Weathering The Storms
There are several metaphors to describe the week President Obama is having. Firefighting. Damage control. Playing defense. Today, however, I went with "weathering the storms" because of the unfortunate optics of Obama giving an outdoor press conference today under an umbrella, as the skies dripped down. Into each president's life some rain must fall, in other words.
While Obama had Marines handy to provide umbrella cover during the presser, the bigger question is how he's weathering the metaphorical storms blowing through Washington this week. There are really four of these, although the media seems fixated on only three.
The Pentagon's sex scandals
A second person in charge of sexual harassment training in the military has now been accused of sexual harassment or sexual assault. This is on top of the report just issued which shows how pathetically the military has been responding to sexual harassment and sexual assault, up to and including rape. They just don't get it, apparently. The media doesn't seem too interested in this scandal either, perhaps because of all the other scandals to choose from this week.
President Obama took a pretty forceful ideological stand on the issue, but it remains to be seen whether Congress will force changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice which might improve the situation drastically. However, nobody's so far been held accountable in the slightest for the dismal statistics over at the Pentagon, and it's pretty clear nobody will ever be held accountable. Obama didn't fire either the Secretary of Defense or his entire Joint Chiefs, to put this another way, which would have indeed sent an unequivocal message.
The IRS scandal
Unlike the military sex scandals, Obama has been moving quickly on the IRS scandal. Already two heads have rolled, the acting head of the IRS and the person responsible for the division where the scandal originated. More heads may roll in the coming days, especially after a few congressional hearings shed more light on the situation.
Again, this sends a clear message that wrongdoing happened, and it sends a message of accountability and taking responsibility for what happens in an agency you run. Unlike the Pentagon situation, I hasten to point out. This message, and all the rest of the changes barreling down the pike (from both the White House and Congress), will change the culture at the IRS immediately, by showing the consequences for bad behavior. Because Obama acted so quickly and decisively, this may be the first storm scandal to pass by. It is a fixable problem, and Obama's already taken big steps to fix it.
Benghazi
The Republicans have been hammering on this one for quite a while now, but their narrative of whatever is supposed to be so scandalous has never been accepted by the public at large (perhaps because it's so convoluted).
The talking points at the center of this narrative were just that -- talking points. They are, almost by definition, political spin. That's what talking points are. The CIA wanted to spin them one way, the State Department wanted to spin them another way. Gosh, the CIA and the State Department see things differently? Alert the media! This is not exactly news to Washington-watchers, in other words. The spin didn't work, and was exposed and walked back within days -- long before the election happened. Politically, in fact, Mitt Romney was the first one out of the box with his spin on Benghazi, which also proved to be incorrect after more facts were known.
This is not, to put it another way, the Gulf of Tonkin incident. It is not Iran-Contra. It wasn't even Condi Rice and Dick Cheney ominously warning of "mushroom clouds" arriving from Iraq.
But there is a gigantic ulterior motive for Republicans on Benghazi, and her name is Hillary Rodham Clinton. Obama's barely even the target of the Benghazi scandal -- Republicans are much more interested in tarnishing the woman they could very well face in the 2016 presidential race. So pretty much no matter what Obama does, the GOP will do everything within their power to keep the story alive. Obama is doing damage control, though, as he released a whole bunch of emails this week, but this news was almost lost in the other scandal news.
The AP scandal
The Republicans know that they're going to look like utter hypocrites by getting indignant about this scandal, since they were the ones who pushed -- very hard -- for the Justice Department to robustly investigate the leak in the first place. They can't really complain when Justice did exactly that.
However, this scandal won't need Republicans to keep it alive, as the media themselves will no doubt express sufficient outrage to do so. The Associated Press is, after all, one of their own. The media will close ranks around this story and hammer it for all it's worth.
Unfortunately for Obama, he's also looking like a hypocrite in his response to the issue. He's now calling for a federal "shield law" to insure the privacy of journalistic sources. The unfortunate and hypocritical part of this is that the Obama White House worked hard to kill a shield law bill in Congress a few years back. Now Obama seems to have changed his mind on the desirability of having such a law.
Attorney General Eric Holder didn't do the Obama administration much good, in his first appearance before Congress over the AP phone records. Even though I strongly suggested he step down as recently as yesterday, I have to admit that this wasn't really Holder's fault. Look up "recuse" in the dictionary. Right there, it says that when you recuse yourself, you have taken yourself out of the case. It's what the word means, after all.
