IRS

Obama: IRS Behavior 'Inexcusable.' Obamaite Journalists: It's a 'so-called scandal'

|

GET IT??? |||

Sure, the president of the United States called the Internal Revenue Service targeting of Tea Party and conservative groups "intolerable and inexcusable," but that hasn't stopped an army of commentators from claiming loudly and proudly that there's no there there. Just do a Google News search on "so-called scandal," and here's part of what comes up:

Elizabeth Drew, New York Review of Books:

References to Watergate, impeachment, even Richard Nixon, are being tossed around these days as if they were analogous to the current so-called scandals. 

David Horsey, Los Angeles Times:

Sadly, after this so-called scandal has blown over and enough heads have rolled, the cowed IRS will be even more timid in denying tax-exempt designation to any front organization run by partisan political operatives and funded by corporate moneymen who want to keep their names out of the news. 

GET IT??? |||

Thom Hartmann, Truthout:

The fact is, while the GOP obsesses about so-called scandal, the pressing issues facing our nation are being ignored. 

Nelson Graves, The News Virginian:

Admittedly, errors in judgment were made in regards to the Benghazi and IRS so-called scandals. But the DOJ was completely within its rights to protect American security.

And so on.

But the real party comes when you search on "the real scandal." So much to choose from!

There's "child poverty" (Jesse Jackson, Chicago Sun-Times), "political gridlock" (Ned Barnett, Charlotte News & Observer), "the Republican party's devotion to grandstanding over governance and its preference for slime over substance" (Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., The Huffington Post), "secret money influencing US elections" (Ari Berman, The Nation), "that 501(c)(4) groups have been engaged in political activity in such a sustained and open way" (Jeffrey Toobin, New Yorker), that "they let General Electric not pay any taxes" (Michael Moore, HuffPost Live), sex abuse in the military (Katrina vanden Heuvel, Washington Post), and even "the IRS itself" (John Tamny, Forbes).

GET IT??? |||

Note that we're talking just about "the real/so-called scandal" as regards the IRS business here; there's an entire media ecosystem devoted to pointing and laughing at the rubes and conspiracists who persist in being troubled by the administration's duplicitous handling of Benghazi. Here's TPM's Josh Marshall from earlier today:

That's often why people are so surprised when something like the 'Benghazi scandal' has such persistent juice behind it even after it's not even clear from a reality-based point of view what the pretended 'scandal' is even about.

Bolding mine, for the nostalgia/irony factor of "reality-based."

Two related pieces from me: "Benghazi Hall of Shame: Remembering the officials and commentators who inaccurately blamed a murderous attack at least in part on an obscure YouTube trailer," and "The 'Truth' Hurts: How the fact-checking press gives the president a pass."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

174 responses to “Obama: IRS Behavior 'Inexcusable.' Obamaite Journalists: It's a 'so-called scandal'

  1. It is almost as if they all got their talking points from a single source or something. But I am sure it is just an coincidence that they all used the same catch phrase in exactly the same context.

    1. Careful John, you’re going to sound like Tony with his “Rush Limbaugh” ad hominem.

      1. Oh look, here he is!

        1. You just had to light the beacon…

    2. Now that’s some nostalgic irony.

      1. Yes Tony various Reporters all come out and say the exact same things using the exact same phrases on the same day just by mysterious happenstance. I mean it is not like the White House meets with friendly reporters to give out talking points or anything.

        1. Could be, I have no fucking clue. Here’s the problem John. Neither I nor any other liberal I know, during the Bush years, sat on the edge of our seats hoping for a scandal and praying, this time, the press would give it legs. I was never gleeful over a Bush scandal. I never wanted one. Every time one happened, indeed, I was made extremely anxious, as they were so numerous and typically so horrifying.

          The Republican party and its moronic followers, on the other hand, don’t have a single solitary thought about the good of the country, except insofar as what’s bad for Obama is what you consider good for the country. It’s been going on for longer than five years now. You are masturbating to the possibility of scandal. It’s unseemly in the extreme, not least because crying wolf so many times tends to obscure any real scandal, which, I repeat, I’m forced to keep an open mind about, because I have no fucking clue which one of these actually has legs, because you guys are such fucking ridiculous cynical liars.

          1. Neither I nor any other liberal I know, during the Bush years, sat on the edge of our seats hoping for a scandal and praying, this time, the press would give it legs.

            Holy fucking horseshit.

            1. Of course you didn’t have to pry up too many rocks to find scandal, malfeasance, or disastrous incompetence back then. Maybe I should cut the Johns of the world some slack. All they want is to have their long-cherished belief in the corruption and evil of Barack Obama stroked. That’s not so much to ask. Would be delightful if they put in a few seconds’ thought in their miserable lives to the good of the country, though.

