest?

I noted this morning that President Obama's approval rating has fallen below 50% for some days now--long enough for it to be a valid observation and not just statistical noise--and his disapproval rating is creeping above his approval rating.

And at least some pundits are attributing that to the scandals that just keep coming. Doesn't look like everybody has lost interest.

I haven't lost interest. I'm just flabbergasted, disgusted and feel extremely helpless.

 

[Foxfyre]

Is that true folks? Have people lost interest?

I noted this morning that President Obama's approval rating has fallen below 50% for some days now--long enough for it to be a valid observation and not just statistical noise--and his disapproval rating is creeping above his approval rating.

And at least some pundits are attributing that to the scandals that just keep coming. Doesn't look like everybody has lost interest.

I haven't lost interest. I'm just flabbergasted, disgusted and feel extremely helpless.

At USMB the straw poll up there is running roughly 6 to 1 in favor of seeing the scandals as scandals. I know we have way more Obama supporters than the 7 "move on - nothing to see here" votes would suggest, so I'm hoping that means that even a lot of those who aren't dedicated conservatives/libertarians/classical liberals are unhappy with the barrage of government misconduct that appears to be happening.

We have the usual chorus of blame the other guy, excuse, and denial from some on the Left, and some excessively unhelpful vitriol from some on the Right, but most members who have chimed in here have had valid opinions/observations to contribute to the discussion.

Those who post on a message board, except for the juvenile verbal graffiti people, tend to be better read and better informed or at least more interested in current events, politics, etc. than maybe the average citizen out there.

Whether our values and what is really important, what bothers us and what we are concerned about, mirrors the general population, I don't know.

I do know that if good people don't stand up and demand better from our government, it will only get worse. Much worse.

 

[PixieStix]

So far, the only thing phony is obama's closing the embassies for a phony terrorist threat.

 

[antiquity]

So far, the only thing phony is obama's closing the embassies for a phony terrorist threat.

That may be true but better save than have another scandal that Obama would call a phony scandal or hope time will simply erase from people minds.

 

[Foxfyre]

Interesting. I hadn't really given thought to this current global alert being a diversion rather than being real. August or the end of Ramadan has typically been marked by an increase in violence initiated by militant Muslims.

It was fifteen years ago this week that 200+ people died and thouands were injured in terrorist attacks on our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. It was around this time of year in 2008 that there was a deadly attack on our embassy in Yemen.

President Obama's birthdate was this past week and of course that was when the threats are said to have become known. We are coming up on anothe 9/11 and the first anniversary of the attack at Benghazi which many authorities on Middle East stuff say really encouraged and emboldened the terrorists.

It is curious, however, that Obama would be so thoroughly briefed (according to the MSM) on all this recent terrorist activity when, according to him and Jay Carney, he was not briefed on the IRS scandals, on the GSA scandals, on the Verizon et al scandal, on the AP scandal, on the James Rosen scandal, on the Snowden scandal, and, he wasn't briefed on the requests of the Benghazi personnel for additional security.

So if he found out about all that in the morning newspaper just like we did, why would he be so thoroughly briefed on an uncertain terrorist threat now?

I don't want to believe that the current terorist threat is a phony scandal. . . but. . . .

I have been expecting an imminent 'wag the dog' crisis to divert attention from all the existing scandals and bolster Obama's approval rating. Maybe this is it?
.

 

[kwc57]

 

[antiquity]

Interesting. I hadn't really given thought to this current global alert being a diversion rather than being real. August or the end of Ramadan has typically been marked by an increase in violence initiated by militant Muslims.

It was fifteen years ago this week that 200+ people died and thouands were injured in terrorist attacks on our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. It was around this time of year in 2008 that there was a deadly attack on our embassy in Yemen.

President Obama's birthdate was this past week and of course that was when the threats are said to have become known. We are coming up on anothe 9/11 and the first anniversary of the attack at Benghazi which many authorities on Middle East stuff say really encouraged and emboldened the terrorists.

It is curious, however, that Obama would be so thoroughly briefed (according to the MSM) on all this recent terrorist activity when, according to him and Jay Carney, he was not briefed on the IRS scandals, on the GSA scandals, on the Verizon et al scandal, on the AP scandal, on the James Rosen scandal, on the Snowden scandal, and, he wasn't briefed on the requests of the Benghazi personnel for additional security.

So if he found out about all that in the morning newspaper just like we did, why would he be so thoroughly briefed on an uncertain terrorist threat now?

I don't want to believe that the current terorist threat is a phony scandal. . . but. . . .

I have been expecting an imminent 'wag the dog' crisis to divert attention from all the existing scandals and bolster Obama's approval rating. Maybe this is it?
.

Since this was leaked by the WH I think politic had a lot to do with it. So you may be right.

