Phony Scandals?

[Impenitent]

At a buck a post, it ain't like I'm gettin' rich,lady!

What do you have against hard working, common people?

I heard that originally Common Dreams was going to pay you $1 per IQ point per hour to post here.

BUT since that fell below minimum wage, they had to go with the buck a post thingy...

But taking note of your only possibly believable criticism, I did not "scour the the country" looking for train riding idiot republicans to criticize, Dewhurst is my Lt Gov. Sometime secessionist, Rick Perry, is my neighbor. I know where n*****head is, and I know what evil lurks in the hearts of men.

Since he has no more influence on the process than you or Rdean have, it's not particularly relevant, now is it?

When you grow up here, the easy decision is to become one of them.

But, God, you haven't seen what I've seen, or heard what I've heard.

Yes, I'll be your opponent!

I'll do it for free.

You're going to give up your gig as a professional demagogue?

You're close, but 180 degrees off.

Book: Fox News Employees Created Army of Fake Internet Commenters/Posters - ClutchFans

Is that you, Steve Doocy?

 

[mamooth]

How's it going, ODS kooks? Is impeachment is just around the corner?

Oh wait. The world is still ignoring you, when they're not pointing and laughing. Have you ODS kooks gotten used to being laughed at, or does it still sting?

 

[Impenitent]

True. If it wasn't for Fox News, conservative talk radio, and the very few conservative internet news sources out there, few of us would have ever heard about most of this stuff because it would have been buried somewhere deep in the newspaper below the fold and not mentioned at all on the network nightly news. Obama's surrogate media is very efficient and effective in glossing over anything that might make him look bad while magnifying any sins of the loyal opposition.

But because there are still some media sources doing their jobs, we DO know about the scandals and are provided with sufficient information to judge for ourselves whether they are phony or not.

Agreed. But it must be remembered that until Rush hit the air waves in 1988, there was nearly zero conservative viewpoints in the national press. Fox News did not appear until 1996. The press has long been dominated by the left and still is.

What does the Left think about conservative members of the press? They have done their best to condemn and terminate them.

The MSM's near complete love of Ds is very harmful. If the press does not expose corruption and abuse of power, wherever it exists, Americans and America is harmed.

Remember NBC had the Monica story, but buried it to protect BJ Bubba. It took an obscure website (obscure then) to expose it. Could the MSM be protecting Big Ears now?

Yes, I remember all that well. We had always depended upon the media to inform us of what we could not know on our own, and until the anti-establishment movement of the 1960's started moving into and pretty well controlling education, the media, and the Democratic Party, the media had served its role well and honorably for the most part.

As a passionate student of modern history, and as a former member of that same media off an on over the years, it is my opinion that it was because the media had largely abandoned its mission to be the Fourth Estate and the harbinger of truth and light into dark places, that sky rocketed a Rush Limbaugh into stardom almost overnight once he was syndicated. It had been so long that those of us on the right had heard our point of view expressed that it was like a breath of fresh air. We were hungry for it and we were beginning to despair that we were all alone in the world. It was great to discover that we were not.

And of course Rush's success is what propelled the whole conservative talk movement as station after station dumped their music or other formats to adopt news/talk that is the format for the Number 1 station in most markets these days.

It is the same syndrome that has produced Fox News' success. The networks and CNN had become such shills for the left that it was extremely frustrating for those of us who wanted the rest of the story. Fox has provided that, and has done so in an honorable and balanced way, and those hungry for that have become its audience.

Those who hate talk radio, hate the conservative press, and hate Fox News hate them all not because they are dishonest, but because they report news that would otherwise be buried or downplayed to the point that the left always looks good. The poliicies of the left don't often look good in the cold hard light of truth. So truth is not a virtue that the left appreciates.

And THAT was the motive for this thread in the first place. To look for the truth re the current scandals even if the scandal turned out not to be what it first appears and the Administration or Congress could be exhonerated.

I keep waiting for those on the Left to start producing the evidence that the scandals are not scandals at all. But all they seem to be able to post are rude or snarky comments that there is nothing to them. Sorry folks, but that just isn't evidence enough for me.

