Phony Scandals?

[Foxfyre]

Where are the fucking emails?

Post them, Herr Goebbels - or at least a link to them?

And I wonder if it went over Mother Jones' (and Dottie's) head that the CBS clip concluded with Major Garrett stating the CIA had altered informtion presented as the official version to the public, but 'there was no evidence the President or State Department ordered those changes."

That to me is the biggest scandal of all. That the President and State Department are completely out of the loop of stuff they should be intensely aware of and hands on with?

I see what you did there. If Obama ordered some alleged thing to occur, you blame him. If he DIDN'T order it, you blame him.

Phony scandal.

If Obama ordered something, he is responsible for what he ordered. If he should have ordered something and didn't, he is responsible for what he didn't do.
If he was not aware of something he should have been made aware of, heads should be rolling that he was not informed.

I blame Obama, and anybody else, for doing something that he should not do.

I blame Obama, and anybody else, for not doing something they were supposed to be responsible to do.

I blame any President or any other leader for ducking his responsibility on the pretext that 'nobody told me' or "i was out of that loop" or "I found out about it the same way you did - in the papers."

Phony scandal? No. For our President and Commander in Chief and chief CEO of the country to be so clueless on so many things he was elected and paid to be responsible for is no phony scandal. It is a very real one.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And I wonder if it went over Mother Jones' (and Dottie's) head that the CBS clip concluded with Major Garrett stating the CIA had altered informtion presented as the official version to the public, but 'there was no evidence the President or State Department ordered those changes."

That to me is the biggest scandal of all. That the President and State Department are completely out of the loop of stuff they should be intensely aware of and hands on with?

I see what you did there. If Obama ordered some alleged thing to occur, you blame him. If he DIDN'T order it, you blame him.

Phony scandal.

If Obama ordered something, he is responsible for what he ordered. If he should have ordered something and didn't, he is responsible for what he didn't do.
If he was not aware of something he should have been made aware of, heads should be rolling that he was not informed.

I blame Obama, and anybody else, for doing something that he should not do.

I blame Obama, and anybody else, for not doing something they were supposed to be responsible to do.

I blame any President or any other leader for ducking his responsibility on the pretext that 'nobody told me' or "i was out of that loop" or "I found out about it the same way you did - in the papers."

Phony scandal? No. For our President and Commander in Chief and chief CEO of the country to be so clueless on so many things he was elected and paid to be responsible for is no phony scandal. It is a very real one.

Obama is a symptom of the machine. Leftist partisans like g5000 demand that if Obama didn't order the IRS to prey on conservatives, then the scandal is phoney.

What the far left fails to acknowledge is that it's utterly irrelevant whether Obama gave orders, Obama is not the left - Obama is a MEMBER of the left, a symptom of a much larger and more serious disease.

The IRS is a government agency, staffed by public employees who are mostly part of public employee unions. The government sector has been raping the general public for decades, bribing democrats to provide obscene pay, benefit, and pension packages to the privileged public sector.

The right, and particularly the TEA party, have grown tired of being raped, and being told we should thank our rapist for the service they provide to us. TEA party activists are pushing back against this privileged class of parasites.

What the IRS has done, is attack those who demand reform of the corrupt public agencies. The IRS is a corrupt public agency, and seeks to line the pockets of public sector employees with the loot they take from the public at large. The exposure of corruption by government employees and the calls for reform, threaten the gorging the IRS does at the public trough, so they attack the critics - any third world dictatorship does the same.

Obama didn't order the IRS to attack - the hack criminals at the IRS did that all on their own. BUT, the IRS knows that Obama is one of them - a corrupt pile of shit - and that the laughably named DOJ under gangsta Eric Holder, will wink and nod at the racketeering activities of the organized crime family of the IRS.

So no, Obama didn't order the IRS to attack the enemies of the left - he instead ENABLED them to.

Obama serves the public employee unions - as does the shameful democratic party in general - the corrupt Obama administration has taken the steps of joining with the unions in open warfare against the public, and THIS is why it falls in Obama's lap, because he joins with SEUI and other criminal elements as an open ally - using the bully pulpit of the Presidency to promote their goals, in direct contradiction of the well-being of the citizenry.