              1. Of course you didn’t have to pry up too many rocks to find scandal, malfeasance, or disastrous incompetence back then.

                Back then, huh?

                Then came change, right?

          2. Got me pegged. I’m thrilled about Obama scandals, because yeah, hopefully they’ll stop him from further running the country into the ground.

          3. Here’s the problem John. Neither I nor any other liberal I know, during the Bush years, sat on the edge of our seats hoping for a scandal and praying,

            LOLOLOL Yeah, no liberal ever believed in 9-11 Trutherism as long as you don’t count the 40% of professed Democrats who did and the former chairman of the DNC who said on national TV it was a legitimate question whether Bush knew about 9-11 or was behind it.

            Then of course there was “Fitzmas”, you know the day they were supposed to indict Dick Chaney over the soccer mom in VA outing. No liberal ever hoped for that to be a scandal.

            Jesus Christ Tony, you really don’t think we are that stupid do you?

            1. That Dick Cheney is a free man is a scandal far worse than anything that’s happened in the last 5 years.

              I am not happy about the crimes he perpetrated on the world, and never was.

              1. That Dick Cheney is a free man is a scandal far worse than anything that’s happened in the last 5 years.

                I am not happy about the crimes he perpetrated on the world, and never was.

                You mean all those things that Obama continues to perpetuate? Those things?

            2. Jesus Christ Tony, you really don’t think we are that stupid do you?

              In Tony’s defense, he thinks he’s really smart and well educated. I believe they call that unconscious incompetence.

              1. That is what is scary. People on here think he is a sock puppet. No, shreek is a sock puppet. Tony is real. And he really has no idea how stupid he is. I wish I could believe he is a sock puppet. It would make me feel less scared for the future.

                1. “And he really has no idea how stupid he is.”

                  He just admitted that “I have no fucking clue.” What else do you want?

                2. As was pointed out in an earlier thread, there really do seem to be some people out there is a transitive property. Which means, in there tiny little minds, if they think the same thing that “experts” and TOP. MEN. think, then they, by extension, are super duper smart TOP. MEN. too.

                  1. There was a study… maybe 5 years back that showed the ability to do something well and the ability to spot that good skill in others is basically the same in the brain.

                    Meaning….people who are not good at intellectual tasks also are not good at recognizing the difference between good & bad intellectuals endeavors in others.

                    Or… some are too stupid to know they’re stupid.

            3. Jesus Christ Tony, you really don’t think we are that stupid do you?

              He really thinks that he is being clever when he parrots talking points he heard on MSNBC. I mean, really smart people came up with those talking points, so if he repeats them then he’ll be really smart too!
              Same with Global Warming. Those scientists are really smart. Really. So if he repeats them then he must be really smart because he’s saying what really smart people said.

              Dad lets him drive slow on the driveway every Saturday.

          4. Shorter Tony:

            Take that Straw Man! And that!
            Ooooooh! I see you’re still standing! Take that!
            Oh yeah? You think you’re tough? Take that!
            Aw fuck it, I’m just gonna set you on fire, bitch!
            Burn motherfucker! Burn!

          5. “don’t have a single solitary thought about the good of the country”

            Because if you don’t want what Tony wants, what you want is bad.

            Ya know doofus, at it’s very core, even a desire for a change in leadership is a desire for “the good of the country”. And if you want to play the cynical (and probably appropriate) they do it for MOAR POWER, some with the TEAM antics.

            Oh no, MY TEAM doesn’t want MOAR POWER. We’re here for GOOD. Your team wants MOAR POWER.

          6. LOL.

          7. The pseudo-controversy surrounding Plame doesn’t ring a bell?

            And why shouldn’t we, or even Republicans, maintain a degree of skepticism about this administration and a critical pose about the scandals outed recently? Your lot isn’t going to do it, especially if what you claim about the previous administration is true. If you weren’t in fact up on soap boxes any time Bush slipped up, there’s even less reason to trust that you’re interested in holding your own accountable.

            1. The first major scandal of the Bush administration was Bush’s “election.” It was pretty much a downhill slide to hell from there. There wasn’t room for any good humor except the gallows sort.

              I’m pleased as punch, however, that things are going so well for conservatives that they have the luxury of extracting actual glee from thoughts of the country being mismanaged.

              1. At least you’ve the decency to address us as conservative rather than Republicans. But yes, thank you. I also get a kick out of watching the sun set or rise, despite its being predictable.

                1. Who’s conservative?

          8. “I have no fucking clue.”

            Thank you for finally admitting this.