Perhaps those on the left don't respond because of your inadequate definition of scandal. When pointed out that totality of your "scandals" amount to a single crime, you remain unmoved, steadfast in your belief of scandal.

Yes, the IRS does exist, and do the unpopular job of collecting taxes, but if they have a glitch, that doesn't mean scandal.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well we know what the assigned talking points to deflect from the scandals are now, don't we? Demonization of Rush Limbaugh and talk radio wasn't working. Impenitent didn't get Fearless Leader's memo to back off that and Fox news as it was backfiring on them. They haven't been able to generate a good George Zimmerman scandal to put on the front pages lately. And the racism charge just wasn't gaining much traction anymore.

So the new assigned line is now to work 'impeachment' into every post, into every microphone opportunity, and into all internet and press commentary as much as possible. It is something they actually can defend and use to make the opposition look fanatical, so that is what they are going to accuse us of being our primary motive for the time being.

Look for it. It is as predictable as taxes.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You're close, but 180 degrees off.

Book: Fox News Employees Created Army of Fake Internet Commenters/Posters - ClutchFans

Is that you, Steve Doocy?

Ohh, a link to another messageboard - that links to Media Matters...

Gunna have to call you "Mr. Credibility.." :drool:

 

[mamooth]

Ah, now the ODS kooks are running scared from the impeachment that they were pushing so hard. That one cratered so fast, it must have surprised both them and FOX.

ODS kooks, what's new phony scandal du jour? Don't ask us to keep up, as you're writing the menu. Better use one of those chalkboards, given how it changes every day. What have you been told to push, now that the impeachment thing was laughed out of the news? Yes, you're playing the race card, and you do it so well, but that's not a scandal.

 

[Foxfyre]

You don't get it do you Mamooth. It hasn't been our side pushing impeachment. It has been YOUR side desperate to get legs onto that rumor and off the real scandals out there. Like Obamacare.

 

[Impenitent]

You're close, but 180 degrees off.

Book: Fox News Employees Created Army of Fake Internet Commenters/Posters - ClutchFans

Is that you, Steve Doocy?

Ohh, a link to another messageboard - that links to Media Matters...

Gunna have to call you "Mr. Credibility.." :drool:

An error in my haste. Here's one straight to mediamatters:

Fox News Reportedly Used Fake Commenter Accounts To Rebut Critical Blog Posts | Blog | Media Matters for America

 

[Impenitent]

Well we know what the assigned talking points to deflect from the scandals are now, don't we? Demonization of Rush Limbaugh and talk radio wasn't working. Impenitent didn't get Fearless Leader's memo to back off that and Fox news as it was backfiring on them. They haven't been able to generate a good George Zimmerman scandal to put on the front pages lately. And the racism charge just wasn't gaining much traction anymore.

So the new assigned line is now to work 'impeachment' into every post, into every microphone opportunity, and into all internet and press commentary as much as possible. It is something they actually can defend and use to make the opposition look fanatical, so that is what they are going to accuse us of being our primary motive for the time being.

Look for it. It is as predictable as taxes.

Careful. Don't let your cohorts make you look like a fool. Some are cross-posting on the impeachment thread as you hack.

 

[Foxfyre]

Keep posting junk from Media Matters Impenitent. It ensures you will never be taken seriously by any thinking person at USMB.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Agreed. But it must be remembered that until Rush hit the air waves in 1988, there was nearly zero conservative viewpoints in the national press. Fox News did not appear until 1996. The press has long been dominated by the left and still is.

What does the Left think about conservative members of the press? They have done their best to condemn and terminate them.

The MSM's near complete love of Ds is very harmful. If the press does not expose corruption and abuse of power, wherever it exists, Americans and America is harmed.

Remember NBC had the Monica story, but buried it to protect BJ Bubba. It took an obscure website (obscure then) to expose it. Could the MSM be protecting Big Ears now?

Yes, I remember all that well. We had always depended upon the media to inform us of what we could not know on our own, and until the anti-establishment movement of the 1960's started moving into and pretty well controlling education, the media, and the Democratic Party, the media had served its role well and honorably for the most part.