But Holder repeatedly stating "I don't know" or "I'm not aware of that" in his congressional hearing certainly didn't do him (or Obama) any good. Holder was in a Catch-22 situation, in fact. By recusing himself, he does not have access to the information. However, as the head of the Justice Department, he's the one who gets called on the carpet to answer questions, so he looks incompetent by not having access to the information. But if he did have access to the information, he would have "un-recused" himself, which I'm sure some in Congress would rake him over the coals for doing. It's a no-win situation -- and I say this not as any sort of fan of the Attorney General, mind you.
This is the scandal that Obama hasn't done very good damage control over at all. It is chum in the shark-infested waters of the national press. You can bet that there will be more questions -- lots of them -- in the near future. So far, Obama's team hasn't done much to weather this particular storm. It may, in the end, be impossible for them to do so, because the fact remains that the Obama administration has been the most vindictive towards leaks of any presidency in history, prosecuting twice as many cases as all other presidents combined. That's the bigger storm they're going to have to weather, and it remains to be seen how they're even going to attempt to do so, really.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Chris,
I suppose that the theme of the Obama/Biden administration can be summed up in two words: crisis management, for better or worse. Okay, so that's six words but, who's counting? Don't answer that!
Of course, we all knew that, intuitively, even before they were sworn into office, given the events of the preceding decade.
As with all crisis situations, though, opportunity beckons. This administration has been given the chance to demonstrate that it can provide the necessary leadership to weather these concurrent storms and break through to the other side, enlightened by lessons learned and poised to move forward.
CW,
The sex scandal is something pervasive and tacitly tolerated from the top on down. It is almost as if it is an accepted fact that if you are a female in the armed services this is a part of military life you are expected to accept.
Benghazi is the most transparent and shallow attempt by the Cons to profit from the 4 embassy dead. As many of us noted this is purely motivated by hatred of all things Obama, whose presidency must fail, above all other concerns the country be damned. Unlike some I think their concern that Obama fail supersedes any fear of Hillery in 2016. If O fails now the Dems chances shrink dramatically,no matter if Hill runs or not so its kind of a two-fer for them .Of the other two scandals the fires will not burn as long or as hot as the obsession with Benghazi and they will whip that horse until it comes back to life,as the Cons see it as their ticket to the WH in 2016.
A question occurred to me while reading this- how much of this does the public believe?
Since Obama was elected there has been a relentless stream of faux scandals from the coorporate media to the point where I'm not sure how much anyone outside of the true conservative believers puts much stock in the nuttiness?
Has the media damaged its own credibility?
Seems a bit like boy who cried wolf syndrome. I mean after being labeled a socialist, Muslim baby killer who wasn't born on American soil, where do you go from there?
-David
David,
Has the media damaged its own credibility?
I guess that depends entirely on one's own perspective. For me, the credibility of much of the media has been at zero and heading backwards for a very, very long time now as a result of their own incompetence and ineptitude. There are, of course, notable but rare exceptions, including our gracious host here.
But, you make a good point about how much all of this resonates with (at least a majority) of the public and how far the Republicans can go with their investigation obsession. I'm not sure I want to know the answer to that particular question
If anyone thinks that these scandals are "no big deal", I invite ya'all to accomplish two things.
First, read Peggy Noonan's play by play of exactly HOW bad it has gotten with the IRS targeting political foes of Obama and his administration.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323582904578487460479247792.html
Sure, dispute the messenger. Call into question the organization that is carrying the messenger's message...
But what NO ONE can do is to dispute the FACTS of what she has put forth.
If anyone can dispute her "FACTS" with facts of their own?? By all means.. Do so..
The second thing ya'all can do is to re-read ALL the reports of the IRS, the AP and Benghazi scandals and mentally change ANY mentions of conservative, Republican or Right-Wing; change it to Liberal, Progressive, Left Wing, Democrat or liberal mentions...
Now, once ya'all faithfully accomplish your mental editing, can ANYONE here honestly and truly say that they would view it as "No big deal"..
Let me help you..
Ya'all discover that Bush's IRS had SOLELY targeted tax-expempt groups that supported Kerry's Campaign and ignored tax-exempt groups that supported Bush's campaign.