          9. So, Tony, let me translate: because Fox News didn’t react quick enough to Bush administration malfeasance (something always criticized here) your solution is to sit still and see no evil while Obama uses the constitution to wipe the sweat off his balls.

            And all these scandals should have legs, if you haven’t drank the cool-aid.

            “I have no fucking clue…”. Yeah, we know.

            1. No – his solution, and many others out there isn’t just to sit around and do nothing, but to also pro-actively ensure no matter how many people are directly murderdroned or harassed by the IRS, what Bush did, was on magnitude, so much worse – that by comparison, Obama is like Gandhi, Mother Teresa, and Jack Bauer combined.

              Anything less is weakness.

        2. Guys, there’s really no need for this. You can put an end to the horror.

          1. We could, but seriously, that was epic concern trolling. I hope his mom brings the meds soon.

          2. Can’t we instead go on an epic car/truck chase that ultimately will lead to his demise in the most spectacular of fashions?

            Of course, this begs the real question: Who here is Wez?

            1. How about a tractor pull?

              1. That’s not in the script.

                1. You people never make movies that regular redneck Republicans can relate to.

  2. At this point, Obama is pushing their heads away from his crotch, saying “not right now, just take it easy for a minute,” and they are pushing back in and slurping even harder.

    1. I won’t lie to ya, I blew a nut in that Amendment.

      1. Thread over.

    2. At this point, Obama is pushing theirTony’s heads away from his crotch, saying “not right now, just take it easy for a minute,” and they areTony is pushing back in and slurping even harder.

      FTFM, since he’s apparently not buried under a mound of rubble somewhere

  3. Bolding mine, for the nostalgia/irony factor of “reality-based.”

    So surely you can articulate what the wrongdoing was, Matt. You seem to have forgotten to do so in the column.

    1. Read the link in the next paragraph. The one that includes the word “Benghazi.”

      1. Matt, you’re making a couple of mistakes.

        1) Assuming that Tony isn’t a sockpuppet

        2) Assuming that Tony can read.

        1. Tony can read. It’s the understanding and learning part that baffles him.

      2. By focusing on the misapplication of blame in the aftermath of the attack, aren’t you being easier on the administration than the ARB report?

        1. Goalposts Forward!

          1. +1 touchdown

          2. I didn’t realize it was all about the video. If that’s all it is, then I’m happy to condemn the administration more than you guys are by accepting the findings of the ARB report.

            1. Fuck the ARB report. They didn’t even get testimony from people like Greg Hicks in there… On purpose.

              Greg Hicks… who briefed Clinton from Tripoli @ 2AM on Sept 12th? Within hours. And told her there had been a terrorist attack? And who was “shocked” when people started talking about a @#*($& YouTube video.

              Yeah, the guy who contradicted Clinton’s congressional testimony, and could get her called back.


        2. Tony| 5.29.13 @ 3:17PM |#

          By focusing on the misapplication of blame…

          Is that your current euphemism for “lying through their teeth”?

          Obama & co were harping in the news about a “youtube video” and “protests” for a month after the event… when emails from as early as Sept 15th between CIA and State showed the *very first CIA assessment*

          a) identified Al-Q-linked Ansar al Sharia as the perpetrators,
          b) mentioned specific warnings of an attack leading up to the event, and
          c) specifically said it was *planned*

          … yet even in January 2013, Clinton was equivocating, saying, “what does it matter?”

          So, lying to public & congress =/ not scandal?

          1. ‘lying to public & congress’ at this point, doesn’t matter?

  4. In August 2010, Austan Goolsbee, serving at the time as economic adviser to President Obama, told reporters during an anonymous background briefing that Koch Industries doesn’t pay corporate income taxes. That statement was made at the same time that top Democrats, including President Obama himself, were demonizing Charles and David Koch, the owners of Koch Industries, for giving money to Tea Party groups. Goolsbee’s remark led to a federal investigation, the results of which have never been released.

    In a September 2010 WEEKLY STANDARD interview, Mark Holden, a lawyer for Koch Industries, disputed Goolsbee’s claim and asked how Goolsbee came up with the idea that Koch Industries doesn’t pay corporate taxes. Holden raised the question of whether someone in the Obama administration might have looked at Koch Industries’ tax returns–which would be a violation of a federal law that was enacted in 1976 in response to Watergate.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/…..31862.html

    Funny how various White House hacks had intimate knowledge of opponents’ taxes.

    1. One of the things I adore about Obama is the way in which he is utterly discrediting the Federal Government, hastening its inevitable demise.

      Every abuse of power makes it easier to make the case that the power should be done away with entirely rather than have a different top man put in charge of it.

