FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » IRS, AP, Bhengazi, nothing to see here... (Page 2)

  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: IRS, AP, Bhengazi, nothing to see here...
steven
Member
Member # 8099

 - posted      Profile for steven   Email steven         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Whoever wins in 2016, I hope he/she has a steady hand, because that's exactly when the Boomers are going to start hitting retirement and Social Security age in large numbers (and if you think that won't be a train wreck that will require tremendous finesse, experience, and judgement to handle, you're crazy [Smile] ).

Hillary definitely would, because of her AND Bill's years of experience. Hopefully any Republican moderate enough to win the general election would be a calm and capable person who would choose GOOD advisers, instead of cronies. GOOD advisers are going to be absolutely essential at that point in time. It's going to be a mess.

Posts: 3287 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Geraine
Member
Member # 9913

 - posted      Profile for Geraine   Email Geraine         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar:
The GOP at this time really doesn't have the candidates that can face someone with Hillary's clout, no one sane or moderate enough to potentially win the election will pass through the primary without being forced to position themselves so far right they can't pivot back to center.

Rubio, Ted Cruz, Santorum, Rand Paul are not viable national candidates; Jeb Bush and Chris Christie can't win the primary.

I don't know who will win the primary, but its either going to be someone who is "moderate" but is too far right now to pivot, or someone who is too far right and won't pivot. Neither of these are convincing candidates to face Hillary, whose experience, likely endorsement from Bill and Obama means she's likely a lock for the Democratic nomination.

The GOP efforts to rebuild themselves has so far failed, they think its an issue of branding, that they didn't effectively communicate their "message" well enough; instead of figuring out what is was about their platform minorities and women don't like instead it must be because they didn't say it convincingly enough.

So far the few GOP that have begun to show sanity are also the ones the Tea Party Express is trying its best to primary in upcoming races; already there's a registered primary challenger for Rick Scott in Florida whose begun trying to moderate his image a tiny bit. This is a typical pattern that's happening across the country.

She probably wouldn't run, but I think Condie would have a shot. I think it would be awesome to see two women being the main contenders for POTUS. I believe Condie is going to stick with local politics though.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Condie would never get elected.

Too many Dems would never vote for her because of her role in the Bush Administration. Too many GOP would never vote for her because she's pro-choice.

She can't win just because she's a black woman.

Posts: 21897 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
The thing is, both of these look like such small potatoes things to get worked up about. Even the IRS complaint was pretty clearly intended to deal with a high volume of new non-profit applications that skirted the edge of political campaign law, and seems problematic mostly in that the message to stop singling out conspicuously political, anti-tax groups for extra scrutiny wasn't properly enforced. Compared to the actual things Obama's done that should be worrying freedom-lovers, these just seem outright laughable.

I have thought about this for a while and my assumption is that it's an event that came at a time of desperation for the right wing, where they really needed something to stir up a base they had already flooded out with outrage fatigue and fringe protest (see: birth certificate 'scandal') and could be built up around ideas which sell well to a jingoistic base.

In this case the idea of negligence (and reactionary conspiracy to cover up this negligence) in protecting ourselves against an overtly hostile other. The real scandals of the Obama administration aren't things they can credibly contest, because getting angry about dead americans is something you can readily whip these Patriots up with, but the wiretaps issue is awkward for them because this is an erosion of privacy which they created and heartily defended, and most conservatives are too nominally supportive of the drone bombing of muslims in pakistan and the "war on terror" — you can't make these things scandals to them, because it's what they want.

But Benghazi's dead Americans! Quick, throw out some crafted narratives and see what sticks.

Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But...dead American in embassy attacks are hardly new to the Obama administration. Are we this stupid?

And what the hell is the furor over the stupid umbrella? Are they going to go ballistic because Marines open doors for the President next?

Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
But...dead American in embassy attacks are hardly new to the Obama administration. Are we this stupid?

And what the hell is the furor over the stupid umbrella? Are they going to go ballistic because Marines open doors for the President next?