 

[blackhawk]

Something of interest for some and something to ignore for other's tomorrow night CNN's Erin Burnett will have a special on Benghazi.

 

[Foxfyre]

Something of interest for some and something to ignore for other's tomorrow night CNN's Erin Burnett will have a special on Benghazi.

I get the feeling that Erin Burnett is appreciating having some freedom at last to criticize or at least question the current administration. CNN had been as much lapdog and surrogate propaganda wing for the Obama Administration as any others for years now. But they seem to be growing some cajones lately.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have commented several times on the very real--not at all phony--scandal of a President who claims to be clueless about what is going on in the government agencies for which he is the chief administrator. And when one of these things comes up he promises a full investigation or says that isn't acceptable and he will get to the bottom of it. . . . only days or weeks later to refer to the same things as 'phony scandals.' So if the President is not engaged in what's going on with Congress or in the government that he is supposed to head as the CEO - Chief Executive - and all that, then what is his job again? And what does he or the people who control him send Jay Carney out to say about them?. . . .

(Mind you this doesn't even include all the daily press briefings for the entire month of July and the first week in August)

Jay Carney doesn’t have an answer for that. He hasn’t discussed that subject with the president. He will refer you to the Department of [insert agency here]. He refuses to speculate on that. He’ll have to get back to you.

But he appreciates the question.

A Yahoo News analysis of the 444 briefings through June 18 that Carney has held since becoming White House press secretary has identified 13 distinct strains in the way he dodges reporters' question. Since Carney held his first daily briefing with reporters in the White House Brady Press Briefing Room on Feb. 16, 2011, for example, he’s used some variation of "I don’t have the answer" more than 1,900 times. In 1,383 cases he referred a question to someone else. But will he at least speculate on hypotheticals? No. In fact, he has refused to do so 525 times.

In the following interactive, you can browse all 9,486 of Carney’s most-used responses and verbal crutches.

The top 9,486 ways Jay Carney won?t answer your questions (interactive)

NOTE: The article includes a link to a feature in which you can see each and every comment under each category:

 

[Dot Com]

The CBS News report says that the leaked versions sent out by the Republicans were different from the batch the White House later released.

CBS: Republicans altered Benghazi emails

Dem Congressman slams GOP for "doctored" Benghazi emails

It's not no one cares. It's once it was discovered that Republicans are "creating" the scandals through political opportunism, people have lost interest.

yep. Issa (R) has called fox .....errr..... wolf so much people know not to believe him doctored emails and hen-pecked witnesses selected by Fire Bug? No thanks. Focus on the economy instead of rw-orchestrated, witch hunts.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I have commented several times on the very real--not at all phony--scandal of a President who claims to be clueless about what is going on in the government agencies for which he is the chief administrator. And when one of these things comes up he promises a full investigation or says that isn't acceptable and he will get to the bottom of it. . . . only days or weeks later to refer to the same things as 'phony scandals.' So if the President is not engaged in what's going on with Congress or in the government that he is supposed to head as the CEO - Chief Executive - and all that, then what is his job again? And what does he or the people who control him send Jay Carney out to say about them?. . . .

(Mind you this doesn't even include all the daily press briefings for the entire month of July and the first week in August)

Jay Carney doesn’t have an answer for that. He hasn’t discussed that subject with the president. He will refer you to the Department of [insert agency here]. He refuses to speculate on that. He’ll have to get back to you.

But he appreciates the question.

A Yahoo News analysis of the 444 briefings through June 18 that Carney has held since becoming White House press secretary has identified 13 distinct strains in the way he dodges reporters' question. Since Carney held his first daily briefing with reporters in the White House Brady Press Briefing Room on Feb. 16, 2011, for example, he’s used some variation of "I don’t have the answer" more than 1,900 times. In 1,383 cases he referred a question to someone else. But will he at least speculate on hypotheticals? No. In fact, he has refused to do so 525 times.

In the following interactive, you can browse all 9,486 of Carney’s most-used responses and verbal crutches.

The top 9,486 ways Jay Carney won?t answer your questions (interactive)

NOTE: The article includes a link to a feature in which you can see each and every comment under each category:

That’s not a ‘scandal,’ that’s subjective partisanism on your part.

You think he’s a ‘bad president’ because he’s a democrat. Fine.

You think he’s ‘unqualified’ because he’s a democrat. Also fine.

You’re entitled to believe Obama is a ‘bad president' and doing a ‘terrible job,’ but that's a subjective opinion, not a 'scandal.'

 

[Foxfyre]

A President who doesn't know a damn thing about anything going on in the government he is responsible for is a scandal.

 

[Dot Com]

^ lol rw partisanship Same person who starts a forum within a forum.