As a passionate student of modern history, and as a former member of that same media off an on over the years, it is my opinion that it was because the media had largely abandoned its mission to be the Fourth Estate and the harbinger of truth and light into dark places, that sky rocketed a Rush Limbaugh into stardom almost overnight once he was syndicated. It had been so long that those of us on the right had heard our point of view expressed that it was like a breath of fresh air. We were hungry for it and we were beginning to despair that we were all alone in the world. It was great to discover that we were not.

And of course Rush's success is what propelled the whole conservative talk movement as station after station dumped their music or other formats to adopt news/talk that is the format for the Number 1 station in most markets these days.

It is the same syndrome that has produced Fox News' success. The networks and CNN had become such shills for the left that it was extremely frustrating for those of us who wanted the rest of the story. Fox has provided that, and has done so in an honorable and balanced way, and those hungry for that have become its audience.

Those who hate talk radio, hate the conservative press, and hate Fox News hate them all not because they are dishonest, but because they report news that would otherwise be buried or downplayed to the point that the left always looks good. The poliicies of the left don't often look good in the cold hard light of truth. So truth is not a virtue that the left appreciates.

And THAT was the motive for this thread in the first place. To look for the truth re the current scandals even if the scandal turned out not to be what it first appears and the Administration or Congress could be exhonerated.

I keep waiting for those on the Left to start producing the evidence that the scandals are not scandals at all. But all they seem to be able to post are rude or snarky comments that there is nothing to them. Sorry folks, but that just isn't evidence enough for me.

Perhaps those on the left don't respond because of your inadequate definition of scandal. When pointed out that totality of your "scandals" amount to a single crime, you remain unmoved, steadfast in your belief of scandal.

Yes, the IRS does exist, and do the unpopular job of collecting taxes, but if they have a glitch, that doesn't mean scandal.

True.

No one is responding because there is nothing to ‘respond’ to.

One can’t ‘respond’ to partisan contrivances, paranoid theories, and rightwing lies about Obama-initiated and authorized ‘cover ups’ absent any objective, documented evidence.

And conservatives whining about the ‘scandals’ being ‘covered up’ by the ‘liberal’ media and the ‘liberal political establishment’ to ‘protect’ Obama is clearly unfounded idiocy – indeed, ‘the media’ would love nothing more than an impeachment and trial in the Senate to cover and report on for month after lucrative month.

In the end the phony ‘scandals’ are nothing more than the manifestations of desperation by an angry, resentful, and blind faction of the partisan right.

 

[Uncensored2008]

An error in my haste. Here's one straight to mediamatters:

Way to shore up credibility, was Stormfront offline?

Fox News Reportedly Used Fake Commenter Accounts To Rebut Critical Blog Posts | Blog | Media Matters for America

Wow, nothing more convincing than a hate site with a long history of lying...



I know I'M impressed.

 

[Impenitent]

An error in my haste. Here's one straight to mediamatters:

Way to shore up credibility, was Stormfront offline?

Fox News Reportedly Used Fake Commenter Accounts To Rebut Critical Blog Posts | Blog | Media Matters for America

Wow, nothing more convincing than a hate site with a long history of lying...



I know I'M impressed.

Please give me some examples of mediamatters links you've personally proven wrong.

Indeed, they are not liars, but monitors of such.

 

[Foxfyre]

An error in my haste. Here's one straight to mediamatters:

Way to shore up credibility, was Stormfront offline?

Fox News Reportedly Used Fake Commenter Accounts To Rebut Critical Blog Posts | Blog | Media Matters for America

Wow, nothing more convincing than a hate site with a long history of lying...



I know I'M impressed.

Please give me some examples of mediamatters links you've personally proven wrong.

Indeed, they are not liars, but monitors of such.