Except this time the current President is Black/Marxist/Coward/Athiest/Muslim so he obviously Hates America/Pro UN so this is a plot to deliberately Weaken America/Political Gain To Win Election.

Also because the GOP desperately wants to tar Hillary in case she runs because yeah, she'll kick any of the current crop of GOP "contenders" handedly.

Condi would never even get to the point of a national election, she can't win the primary.

Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
[QB]And what the hell is the furor over the stupid umbrella?

It looks "elitist." And can be passed around between a bunch of old people on their chain email lists. So it's a thing with conservatives.
Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Conservatives can't talk about the actual bad stuff, because they love the actual bad stuff — Guantanamo. War. Drone killings. Selling out more and more power to corporations. Eroding privacy and rights in general. They can't wait to get right back to it if and when they get back into power. The end result is a parade of manufactured outrage at literally any dumb little thing that they can use to froth the base that, by providence, doesn't point so clearly and directly back to them and their own tendencies. Benghazi is stupid and it turns out that republicans were giving us emails with made-up text used to create a fraudulent case against the administration. The new wiretap controversy is stupid because it is the end product of what the Republicans themselves were demanding that the government do. The IRS profiling is similarly suspect, and the true issue is that political groups were allowed to claim tax exempt status in the first place, hide who their donors are, and even allow their donors to claim a tax exemption if they wish.

Most of these organizations should be 527s, not 501(c)4s. There's a pretty broad common sense line where that should be, but it's been ignored and utilized for covering up money, primarily by conservatives.

Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
[QB]And what the hell is the furor over the stupid umbrella?

It looks "elitist." And can be passed around between a bunch of old people on their chain email lists. So it's a thing with conservatives.
Having someone hold an umbrella (which all presidents in the past have had, along with dressed Marines opening doors) is elitist, but voting for a guy with a car elevator in his beachfront mansion isn't?

Their double standards are starting to double park.

Posts: 21897 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the picture and the subsequent attached narrative is par for the course. i really think chain letter conservative political dissemination is a culture all its own that can be studied. the things that pass for "the real story" are like the result of playing concerted political Telephone.
Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wow, looks like the public's not having any of it.

quote:
The Republican Party's net favorability ratings are down 8 points in the past two months. The amount of respondents viewing the GOP favorably fell from 38 percent to 35 percent, while the number of people who view the party unfavorably climbed five points, up from 54 percent in March.

The only other time the party's favorability ratings have been this low came in the aftermath of the summer 2011 fight over raising the nation's debt ceiling.

The poll's findings — combined with President Barack Obama's continued popularity — suggest that Republicans remain susceptible to overreach on the issues of Benghazi and the IRS' targeting of conservative-sounding groups applying for tax exempt status.


Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Funny, because CNN just released a poll saying that a majority (a slim one) of the public thinks the GOP is reacting appropriately to the scandals.

I don't think the public knows what the hell it wants, it just doesn't want this circus we call a government.

Posts: 21897 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is possible that the President's approval numbers haven't changed much because the folks who were going to hate him have hated him from the start.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Geraine
Member
Member # 9913

 - posted      Profile for Geraine   Email Geraine         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
[QB]And what the hell is the furor over the stupid umbrella?

It looks "elitist." And can be passed around between a bunch of old people on their chain email lists. So it's a thing with conservatives.
I think it has more to do with military protocol. Marines are supposed to always keep their right hands free so they can salute.

Even if that is the case, I think it is stupid to get worked up over something like this. I saw the picture and the headline and literally rolled my eyes. It is one thing to disagree over policies and want answers for things, but come on. This is stupid.

I also think the AP "scandal" is utterly stupid as well. The DoJ was within their rights to request and obtain this information, and have 90 days to notify the news outlets.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/13/ap-phone-records-doj-leaks_n_3268932.html

I think there is more to Benghazi that we are not seeing, but I am going to withhold judgement until we know the whole story.

The IRS thing I also don't know all of the details to so I can't speak to that.

Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, I'm much more wary of the AP story. Government tracking and (secretly!) obtaining reporter records is...troubling. Especially since NationalSecurity!! is hardly ever going to be something the people ever get to vet. My problem is that if they were within their rights...they've give themselves that right!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And no one opposed it because PatriotismPatriotism9/11Urah.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Geraine
Member
Member # 9913

 - posted      Profile for Geraine   Email Geraine         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
Yeah, I'm much more wary of the AP story. Government tracking and (secretly!) obtaining reporter records is...troubling. Especially since NationalSecurity!! is hardly ever going to be something the people ever get to vet. My problem is that if they were within their rights...they've give themselves that right!

Not quite sure if you were serious or having fun with it. [Smile]

If the DOJ has 90 days to notify the press and they followed protocol I have no problems with it. We can argue that this is a stupid requirement and that it needs to be changed. If the DOJ followed the law and people don't like it, the conversation should be regarding the law.

Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Geraine:
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
Yeah, I'm much more wary of the AP story. Government tracking and (secretly!) obtaining reporter records is...troubling. Especially since NationalSecurity!! is hardly ever going to be something the people ever get to vet. My problem is that if they were within their rights...they've give themselves that right!

Not quite sure if you were serious or having fun with it. [Smile]

If the DOJ has 90 days to notify the press and they followed protocol I have no problems with it. We can argue that this is a stupid requirement and that it needs to be changed. If the DOJ followed the law and people don't like it, the conversation should be regarding the law.

You're right, but.....

I don't know how much law makers listen to Heritage Action.

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Geraine
Member
Member # 9913

 - posted      Profile for Geraine   Email Geraine         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sigh.... Let's not try to work together to get anything done. No, let's pound on these "scandals" instead, even though it will probably come out that there wasn't anything illegal done.

I don't think I've read something more idiotic in the past year.

I'm getting really sick of both Republicans and Democrats. Republicans more so lately. I'd be happier if the majority of congressmen were not affiliated to any party.

Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Elison R. Salazar
Member
Member # 8565

 - posted      Profile for Elison R. Salazar   Email Elison R. Salazar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lets get that 800bn in new infrastructure spending done then, no opposition its needed right?
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Darth_Mauve
Member
Member # 4709

 - posted      Profile for Darth_Mauve   Email Darth_Mauve         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Conspiracy Theory for the weekend.

The IRS scandal was really done on the orders of the Republican Party.

The head of the IRS at the time this occurred was appointed by President Bush, and left afterwards.

The focus of the illegal scrutiny was on Tea Party and Right Wing Fanatical organizations.

Who was threatened by the Tea Party and Fanatical Conservatives?

Not the President or the Democrats who could only gain by the over-the-edge conspiracy, racist, and sexist comments that these groups routinely spouted.

Every time a heavily armed conservative brazenly shouldered their guns marching through a political meeting moderates and independents stepped away from the Republican brand. Every time a man in a Paul Revere Outfit spoke about birth certificates, those same independents and moderates gave good money to Democrats.

What would the Democrats or President Obama have to gain from hindering or stopping those groups?

On the other hand, the Republican Party, seeing their chances of winning being eaten away, and their leaders power dwindling as Tea Party players gain the conservative base, did have a motive to diminish or limit their organizational ability.

For decades it was the party who had the money, so the candidates had to toe the line. Here the Tea Party wanted to be the ones with the money, forcing the candidates to toe their line.

Hence, competing conservatives, the Republican Party Faithful had both the motive to limit the Tea Party fundraising groups, and with their man as head of the IRS, the means and opportunity to do so.

And if it all came out to the media, they could blame the Democrats who were in charge of the system when it misfired.

Enjoy your silly conspiracy for the weekend.

Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oooooo...
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Diabolical.
Posts: 21897 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
wouldn't they have popped that one a wee bit before obama, you know, got re-elected to a second term
Posts: 15419 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They didn't want Romney elected. If he was elected, they'd actually have to do something.

Better to save plans like this for after Obama gets elected so they can get reelected more easily and grind the gears of government to a halt while claiming to be champions of better government.

Posts: 21897 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll add fuel to your crazy fire!
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2