      1. That might happen if the Republicans get in in 2016. That would make the Dems real interested in taking away power and stopping abuse. But if the D’s win in 2016, forget it. The abuses will become SOP.

      2. Didn’t happen under Bush, what makes you think it’ll happen now?

        1. Because the Dems got into power and decided to use those powers for themselves?

          And please tell me when and where Bush used the IRS to investigate and harass his opponents. I would be curious to hear. I want dates, organizations and proof of such.

          1. Here you go.

            Even despite the fact that liberal groups have been targeted by Republican administrations for years, I should note that the (false) claim that “Bush didn’t have this exact scandal” doesn’t make all his other ones go away.

            1. The well-known church, All Saints Episcopal in Pasadena, became a bit of a cause c?l?bre on the left after the IRS threatened to revoke the church’s tax-exempt status over an anti-Iraq War sermon the Sunday before the 2004 election. “Jesus [would say], ‘Mr. President, your doctrine of preemptive war is a failed doctrine,'” rector George Regas said from the dais.

              Sorry Tony, that doesn’t quite cut it. Going after one church is not the same as going after hundreds of groups, using the FBI, auditing opponents, and engaging in what appears to have been a coordinated campaign to shut down your opponents during an election.

              Try again. The fig leafs that you use to sleep at night, are not going to cut it. And moreover, if liberals were so concerned about this, why didn’t they do something when they controlled every single branch of government for two years? Maybe that is because they wanted to do the same thing on a much larger and more coordinated scale?

            2. https://reason.com/

              This website has all these old stories complaining about scandals and government overreach that took place during the Bush administration. And for about the 300,000th time, the fact that Bush fucked up doesn’t make it ok for Obama to fuck up more, you creepily devoted little taint.

              1. The whole point is that Obama didn’t fuck up more, he fucked up about 10,000 times less, and you guys can’t even clearly articulate how he fucked up on these matters, or explain how he was involved at all.

                Saying Obama is worse than Bush is to be far, far more partisan than I could ever be.

                1. The whole point is that Obama didn’t fuck up more, he fucked up about 10,000 times less

                  So the IRS telling one church that it might have its tax exempt status revoked (note it never was) is “10,000 times less” than dozens of conservative groups having their status denied, delayed for months, their leaders taxes audited?

                  What color is the sky in your world Tony? You are embracing flat out fascism here. You are saying it is okay for the President to go after political opponents with the IRS and the FBI. Is that what you wanted to be when you grew up?

                2. They both suck in their own distinct ways (and in many similar ways).

                  Shrub, for all his mountainous shittihood, never murdered an American citizen in cold blood, jumped into a war without notifying Congress, or stole money from investors to pay off his supporters.

                  I don’t know about “worse” or “better”, I just see two gigantic piles of dogshit. I’ve never known an honest, rational person to spend much time on which of two gigantic piles of dogshit was “better”.

                  1. To be fair, Tony hasn’t spent any time wondering either. He takes it on faith that the blue pile of shit is better.

                  2. Having such perspective is necessary for being rational.

                3. The whole point is that Obama didn’t fuck up more, he fucked up about 10,000 times less

                  No, the whole point is that Obama fucked up, you mendacious boot-licking chump.

        2. Didn’t happen under Bush, what makes you think it’ll happen now?

          Tony, your pervasive ignorance and bufoonery inevitably fills me with joy. I can’t explain why it is, but it’s like watching a toddler staggering down a hall-way, straining at a mundane task and filled with a sense of accomplishment for doing it in a half assed way compared to adults.

          In the case of your above quote, I would like to make you aware of a couple of movements that you might have, in your charming childlike ignorance, missed: the rise of the Ron Paul movement & its capture of many state Republican aparati; the growth of a populist anti-tax movement called the tea party, all of which happened over the course of the Bush administration.

          Yous hould google both Ron Paul and the Tea Party and spend a few hours reading up on them; I’m amazed that you missed them.

          1. Geriatrics confused about government’s role in Medicare do not a political movement make. They just might rip apart the GOP, though, and that would be fun.

            1. Hey, look over there!

      3. One of the things I adore about Obama is the way in which he is utterly discrediting the Federal Government, hastening its inevitable demise.

        “He may be a bastard, but he’s our bastard.”

    2. Thanks for remembering this. I couldn’t find this story.

  5. I don’t get the third comic. Why is Justin Bieber holding that sign?

    1. Canadians do some weird things, Hugh.

  6. Forget about actual policy failures – nothing to see here. Now, if King Lord and Master of All That He Surveys got caught fucking Angela Merckel behind a dumpster in Cologne’s housing projects, that would be a scandal!