Would that have been "no big deal"??? Of course it wouldn't. It would have been screamed to the high heavens and the Left would have gone apoplectic with screams of IMPEACHMENT and OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!
We all KNOW this to be true...
If one wants to look at this scandals in a fair and objective way, then one MUST ask themselves, "How would I feel if the political players in this scandal were opposites to what they are now.
This is how I *KNOW* for a fact that this scandal is worthy of attention..
Because, if the scandal shoe were on the other foot, ya'all would be reacting considerably MORE hysterical than the Right is now..
It's simple logic...
Michale
David,
Seems a bit like boy who cried wolf syndrome. I mean after being labeled a socialist, Muslim baby killer who wasn't born on American soil, where do you go from there?
Well, *I* would hope they would go to the FACTS..
The problem is, for those enslaved by Party ideology, the facts mean precisely dick..
"Yea, let me tell you about those skills, slick. As of now, they mean precisely dick."
-Agent K, MEN IN BLACK
:D
No one wants the facts because, on the Right no one wants to see Obama as anything less than Satan Incarnate himself.
On the Left, no one wants to see Obama as anything less than Saint Barack The First, Doer Of No Wrong..
And so it goes and so it goes...
Michale
statusquoteme,
Hope yer still around...
When a group, as a whole, proclaims antithesis towards a certain institution and that institution's process-then goes to that institution for favorable advantages, merits for me, that institution looking deeper into that group's various doing(s).
Forgive me if I misunderstand what you are saying but, what you appear to be saying is that, if the group in question has set their agenda to be OPPOSED to government's actions then that group DESERVES to have their actions monitored more than another group that DOESN'T oppose government actions..
Are you absolutely SURE you want to take that stance??
Because I have some "what ifs" based on that stance that will make yer hair stand on end...
For example, what if the IRS targeted black groups that were against the government's lack of Civil Rights movement?? Wouldn't ya'all have a problem with that??
I would sure hope so....
It could be from all the talk radio I listen to that this ruffles my feathers something bad, the blustered hyperbole emanating grinds me to no end. Was there any one of them that were denied the special status?
Many groups withdrew their applications based on the un-called for and illegal scrutiny. In other words, they were denied their special status..
Now, of course, this might lead one to say, "If they aren't doing anything wrong, why do they want to hide it??"
To that, I would say (once again), "Are you SURE you want to put your egss in that basket???"
Michale
David,
I bring up #2 because it seems like the IRS figured out they made a mistake and then raised the issue themselves. Not exactly the trademarks of a conspiracy.
We now know that the "revelation" regarding the IRS's illegal targeting of conservative groups during the last POTUS election was not revealed for altruistic motives, but rather to pre-empt the announcement that was coming from the IG..
http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/17/lerners-admission-was-pre-planned-public-disclosure/
So, Obama's IRS deserves absolutely NO CREDIT whatsoever for "raising the issue" themselves..
They only raised the issued in a vain attempt to control the information..
Hardly altruistic and contrite, no matte how ya spin it...
No matter HOW ya'all try to slice it, Obama's administration is dirty...
Plain and simple... No spin required...
Michale
Conservative Hispanic Groups Targeted In IRS Scandal
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/05/16/irs-allegedly-targeted-latino-run-conservative-group/
Obama's war against minorities???
Michale
winbyrd -
Welcome to the site! Your first post was automatically held for moderation, so I apologize for the delay. From now on, you should be able to comment and have them appear instantly. Just don't post more than one link per comment, as multi-link comments are also automatically flagged for approval (to cut down on comment spam).
-CW
Michale -
Welcome to the site! Your first post was automatically... oh, hey, wait a minute, don't I know you?
Heh.
I've been amazed at the lack of Michale comments this week, personally. I thought "maybe he's just taking the moral high road in a bad week for Dems" but then I found myself laughing so hard I couldn't breathe, so I discarded that line of thinking.
In any case, welcome back. (I just KNOW I'm going to regret saying that...)
-CW
winbyrd,
Of the other two scandals the fires will not burn as long or as hot as the obsession with Benghazi
Many Weigantians said the same thing..
"Benghazi was just an election issue. We won't hear any more of it, now that Obama has won the election"..
And yet, not only is Benghazi going strong, it is getting hotter and hotter...