 

[Dot Com]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

 

[Foxfyre]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

According to the straw poll up there, by a 5 to 1 margin, your fellow USMB members seem to believe there is plenty of 'there there'. The national polls are not quite that strong but every single one of them relfects a majority or at least a strong plurality of Americans who believe there is some 'there there'.

Are you of the opinion that we should just shrug it off and let our government be as corrupt, incompetent, coercive, manipulative, intrusive, and/or deceitful as it wishes with nobody challenging that? Did you feel that way during the George W. Bush Administration?

Why is the present Administration so much more likely to be blameless and for there to be no 'there there' now?

 

[Dot Com]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

According to the straw poll up there, by a 5 to 1 margin, your fellow USMB members seem to believe there is plenty of 'there there'. The national polls are not quite that strong but every single one of them relfects a majority or at least a strong plurality of Americans who believe there is some 'there there'.

Are you of the opinion that we should just shrug it off and let our government be as corrupt, incompetent, coercive, manipulative, intrusive, and/or deceitful as it wishes with nobody challenging that? Did you feel that way during the George W. Bush Administration?

Why is the present Administration so much more likely to be blameless and for there to be no 'there there' now?

ummm..... you should know by now that this is a right-leaning board and you are a Rightie so what did you expect the poll results to be? Since Repubs doctored those email summaries before giving them to the press, their *cough* "investigative" methods have been exposed for what they are rw hackery.

 

[Foxfyre]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

According to the straw poll up there, by a 5 to 1 margin, your fellow USMB members seem to believe there is plenty of 'there there'. The national polls are not quite that strong but every single one of them relfects a majority or at least a strong plurality of Americans who believe there is some 'there there'.

Are you of the opinion that we should just shrug it off and let our government be as corrupt, incompetent, coercive, manipulative, intrusive, and/or deceitful as it wishes with nobody challenging that? Did you feel that way during the George W. Bush Administration?

Why is the present Administration so much more likely to be blameless and for there to be no 'there there' now?

ummm..... you should know by now that this is a right-leaning board and you are a Rightie so what did you expect the poll results to be? Since Repubs doctored those email summaries before giving them to the press, their *cough* "investigative" methods have been exposed for what they are rw hackery.

You haven't read the thread have you. I suggest you do and get the real deal on those 'doctored email summaries' before you comment further on them.

 

[Dot Com]

I'm more interested in the economy, tax reform, & immigration so, have at your conspiracy theories. Toodles

 

[Uncensored2008]

ummm..... you should know by now that this is a right-leaning board and you are a Rightie so what did you expect the poll results to be? Since Repubs doctored those email summaries before giving them to the press, their *cough* "investigative" methods have been exposed for what they are rw hackery.

Still waiting on those emails..

I mean, not that I'm calling you a fucking liar.... But the failure to point to these emails is telling...

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm more interested in the economy, tax reform, & immigration so, have at your conspiracy theories. Toodles

Conspiracy theories - like doctored emails that no one can produce?

That sort of "conspiracy theories," Scheiß Mause?

 

[Foxfyre]

Two more 'scandals' hit the papers this past week.

1. The NYT expose of all the shenanigans and mschief in the Clinton Foundation with the implication that there is an awful lot of semi-illegal or fully illegal hanky panky going on. But as the feds are unlikely to get too tough on the Clintons over anything, it is much ado about nothing.

And in my completely jaded and cynical view of politics, I feel fully confident that they broke the story now to move it into the realm of old news--been there and done that--to make it more difficult for Hillary's opponents to get any traction with it later on when the next campaign kicks off.

2. The other is the poor beleaguered rodeo clown in the Obama mask, now banned for life and the NAACP is demanding that the rodeo association be investigated for racism.

Poor taste? Absolutely. Should be criticized by everybody? Absolutely. But come on. Ban the poor clown for life just because it was Obama? Rodeo clowns have been using masks depicting famous figures for eons--in the early 1990's, the rodeo dummy--the one the bulls are allowed to attack--was a depiction of George H.W. Bush. And no doubt every president has been represented by a rodeo clown somewhere. Madonna did an act in which she threw a hand grenade at a likeness of George W. Bush. There was no outrage over that or demands that she be banned from the stage.

But this time it is somehow worse because the President happens to be black? What ever happened to equal protection?