    1. Only if they reported it. My guess is that King Lord and High Master of All That He Surveys is probably fucking a few things that are not his wife and the media is not looking or reporting because that would not be for the good of the country.

      1. The word I’ve heard is that one of Valerie’s jobs is to keep Michelle’s competition away from the prez.

        If true that is awesome; the guy is a prisoner in his own palace!

        1. That is interesting. Of course he is away from her a lot. The entire West Wing was dedicated to keeping women away from Clinton and they still failed.

          I honestly think he might play both ways and is seeing a guy. NTTAWWT.

          1. And you act surprised when people don’t take you seriously on a potentially real scandal.

            1. Why couldn’t Obama be bi? Lots of people are. That is his business. There are a lot of pretty credible rumors in Chicago that say he was. I wouldn’t be shocked at all if he was on the low down with Reggie Love or someone. It is not like there are not thousands if not millions of other married men who are.

              1. There are lots of bullshit rumors on bullshit rightwing websites, sure. You’re really doing all my work for me, John. Indeed why should it matter whether Obama were secretly homosexual or Muslim? I’ll tell you! Because rightwing idiots who read the websites you do are homophobic and anti-Muslim. So all you’re doing is holding a mirror up to yourself with this crap. You are, figuratively speaking, jerking off to the evil, duplicitous caricature of Obama in your head. You need these conspiracies to be true. You need Obama, far more than I do. Your obsession is definitely pathological. Perhaps one day, far in the future, when Democrats are no longer winning the White House, you guys can get back to having political ideas instead of just bottom-feeding scandal mongering. While you’re defending your president from daily horrifying war crimes, of course.

                1. I suspect it would very much matter if a Republican President were secretly gay. And you would be the first one to act like it was bad if you thought it would further your political cause.

                2. While you’re defending your president from daily horrifying war crimes, of course.

                  A Libertarian president probably wouldn’t be committing “daily horrifying war crime.”

                3. “Indeed why should it matter whether Obama were secretly homosexual or Muslim?”

                  It doesn’t matter to anyone here, so what the fuck are you babbling about?

                  It DOES matter that your boy has been ass-raping the Founding Fathers for 4+ years. Go ahead, convince yourself that Obama knew NOTHING about Fast and Furious, IRS persecutions, drone strikes, medical marijuana raids (more that BOOSH!), SWAT team raids on raw milk sellers, and the Federal raid on Gibson Guitars. And that’s just a start.

                  Wipe the government’s jism out of your eyes and look upon its horrific visage you sycophantic toad.

    2. Not a scandal unless Merkel was pegging him.

      1. Ok, NOW we need barfman

        1. Allow me to stand in…

          *barf*

  7. A stronger people would’ve attacked Washington decades ago and have done violence to DC and its denizens. For far less. But this is a “so-called scandal.”

    1. Some of us weren’t around decades ago!

      And nowadays we have homebrewed beer, smartphones, and internet porn to distract us.

    2. A people with muck less to lose would. I’ve got a beautiful wife, a kid, luxuries any monarch a mere thirty years ago would envy, and access to most any beer I could want. To give all of that up to confront the injustices of the world is asking a bit much given all the years of hard work I have put into earning those things. If the kid’s future is seriously threatened, and the proglodytes are constantly poking that with a stick, I’ll have to give secondary consideration. However, as it stands, I believe I can give him an adequate educational defense so his life will prove as prosperous as my own. If I ever have to conclude otherwise, watch the fuck out.

      1. The thing is, this less limited government could take it all away. All you have to do is accidentally appear on their radar.

        1. Notice the LAPD descent into shit pantsing fear during the last manhunt? The radar signals both ways.

      2. Just so. There’s a reason that the internal dissent in Nazi Germany and the Warsaw Pact nations were overwhelmingly unmarried men and women.

        1. They were the same demographics who formed the early membership of both the Nazi and communist parties, as well. I recall Paul Johnson in Modern Times writing about young gangs of thugs who would be attracted to one party line, and switch over to the other on a whim.

          1. The Islamist parties and paramilitaries have a similar group composition. When you’re young, broke, pissed off, and have no one to fuck, it’s not exactly a winning combination.

            1. When you’re young, broke, pissed off, and have no one to fuck, it’s not exactly a winning combination.

              What does this say about the future of China considering their one child policy?

              1. Nothing good, I’d wager. If I were Vietnam, I’d be hiding my womenfolk right about now.

  8. For anyone familiar with Bill Simmons’ Tyson Zone, I submit that Obama has entered the Tyson Zone. Meaning, he can say or do anything, and it would not surprise me.
    I say he entered the Tyson Zone when he said at a press conference that he heard about the IRS scandal on TV, and DIDN’T get laughed off the stage.