While you may be right about the MOTIVATIONS of those going after Benghazi, I submit to you that such motivations do not change the FACTS one iota..
And those facts are:
A> Prior to the attack, Obama's State Dept *KNEW* that the Benghazi mission had some real and pressing security issues.
B>During the attack, military forces WERE available and COULD have prevented the second attack. Those forces were told to stand down..
C> After the attack the entire Obama Administration up to AND INCLUDING the POTUS himself lied to the American people about the impetus and the nature of the attack. To make such lying worse, Obama et al did so for COMPLETELY, UTTERLY and UNEQUIVOCALLY Party agenda reasons..
"These are the facts. And they are undisputed."
-Captain Smilin Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN
While the other scandals (IRS and Targeting The AP) will likely be the ones that bring the most bi-partisan condemnation, make no mistake that it is Benghazi that demonstrates the TRUE incompetence and utter disdain for America and American Forces by this Administration..
By the bi, as I am wont to do...
"Welcome to the party, Pal!!!"
-John McClane, DIE HARD
:D
Michale
David [3] -
It's too early to tell, really. I saw a poll today showing around 52-53% of the public said they're following the scandals closely, heavily tilted on the GOP side.
O's job approval took a minor dip, but seems to be recovering this week. But there's always a delay before events really show up in this number, so I'll be looking to next week's numbers as a more definitive answer to the question.
So far, with the incomplete data that's in, Obama looks to be weathering the storms somewhat better than I would have expected. But, as I said, it's still early...
LizM [4] -
Republicans (those that remember 1998) are already cautioning their fellow GOPers not to go too far overboard. A public backlash can indeed follow a witchhunt. We'll see...
Michale [6] -
No one wants the facts because, on the Right no one wants to see Obama as anything less than Satan Incarnate himself.
On the Left, no one wants to see Obama as anything less than Saint Barack The First, Doer Of No Wrong..
And so it goes and so it goes...
That's actually amazingly balanced (cough... for you... cough, cough), I must say. And you even quoted Kurt Vonnegut at the end, there (if you didn't, just pretend you did and nobody will notice... heh).
Michale [8] -
It's been known all along that the IRS admitted wrongdoing a week ago because of the IG report that was about to be released. It's not a revelation, in other words.
So, you're saying that the IRS deserves no credit for raising the issue themselves. So you've got to give credit to Obama's Treasury Department for raising the issue, right? The Obama administration actually found the problem, and publicly exposed it.
Right? I mean, after all, them's the facts....
:-)
-CW
Michale [7] -
Are you sure you didn't post this comment in the wrong article thread? You seem to be answering a comment from earlier...
-CW
I've been amazed at the lack of Michale comments this week, personally. I thought "maybe he's just taking the moral high road in a bad week for Dems" but then I found myself laughing so hard I couldn't breathe, so I discarded that line of thinking.
As well you should!! :D
While I have, in the past, given Democrats a breather because I felt sorry for them and because it was just too damn easy to pull them down (Like dynamiting fish in a barrel) we are not at that point...... Yet.. :D
Getting close, to be sure, but not there yet... :D
In any case, welcome back. (I just KNOW I'm going to regret saying that...)
Thanx ya.. And yes.. Likely so.. :D
And just so'se ya'all know that it would be something REALLY important to drag me away from CW.COM...
http://sjfm.us/temp/family1.jpg
:D
Michale
Are you sure you didn't post this comment in the wrong article thread? You seem to be answering a comment from earlier...
Actually, I compiled the comments from the last 4 days or so.. Didn't want to force people to go back and find the most recent outrageousness from yours truly... :D
. And you even quoted Kurt Vonnegut at the end, there
Really??? I thought it was Billy Joel... :D
It's been known all along that the IRS admitted wrongdoing a week ago because of the IG report that was about to be released. It's not a revelation, in other words.
Yea, but that's what was thought last Friday when David made the comment..
So, you're saying that the IRS deserves no credit for raising the issue themselves. So you've got to give credit to Obama's Treasury Department for raising the issue, right? The Obama administration actually found the problem, and publicly exposed it.
Definitely... Credit where credit is due...
I am willing to give Obama the credit for a truly independent IG report..
IF......
If anyone here is willing to reciprocate and put the blame where it belongs as well.
Obama knew..
If he didn't know, he SHOULD have known...