Here you go. It will take some effort to explore it all, but take your time:
http://mediamatters.blogsome.com/
Media Matters Deliberate Dishonesty On Internet Gun Sales & Gun Show ?Loophole? | Pocket Full Of Liberty
O'Reilly: There Is A Danger That The Election Will Not "Be Reported Honestly" | RealClearPolitics
Media Matters dishonest editing in support of their ?smear? argument exposed « Hot Air

And a whole lot more links are included here:
Media Matters? ?Volatile and Erratic? Founder David Brock | Truth Revolt

And a pretty good donors list here:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/obama-finance-chief-funded-media-matters/

The George Soros funded MediaMatters is a scandal itself.

 

[Impenitent]

Way to shore up credibility, was Stormfront offline?



Wow, nothing more convincing than a hate site with a long history of lying...



I know I'M impressed.

Please give me some examples of mediamatters links you've personally proven wrong.

Indeed, they are not liars, but monitors of such.

Here you go. It will take some effort to explore it all, but take your time:
http://mediamatters.blogsome.com/
Media Matters Deliberate Dishonesty On Internet Gun Sales & Gun Show ?Loophole? | Pocket Full Of Liberty
O'Reilly: There Is A Danger That The Election Will Not "Be Reported Honestly" | RealClearPolitics
Media Matters dishonest editing in support of their ?smear? argument exposed « Hot Air

And a whole lot more links are included here:
Media Matters? ?Volatile and Erratic? Founder David Brock | Truth Revolt

And a pretty good donors list here:
Obama finance chief funded Media Matters

The George Soros funded MediaMatters is a scandal itself.

Citing mediamatters to a con is like showing a cross to a vampire.

 

[Foxfyre]

I will respond to you further Impenitent when you choose to not do the routine trollism and choose to engage in the discussion. Until then I am quite weary and bored with you and those of your type. Thank you for understanding. I profoundly apologize to others particpating on the thread for making the mistake of taking you seriously.

 

[Impenitent]

Crickets? Are scandals so routine nobody cares anymore?

I'd like to add obstruction, sequester, and shutdown to the list of scandals.

I think they most certainly qualify under the reasons you've listed.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Crickets? Are scandals so routine nobody cares anymore?

I'd like to add obstruction, sequester, and shutdown to the list of scandals.

I think they most certainly qualify under the reasons you've listed.

Along with the credit rating downgrade and Boehner’s refusal to bring legislation to the floor of the House because he knows it will pass on a bi-partisan vote.

Now page 32, and still no evidence.

 

[gipper]

By any objective analysis the current administration is one of the most corrupt...and we have had to endure so many corrupt administrations. However, history tells us big unlimited government is ALWAYS corrupt. How so many Americans have forgotten this basic truth, is beyond me.

 

[Foxfyre]

By any objective analysis the current administration is one of the most corrupt...and we have had to endure so many corrupt administrations. However, history tells us big unlimited government is ALWAYS corrupt. How so many Americans have forgotten this basic truth, is beyond me.

Yes. If a Republican was in the White House, we would no doubt be focusing on this or that scandal associated with that Administration. The media was certainly all over anything they could accuse George Bush of. But George Bush has not been President for almost five years now and it is Barack Obama in the White House.

And it is Barack Obama who called them 'phony scandals'. And it is Barack Obama who is described now as the 'teflon President'. And it is Barack Obama who carefully stages all photo ops now not allowing any but the White House official photographer into meetings to make sure oly what HE wants shown will be shown to the public. It is Barack Obama who promised as candidate Obama to have the most transparent Administration in the history of the country and it has instead been the most secretive since the Nixon Administration. (I wonder if the Obama apologists would have considered the Nixon Administration to have been wrongly plagued with 'phony scandals'?)

So what is a government scandal anyway? Is it not when an elected official or appointee or bureaucrat or an agency or group within government acts imprudently or stupidly or unethically or illegally and then denies it? Tries to cover it up or deflect from it?

Isn't it where term 'wag the dog' originated?

For example: our Obama apologists are desperately trying to get legs under the impeachment theory. They know such a rumor won't hurt Obama and might further erode the GOP's approval rating. It is clearly orchestrated and designed to get the attention off the real scandals that are out there.

If unsuccessful doing that, we can look for a 'wag the dog' scenario almost any time, though ur qukk niew likely be closer to the next election, to focus the attention there instead of on Obama's embarrassing difficulties.