For sure condemn the tasteless act. But I am getting sick and tired of any ridicule of THIS president being a cardinal offense when no such outrage was expressed when his predecessors were disrespected. It IS a scandal.

 

[candycorn]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

​

 

[Edgetho]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

​

I don't see how they're wasting a lot of money, they're all salaried and, AFAIC, they don't earn it anyway.

 

[Trajan]

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.'

reading comprehension isn't your long suit, so read the remark you bolded ( and the sentence there after) that she made- again.

 

[kwc57]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

You are a most excellent citizen comrade. Extra bread for you!

 

[Foxfyre]

Careful guys. We've done a pretty good job so far keeping this thread from dssolving into another turd flinging fest or food fight and I really appreciate that. Lets focus on the scandals please, or why any of us might think they aren't a scandal.

As an old debate coach however, I sort of insist on a rationale for a point made. Saying it just isn't so, without showing why it isn't so, just won't cut it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

A majority of Americans see the ‘investigations’ for what they really are: pandering to the base, motivated by the fear of being primaried.

 

[blackhawk]

Left is still trying to sell the phony scandal line I see.So if Benghazi is phony then that must mean Obama was not serious about find those responsible and he still believes it was just a out of control protest. The I.R.S. scandal when it was first uncovered Obama called the I.R.S actions outrageous now it's phony so was he lying when he called it outrageous or now when he calls it phony? The NSA does not spy on or listen in on American citizens we just found out that was not really true didn't we? Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.

 

[Foxfyre]

how many millions of taxpayer $$$ will the Repubs spend THIS TIME to find theres "no there there"? Everyone knows that all their doing is deflecting from the Tea Party-controlled House's failings.

A majority of Americans see the ‘investigations’ for what they really are: pandering to the base, motivated by the fear of being primaried.

Are you sure about that or just wishful thinking? And for those brave reporters who continue to dig on these stories, I can't imagine that is going to turn the sympathy in Obama's direction if more scandals continue to surface or as more start paying attention to what is going on. Most Americans aren't watching much of anything in the news these days, but those who are do form some telling opinions about it.

Last week, voices in the media began warning Republicans about overreaching on scandal investigations involving the IRS and especially Benghazi. Beware of the backlash! came the whispers among Republicans, and predictions of political damage came from other quarters. According to a new CNN poll, however, the investigation into Benghazi polls higher than most other Republican initiatives have in the last several years — and even better than the opening round of the probe into the IRS scandal (via John Nolte at Breitbart):

But a CNN/ORC International survey released Sunday morning also indicates that congressional Republicans are not overplaying their hand when it comes to their reaction to the three controversies that have consumed the nation’s capital over the past week and a half. And the poll finds that a majority of Americans take all three issues seriously. …

Republicans have ripped the administration for not providing adequate security for the Benghazi mission, botching the response to it, and misleading the public for political gain with the attack coming less than two months before last November’s presidential election.

According to the poll, 44% say statements made by the Obama administration soon after the attack were an attempt to intentionally mislead the public. Half of those questioned say those statements reflected what the Obama administration believed, at the time, had occurred.

But 59% now say that the U.S government could have prevented the attack in Benghazi, up 11 points from last November. And only 37% say that congressional Republicans are overreacting in their handling of the matter, with 59% saying they’ve reacted appropriately.
It’s the same story on the IRS controversy, with 54% saying the GOP in Congress has not overplayed its hand.
CNN poll: 59% approve of GOP handling of Benghazi scandal « Hot Air

The president's approval rating stands at 45%, down from 53% in mid-May. And 54% say they disapprove of how Obama's handling his job, up nine points from last month. It's the first time in CNN polling since November 2011 that a majority of Americans have had a negative view of the president.

"The drop in Obama's support is fueled by a dramatic 17-point decline over the past month among people under 30, who, along with black Americans, had been the most loyal part of the Obama coalition," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

The president also dropped 10 points among independent voters, from 47% last month to 37% now, with Obama's disapproval among independents jumping 12 points to 61%.
What's behind the drop?

"It is clear that revelations about NSA surveillance programs have damaged Obama's standing with the public, although older controversies like the IRS matter may have begun to take their toll as well," adds Holland.