Even if he didn't know, it was Obama and his advisers who CREATED the atmosphere that these kinds of abuses can occur and did absolutely NOTHING to prevent their occurrence.....
So, the buck DOES stop with Obama..
Even if no one amongst the rank and file Weigantians will admit it...
Michale
The problem is, for those enslaved by Party ideology, the facts mean precisely dick.
Yep.
Let's look at the facts then ...
1) Campaign finance laws were changed by Republicans creating new tax exempt 501c groups
2) This opened up a flood of new requests for tax exempt organizations called social welfare organizations
3) Many of these organizations were organizations applying for the tax exemption for groups such as Crossroads GPS, which were conservative groups which were not social welfare organizations. That is, these groups did not qualify for tax exempt status.
4) The IRS, seeing this, started to look more closely at conservative groups applying for tax exempt status using words like "tea party," "9-12" etc. (This is where they went wrong. They should have had a procedure which looked at all applications.)
5) There is no evidence of Obama or any other Democrats "targeting" Republican groups for political reasons. They were being targeted because some of these groups had tried to improperly register for tax exempt status. (This was wrong, but it's not what conservatives are claiming. It's not anything like how Nixon targeted Democratic opponents.)
6) It was disclosed by the IRS and Obama agreed it was wrong and fired the head of the IRS over it.
7) Republicans have ignored the facts and come hard with their usual over-the-top political hyperbolic comparisons to Watergate or it being some part of the giant liberal conspiracy ...
- "a blatant and thuggish abuse of power” - Mitch McConnell
- “This whole episode reinforces and confirms the American people’s worst fears about big government run amok” - Senator John Thune
- “The startling revelations give real credibility to numerous reports over the last year that the IRS ‘inadvertently’ released donor information from conservative groups — and that information ended up in the hands of political opponents,” Sen. Jerry Moran
Huh? All of this is pure conspiracy theory. Great theatre, I'll admit, but completely unsubstantiated.
8) The media has run with sensationalist stories with headlines like "IRS targeted Republicans" without explaining most of this. Try finding an article or story in the corporate media which actually explains how conservative groups were "targeted". They've been coming out more after the facts were known, but the initial reports went with the hype.
In summary, the facts are that the IRS profiled conservative groups applying for 501c group status, the corporate media ran with it as a sensationalist story because it drew attention and spiked readership, and conservatives continue to blow this way out of proportion for political gain.
*yawn* Not much of a story in the facts though, eh?
Obama is doing the right thing by focusing on fixing the problem with the IRS.
-David
If you or anyone else for that matter can show me a fact linking this to Democrats, Michale, you might have a case.
Until then ... Zzzzzz
:)
David,
re: [17]
NONE of that gives the Obama Administration the right to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents..
Would you agree with that??
If you or anyone else for that matter can show me a fact linking this to Democrats, Michale, you might have a case.
The agencies involved are Executive Agencies of the Obama Administration...
Linkage is MORE than established, it's a downright fact..
I am also constrained to point out that such linkage would be MORE than enough to convict a Republican administration if they were in charge when these scandals were exposed..
This is also undeniably fact..
Shall we go back to the Bush years and list all the agency misconduct that was laid at the feet of the Bush Administration???
Hmmmmmmm????
Do you REALLY wanna go there?? :D
Michale
They were being targeted because some of these groups had tried to improperly register for tax exempt status.
Bullshit..
There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE of this whatsoever..
Cite your source for this..
And I'll be VERY disappointed if it's HuffPo or DailyKos...
:D
Michale
There is no evidence of Obama or any other Democrats "targeting" Republican groups for political reasons.
Really??
The explain why *only* groups with Tea Party or Patriot in their names or notes were targeted and groups with Progressive or Liberal in their name or notes were not..
Com'on David!! I wasn't born yesterday...
It's like saying that ONLY black groups are targeted and NO white groups are targeted by a group made up completely of white people and then that white people group claims that race is not an issue...
Remember... At night.. Not LAST night...
Michale
Remember... At night.. Not LAST night... :D
That shoulda had a ' :D '
Michale
Let's face the facts here..
Conservative groups were targeted for absolutely NOTHING beyond the fact that they were conservative..
There was NO attempt to evade, NO attempt to obtain undeserved status, NO attempt at any nefarious actions whatsoever..