    1. I am familiar and yes I agree. At this point I really can’t think of a single thing that he could say or his administration could do that would shock me. Surprise me maybe but not shock. I guess maybe actively plotting to murder a political opponent would shock me. But anything less than that would be at most a mild surprise.

    2. That was pretty outrageous, wasn’t it? The head of the IRS was in the White House 118 times, an average of more than once a week, and this never came up?

      1. The head of the IRS isn’t even a cabinet member. There is no reason for them to ever be in the White House. What business does the IRS have there that isn’t handled by the Treasury Secretary? The only reason the head of the IRS was there that many times is because they were using the IRS to go after political opponents.

        1. It’s hard not to believe that. And I do think the political use of the IRS has been common, but it’s still insanely illegal.

          Frankly, if this all pans out as accurate, a lot of heads should roll, including the president’s. Yes, it’s that big of a deal.

          1. I don’t think at least post Watergate it has ever been this common. The Obama took what was sometimes done on the edges and made it a coordinated SOP. What they seem to have done is of a scale and quality entirely different from any administration since Nixon.

            1. It does seem worse, but getting caught is part of it, too.

              I have an idea. Let’s destroy this administration, then go prosecute previous politicians if they did it, too.

              1. Works for me. And since something like 80% of the federal bureaucracy are partisan Democrats, I seriously doubt there is much that happened under Bush that we don’t already know about. But more power to you to prosecute whatever you find.

            2. I am starting to suspect that two different agendas combined to creat the IRS mess.

              1) The Obama administration is very data driven when it comes to politics. They’ve been trying to collect names, email addresses etc of people who oppose their policies from the get go to allow them to map out their opposition.

              I suspect that the admin (or a subset of its officers) wanted to use the IRS data toward that end. This is not surprising, remember their attempt to get Romney to release his returns by falsely claiming he hadn’t paid any taxes? It was pretty apparent that there was something they felt would be damning but they were afraid to leak them outright.

              2) Lerner’s crusade against political spending – brought over from her bizarre performance that the FEC where she was known to craft bizarre theories that even her allies thought unsupportable as to how political organizations must be breaking the law.

              The Obama admin wanted data. They didn’t have harassment as their primary goal (although I don’t think they minded it). They were happy to harass and frustrate to a degree that would cause mission degrade their opponents but not in a way that would endanger their opposition research.

              Lerner, on the other hand saw the harassment as her raison d’etre. The data wasn’t merely to help orient the campaign, it was to help her uncover wrongdoing, and when she didn’t find it, by God, she would dig deeper until she did uncover the wrongdoing that she knew was in there.

              1. The admin liked Lerner, since she got results, and was tough.

                I don’t think they understood how thoroughly she was crossing the line.

                1. Tarran,

                  What results? Giving them information about people’s taxes? Delaying their political opponents organizing?

                  Those two results are felonies.

                2. Lerner was a Gregor Clegane. It doesn’t do the Lannisters of American politics any good to probe too deeply into the actions of their Gregors — quite to the contrary; plausible deniability being what it is.

              2. They clearly were looking at Romney and the Kochs and pretty much any one the wanted to tax returns. That alone is a felony that ought to send Lerner and anyone who used the information to prison.

                What you are telling me is they used the power of the IRS to gather information on their political opponents. That, last I looked, was one of the primary things that got Nixon kicked out of office.

                1. What results? Giving them information about people’s taxes? Delaying their political opponents organizing?

                  Oh yes! We are talking about Obama, who in every election* leaked sealed divorce records with the intention of discrediting his political opponents.

                  These people are utterly unethical. Can you imagine Obama delivering, unopened, a letter from one of the Koch bros addressed to Rand Paul that was accidentally delivered to his desk?

                  1. * I can’t remember the leak in the McCain election, but he did it to all his other opponents, including Romney’s business partner.

                    1. And it was just a coincidence that Joe the Plumber’s personal information was illegally obtained by a Dem operative / Head of Jobs and Family Services here in Ohio.

                    2. And don’t forget that the FBI, ATF, and OSHA also look like they were used to harass Tea party people.

      2. Independent. Agency.

  9. It’s not that the Emperor has no clothes on, it’s that you are all a bunch of racists for demanding that he wear any!

  10. it’s not even clear from a reality-based point of view what the pretended ‘scandal’ is even about

    Is Amb Stevens not dead in the ‘real world’?

    Apparently “Lying to protect your ass during re-election” doesn’t count for proggies… because in *the real world*… ‘everybody does it…. and BUSH WUZ WORSE!~!’