Six in 10 disapprove of how Obama is handling government surveillance of U.S. citizens, which is higher than the 52% who disapproved of George W. Bush on the same issue in 2006, when government surveillance was also in the headlines.

Obama's approval rating on terrorism, although still above 50%, has taken a 13-point hit since mid-May. By contrast, his approval rating on domestic issues such as the economy, immigration and the deficit only dropped by two to four points, within the poll's sampling error.

Views of Obama's personal characteristics have also declined.
The number of Americans who think he is honest has dropped nine points over the past month, to 49%. Fifty-seven percent of those questioned say they disagree with the president's views on the size and power of the federal government, and 53% say he cannot manage the government effectively. Fifty-two percent say the president is a strong and decisive leader. That's still a majority, but it's down six points from last month.

Forty-three percent of the public says that the Obama administration has gone too far in restricting civil liberties to fight terrorism, with 38% saying the administration has been about right and 17% saying it has not gone far enough.
CNN Poll: Obama approval falls amid controversies ? CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Thursday, August 15, 2013
The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development has announced plans to make the nation’s neighborhoods more diverse, but Americans strongly oppose this idea. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only 10% of American Adults think the federal government should do more to make sure most, if not all, neighborhoods in the United States are more racially and ethnically diverse. Seventy-four percent (74%) disagree, while 16% are not sure.
74% Oppose Federal Plan to Make Neighborhoods More Diverse - Rasmussen Reports?
44% Rate Obama Administration’s IRS Response As Poor

Last modified: 07/23/2013 10:45 am

Voters remain suspicious that President Obama or his top aides knew about the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups, and they believe even more strongly that those involved should be jailed or fired.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters think it is at least somewhat likely that the president or his top aides were aware that the conservative groups were being targeted. Just 32% consider that unlikely. This includes 38% who say it’s Very Likely the president or his top aides knew of the rogue IRS activity versus only 10% who say it’s Not At All Likely.

Seventy-two percent (72%) of voters, however, suspect that the National Security Agency may have violated one of the country’s most cherished constitutional standards – the checks and balances between the three branches of government – by spying on the private communications of Congress and judges.
What They Told Us: Reviewing Last Week?s Key Polls -- For the Week Ending June 29, 2013 - Rasmussen Reports?

The Justice Department's secret investigation of the Associated Press horrified the journalism world and received intensive news coverage. Yet, according to a new study, Americans aren't very interested, though most of them disapprove of the Justice Department's actions.

The Pew Research Center released a poll on Tuesday that showed the public was following the AP story less than the controversies over the IRS or Benghazi. While 26 percent said they were tracking the IRS closely, and 25 percent said the same for Benghazi, just 16 percent said the same of the AP.

Broadly speaking, Pew said, "public interest in a trio of controversies connected to the Obama administration has been limited."

Even so, the study also showed a plurality of people disapproving of the Justice Department's actions, by a margin of 44 to 36 percent. (20 percent had no opinion.) Among people following the story closely, 55 percent disapproved.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/21/ap-scandal-poll-doj_n_3312188.html

 

[Foxfyre]

You probably won't read it in most morning newspapers or hear it on the network news, but this week Secretary of State John Kerry absolved the State Department of any wrong doing or dereliction of duty re Benghazi (or anything else for that matter.)

He said after reviewing all the documents, that there was no dereliction of duty. Four state department employees were were put on administrative leave in the wake of Benghazi--how many of you knew THAT had been done?--have been returned to work but they have been reassigned elsewhere. Meanwhile they enjoyed a nice long 10-month vacation at full salary and benefits while the 'investigation' was in progress. No heads will roll. No disciplinary action is necessary. Hillary Clinton can go right ahead and run for President. No blood on her hands. And it will be such old news by the time the next campaign kicks off that it will be deemed unimportant anyway.

So the verdict is relax everybody. There is no there there. Never was. Even though the gag order on everybody involved in that incident continues. (I am dusting off all those bridges I have to sell again.)

 

[Foxfyre]

Also Lois Lerner is in her fourth month of administrative leave with full pay and benefits in the wake of the IRS scandal. I'm pretty sure after most of a year has passed and most people have forgotten about the scandal, she too we be returned to duty or reassigned into another cushy position at our expense and they will be saying move along. Nothing to see here. There is no there there.