These groups were targeted SOLELY and COMPLETELY because they were conservative..
They were asked question and were ordered to provide information that the IRS had absolutely NO RIGHT to request...
Family records, business associates, donor lists, reading materials, etc etc ..
And **NO** Leftist, Liberal, Democrat etc etc groups we're scrutinized in this manner..
Deny the facts all ya want..
But the simple fact is, these groups were scrutinized, NOT for any nefarious, illegal or unethical actions, but SOLELY and COMPLETELY for their political leanings...
It's as insidious as any group scrutinized for the color of their skin..
And I *KNOW* ya'all would go ape-shit over THAT happening...
Michale
Postulate a scenario where Bush's IRS had a muslim group who was applying for tax-exempt status..
And, it was learned that Bush's IRS asked the group to provide enforcement agents with the contents of the group's prayers..
Ya'all would go utterly and completely bat-shit over such a request..
And yet, that kind of question is EXACTLY what Obama's IRS was asking of Conservative groups..
Now.. Ya'all tell me..
What the *FRAK* does the content of a group's prayers have to do with whether or not that group qualifies for tax-exempt status??
Can ANYONE justify that??
No...
Ya'all can't....
So, please... Cut the crap about how this is all about legitimate investigation over tax-exempt status..
It ain't and ya'all KNOW it ain't..
This whole sad affair is about one thing and one thing only.
Using government enforcement agencies to persecute and intimidate those who do not support the Obama Administration..
THAT is the *only* thing that this sad, sordid affair is about...
Michale
Just let me leave ya'all with this...
This has nothing to do with political parties. This has to do with highly targeted groups. This reconfirms everything the American public believes. This is a huge blow to the faith and trust that the American people have in their government. Is there any limit to the scope where you folks can go? Is there anything at all? Is there any way that we could ask you is there any question that you should have asked?
My goodness. How much money do you have in your wallet? Who do you get emails from? Whose sign do you put up in your front yard? This is a tax question? And you don't think that's intimidating? It's sure as hell intimidating. And I don't know that I got any answers from you today. And I don't know that -- what Mr. George said is great work -- but you know what? There's a heck of a lot more that has to come out in this. Anybody that sat here today and listened to what you had to say, I am more concerned today than I was before, and the fact that you all can do just about anything you want to anybody?
You know, you can put anybody out of business that you want. Any time you want. I gotta tell you. You could talk about how you're a horribly run organization, if you're on the other side of the fence, you're not giving that excuse. And the IRS comes in, you're not allowed to be shoddy, you're not allowed to be run horribly, you're not allowed to make mistakes, you're not allowed to do one damn thing that doesn't come in compliance, and if you do, you're held responsible right then. I just think the American people have seen what's going on right now in their government. This is absolutely an overreach and this is an outrage for all Americans.
In the uber-tranquil koom-bye-ya world of Leftist ideology, the person saying the afore words would be a Democrat fighting for the rights of every American and the very soul of of our Democracy...
But, in the REAL world, in the here and now, the words come from a Republican (REP. MIKE KELLY (R-PA))..
Republicans... Who are, by ya'alls claims, the "enemy", the "terrorists", the people who are bent on destroying this country...
And yet.. These very profound and meaningful words come from THAT side of the aisle, AGAINST the people who ya'all claim are the saviors of this country who are, ya'all claim, the "warriors" for decent Americans everywhere..
So, ya'all really have to ask yourselves...
Who really are the bad guys here???
Let's just think about that for a while.......
Michale
Who really are the bad guys here???
Let's just think about that for a while.......
OK, times up..
Who are the bad guys around here??
The guys who are creating the atmosphere and actually persecuting groups SOLELY due to their political ideology??
Or...
They guys who are fighting to expose such targeting and persecution??
Face it, people.
No matter how ya spin it, the Obama Administration are the bad guys here..
Even Democrats in Congress say so...
Michale
NONE of that gives the Obama Administration the right to use the IRS to intimidate political opponents.
Absolutely, I'd agree with this statement. There is no evidence that the Obama administration has been using the IRS to intimidate political opponents though.
The explain why *only* groups with Tea Party or Patriot in their names or notes were targeted and groups with Progressive or Liberal in their name or notes were not.
Because some groups like American Crossroads GPS had applied for tax exempt status (which they weren't entitled to).