    1. My favorite is that they are now saying, in light of irrefutable evidence of Obama’s incompetence and malfeasance, that “No liberal seriously believed in 2008 that Obama was going to change Washington. We just knew he’d be better than Bush.”

      The cognitive dissonance is staggering.

      1. My favorite is the DOS people who gave the interview to the Post a few weeks back on Bengazi. They basically say in so many words that they wish people would stop engaging in conspiracy theories and just understand that they were just totally incompetent and really screwed the thing up, as if that is any better or that we are supposed to believe that. If they really are that incompetent and it cost four people their lives, why were they not fired?

        1. Who was fired after 9/11? More relevantly, who did you call to be fired?

          1. BOOSH!!!!!

            1. PERSPECTIVE IS FOR LOSERS!!!!

              1. So you admit that Obama’s DOS is totally incompetent and Obama has done nothing to fix it. But that is okay because Bush didn’t fire people either.

                Even you can’t defend Obama anymore can you. All you can do is change the subject.

              2. IT’S OKAY WHEN TEAM BLUE DOES IT!!!

          2. I wanted the whole federal apparatus lopped off at the neck after 9/11.

            Of course, I was a teenager and thought myself a dyed-in-the-wool progressive, and wanted to room made in the exeuctive branch for the left’s brain trust. If I’d been born a decade later and came of age during this administration, I would understand that executives and their cabinets don’t need to be punished so long as they’re liberals.

            1. I wanted the intel agencies fired to the last man/woman/cisgender. But I was some dumb field grade Army officer who had to live with the consequences of their failures – not to mention the thousands dead in NYC. DC, etc.

              1. Me too. But instead they blamed, unfairly the INS, and got away without anyone being held accountable. The NSA was listening to the hijackers’ phone conversations and never told the FBI or the INS.

          3. Who was fired after 9/11? More relevantly, who did you call to be fired?

            You mean rescue teams were ordered to stand down, guaranteeing that everyone would die? Hell yeah someone should have been fired!

            Oh, wait. I’m sorry. That was Bengazi, not 9/11. My bad.

          4. This is exactly the same. Bush and team blamed a video. Bush ordered a military team to stand down during the attack.

            And anyway, for the millionth time, who cares. This isn’t a Bush loving site, so you’re “but Bush” defense of Obama on everything is misplaced, idiotic and childish, like a child telling his parents that Johnny did it so why can’t I.

          5. Tony| 5.29.13 @ 3:41PM |#

            Who was fired after 9/11?

            Uhm. I think that asshole Marxist professor from U Colorado who said, “People in the trade center deserved it”

      2. Are they really saying that? I seem to remember a certain college campus in Nov. 08 that seemed to think his election was the biggest thing to happen to the country (and each of them specifically) ever.

        1. Yes they are. And also as things get worse, expect to see a lot of thumb sucking pieces about how ungovernable the country is. The country let Obama down. No man, not even Superman could have done the job in this horrible partisan environment. Those will be the talking points.

          1. No man, not even Superman could have done the job in this horrible partisan environment.

            Well this part pretty much already happened. Why is Obamacare failing? Why wasn’t a budget passed for years? Why did the sequester happen? Republican obstructionism (for purely political reasons)!

  11. It’d be nice to have something other than a so-called President.

  12. One of the things I adore about Obama is the way in which he is utterly discrediting the Federal Government, hastening its inevitable demise.

    One of the little news blurbs at the bottom of the Bloomberg News screen this morning was something about Paul Volcker starting an organization to counteract Americans’ loss of faith in their government.

    Maybe he’ll start by killing Ben Bernanke with an axe on live teevee.

    1. Restore faith, provided that no one in a position of authority is ever held accountable for anything.

      1. We will return to our regularly scheduled calls for impeachment just as soon as Democrats lose the 2016 election.

        1. Yup. If Volker was so interested in restoring faith in government, he would want people in government held accountable for their fuck ups. But Volker being a total organization man would never want that.

          1. Intentions, John, its all about the intentions.

          2. I thought Volker was a good man. Maybe not a great man, but not the apologist for power he seems to be. Or is it a Linus Pauling thing, someone brilliant in a narrow application going full retard when he set his sights abroad?

            1. Me too. One of the few happy things about Obama taking office is that he brought Volker with him. It turned out not to mean a thing. Power really does corrupt I guess.

  13. it’s not even clear from a reality-based point of view what the pretended ‘scandal’ is even about.

    Next time, try objective reality.