This was profiling and is wrong and should be fixed. But there is no evidence indicating this was intimidation by Democrats.
Com'on David!! I wasn't born yesterday.
"I wasn't born yesterday" is not evidence of Democratic "intimidation".
Where's your evidence, my friend?
-David
The problem Michale is, as you so eloquently stated, "the facts mean precisely dick" when there is political benefit to be had.
Absolutely, I'd agree with this statement. There is no evidence that the Obama administration has been using the IRS to intimidate political opponents though.
The IRS was intimidating Obama political opponents..
FACT...
The highest High Ups in the IRS knew about it a year ago...
If no one in the White House knew, then they are incompetent..
Where's your evidence, my friend?
My evidence would be MORE than sufficient to convince ya'all if we were talking about a GOP administration..
Ergo, the evidence SHOULD be enough, even though we are talking about a DEM Administration.
The fact that it isn't is on ya'all, not me...
Michale...
Where's your evidence, my friend?
And what exactly do you need evidence to convince yourself of??
Do you doubt that the IRS targeted conservatives??
Because the evidence is overwhelming no matter WHAT your ideology is...
Michale
No, the problem here is that the facts mean precisely dick SOLELY and completely because of the '-D' after Obama's name...
That's what chaps my ass so bad..
Ya'all claim that all you want are facts, but when the facts so completely and unequivocally show the Obama Administration in the wrong, you ignore the facts to further the partisan agenda...
Michale
Here's the official report ...
http://docs.google.com/a/rawstory.com/viewer?url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/05/201310053fr-revised-redacted-1.pdf&chrome=true
The conclusion:
The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy recommendations instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention.
I don't see anything about Democrats or Obama or any conspiracy.
Where's the evidence for Democratic involvement?
-David
BTW- According to the report ...
Of the 298 groups subjected to additional review, only 72 were “tea party” groups, 11 were “9/12? groups and 13 were “patriots” groups.
I don't see anything about Democrats or Obama or any conspiracy.
Where's the evidence for Democratic involvement?
A Democrat Administration??
Using your reasoning, Bush was not responsible for the Second Iraq War, because it was the CIA's screw up..
Abu Ghraib wasn't Bush's fault because it was the Pentagon's screw-up..
Shall I go on??
Why is it that, when it's a GOP POTUS, EVERYTHING is the fault of the POTUS??
But when it's a DEM POTUS EVERYTHING is the fault of all the agencies below the POTUS and the POTUS is pure as the driven snow??
Can you explain that??
At least we agree that what the IRS did was heinously wrong...
Correct??
Of the 298 groups subjected to additional review, only 72 were “tea party” groups, 11 were “9/12? groups and 13 were “patriots” groups.
"Hay! That thing killed a civilian!!"
"We project 7% collateral casualty rate. Acceptable."
"Yea... Unless you happen to be that 7%"
-Blue Thunder
OR
"How many people does it take, Admiral, before it becomes wrong? A thousand? Fifty thousand? A million? How many people does it take, Admiral?"
-Captain Jean Luc Picard, STAR TREK: Insurrection
People's lives were destroyed, David.
Their financial well-being decimated, David..
And all because they had a political ideology that was counter to the Obama Administration's.
Fellow Americans like you and I who believed as passionately in their ideology as you believe in yours..
Is it REALLY relevant that it was only a small percentage of fellow Americans?
How would you feel if the IRS crawled up your ass with a microscope and asked YOU invasive questions, solely and completely because you believed in the progressive ideology?? Would you be consoled by the fact, "Well, at least it's only a few of us Americans that were ruined.."
Michale
Right. The usual hysterics. No evidence of Democratic involvement.
-David
Right. The usual hysterics. No evidence of Democratic involvement.
Other than a Democratic POTUS at the head of all the agencies involved...
Yer right.. No evidence of Democratic involvement..
And Enron had NO EVIDENCE of Ken Lay involvement..
Other than the fact that he was in charge...
Michale
Why is it that Obama can do no wrong in your eyes??
Why do you refuse to hold him accountable for ANYTHING????
ALL these problems that Obama has had in the last 4+ years...
ALL the screw-ups..
ALL the mistakes...
ALL the scandals..
And NOT ONE OF THEM was Obama's fault..
How can that be possible???
Michale
Why is it that, when it's a GOP POTUS, EVERYTHING is the fault of the POTUS?
The simple answer is: It's not and never was.
A good example is 9/11. Not Bush's fault even though he was President.
But when you make the decision to invade Iraq, sorry Michale, Bush is responsible.
But when it's a DEM POTUS EVERYTHING is the fault of all the agencies below the POTUS and the POTUS is pure as the driven snow?
Again. Your generalization is simply false.
I hold Obama accountable for the decisions he makes as President. Examples include foreign policy, health care, appointments, etc.
But the bureaucratic decisions of a low-level IRS office? That's hard to swallow. I mean unless you already hate Obama and then it's easy.
Since you insist on contrasting Obama w/ Bush, let's take a quick look at how both handled a bureaucratic situation.
Obama insisted that what the IRS did was wrong, fired those in charge, and is taking steps to correct it.
If we look at Hurricane Katrina and the Department of Homeland Security, when confronted with poor performance, Bush insisted that nothing was wrong. In fact, he went so far as to say the Dept was doing a great job when it was clear to just about everyone it was a giant cluster #(#@&%*.
So while Bush wouldn't have been viewed as responsible for the initial failure of the department, it was very easy to see his failure of leadership in handling it.
I know you think somehow this is all "the Left, the Left, the Left" ...
But has it ever occurred to you, based on the evidence of his decisions, that perhaps George W. Bush wasn't such a good leader?
-David
A good example is 9/11. Not Bush's fault even though he was President.
Oh come'on! Everyone (with a couple exceptions) here, including yourself has blamed Bush for 9/11.. As recently as the latest FTP Commentary..
LD blamed Bush for 9/11...
Did you correct him??
No, you did not..
I hold Obama accountable for the decisions he makes as President. Examples include foreign policy, health care, appointments, etc.
Again, bullshit..
Did you hold him accountable when he illegally posted a member to the Labor Board??
No you did not..
The ONLY time you hold Obama accountable is with partisan agenda issues.. When he doesn't stick it to the GOP hard enough. When he doesn't fight for the liberal/progressive agenda hard enough..
You have NEVER held him accountable for mistakes made that has nothing to do with partisan agenda..
NEVER... NOT ONCE...
If you have, by all means, point it out to me..
But the bureaucratic decisions of a low-level IRS office? That's hard to swallow. I mean unless you already hate Obama and then it's easy.
Or, unless you already love Obama and it's easy to adopt the "HE CAN DO NO WRONG" mentality..
It's been established that low level flunkies in the IRS do NOT make decisions like that.
The decisions to target conservative groups HAD to have come from higher ups in the IRS or the White House.
It simply could not have happened any other way.....
Another one of those FACTS that you claim to want, but ignore when they show Obama in a bad light..
But has it ever occurred to you, based on the evidence of his decisions, that perhaps George W. Bush wasn't such a good leader?
No.. Because you only look at the bad and ignore the good. Just as you do with every GOP POTUS.. I suppose it works out for you because, with a DEM POTUS, you only look at the good and ignore the bad. :D So it's balanced in a partisan sort of way.. :D
I, on the other hand, look at the totality of the decisions made. Granted I place a lot of emphasis on national security and counter-terrorism issues because that's my background..
But I look at ALL the decisions made and then make my conclusion..
And the fact is, Bush did a LOT more right than he did wrong..
And many of the "wrong" things that you blame him for (Katrina foremost) were actually the fault of the STATE and LOCAL governments, not the Federal government..
I know you can't see any good in Bush because your ideology won't let you.
I have no ideology, therefore my logic and objectivity is not impaired..
Michale
I have no ideology, therefore my logic and objectivity is not impaired..
To be more accurate, I have no POLITICAL or PARTISAN ideology..
My "ideology" is more based in common sense than anything else...
Michale
There's your Democrat connection, David..
People in the White House knew a full month before they first claimed to know about the illegal IRS targeting...
This is the fifth iteration of the story coming out of the White House..
Obama's Chief Of Staff knew a full month on and didn't tell Obama??
Sheeya right.. And a Monkee is gonna crawl outta my butt, too! :D
Like I have reminded ya'all in the past.
Sometimes, I *DO* know what I am talking about. :D
Michale
Ooops #40 should have been posted over to the latest FTP ...
My bust...
Michale