  14. A classic about the media and Obama in the daily Beast of all places.

    The same journalists who did not hesitate to assume the worst of previous Republican administrations?E.J. Dionne, Walter Pincus, Jack Shafer, to name a few?are now tying themselves in knots trying to explain that there is nothing to see when the IRS probes Obama’s enemies or that the Justice Department secretly seizing the phone records of one of their peers and his mother was really a good thing. One has to wonder if it were their mother and her records, how that mother-son conversation would play out.

    “Well, Mom, you know, the president has to do these things, and I’ve told you time and again not to email Aunt Sally about my sources. Is that any way to keep hope alive?”

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/a…..tself.html

    1. What would you think of a president under whom

      What would you think of a president whose obsession

      What would you think of a president whose head of the Department of Justice

      What would you think of an administration that directed

      The president, nor any of his cabinet members, knew nothing about any of the incidents above, and in any event they were taken out of context, and his administration is actively pursuing the informants who disclosed these salacious allegations.

      There, are you satisfied?

  15. This is why you don’t run Romney against Obama. Because agreeing with Obama 47% of the time doesn’t buy you anything.

  16. The real scandal:
    Guy who made a video no one saw is in prison, after the Sec of State promised to get the guy who made the video.
    Liberal civil libertarians everywhere yawn.

    1. The freedom from parody that Muslims enjoy trumps those of bigoted parole violators.

      Or probation, I cba to look it up.

    2. Because PAROLE VIOLATION! As if that particular piece of information would have been relevant but for White House involvement, but no matter. The liberals have a fig leaf, so they’ll hang onto it and rub it until it tatters.

      1. Yeah it was pretty messed up of the administration to use the parole violations but he did violate his parole. I am sure that there was a lot of high fiving and back slapping going on when they discovered that they could put him in jail for it thought.

    3. What? The guy’s arrest has been condemned as a travesty by pretty much everyone commenting on it here.

  17. NYT editorial board agrees with Bob Dole. Republicans are icky doodooheads.

    The difference between the current crop of Tea Party lawmakers and Mr. Dole’s generation is not simply one of ideology. While the Tea Partiers are undoubtedly more extreme, Mr. Dole spent years pushing big tax cuts, railing at regulations and blocking international treaties. His party actively courted the religious right in the 1980s and relied on racial innuendo to win elections. But when the time came to actually govern, Republicans used to set aside their grandstanding, recognize that a two-party system requires compromise and make deals to keep the government working on the people’s behalf.

    [et c, et c, blah, blah, blah]

    Already, the mulish behavior of Congressional Republicans has led to the creation of the sequester, blocked action on economic growth and climate change, prevented reasonable checks on gun purchases and threatens to blow up a hard-fought compromise on immigration. Mr. Dole’s words should remind his party that it is not only abandoning its past, but damaging the country’s future.

    How did those “modern bombthrowers” get into the Senate and Congress, again? Voted in, you say? Sent to Washington to carry out the wishes of a majority of the voters?

    That’s no way to run a progressive paradise!

    1. But in 1996, back when Bob Dole was a danger to do something, Bob was a crazy, radical Republican nihilist!!

      They never come up with any new moves. How many times can they play the old “Republicans of yesterday were noble” jedi mind trick?

      1. What do you mean, John? Can’t the Republicans go back to being reasonable in the mold of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, both of whom would be cast out as big government Republicans in this new anarchistic, nihilistic Republican party?

        1. The pinning for Goldwater and Reagan, two people liberals flat out said were war mongers bent on nuclear war, is astounding even for liberals.

          1. Casting Goldwater (or Thatcher) in that mold is especially mendacious. You can make a case that Reagan was a liberalizing social democrat in the mold of Konrad Adenauer, but casting either Goldwater or Thatcher as being big government compromisers really does beggar belief.

            1. Regardless of reality, they spent 8 years saying Reagan was senile and crazy and bent on nuclear war with the Russians. For them to then come back and hold him up as one of the good guys like the rest of us are too stupid to remember what really happened infuriates me.

              1. Yup. They really, really hated Reagan with the heat of a thousand suns.

                1. Reagan was hated as much as Bush, it’s just that there was no internet back then.

                  Reagan was blamed for AIDS and accused of populating the “inner cities” with crack.

                  Before Reagan, everything was Nixon’s fault.

      2. If h&r is a petri dish, Tony managed about 14 times in nearly half an hour. Once every two minutes, then?

        If you’re of a mind that politicians should be held accountable for their lies and mistakes, your best bet is to rabidly defend the sitting adminstrators as less-culpable than those previous.

        1. As far as I can tell, people have been and are being held accountable in a more-or-less appropriate way for the matters at hand.

          That’s just not enough, though. Clearly there’s an extra element of glee/schadenfreude going on. I mean, is it some sort of secret that all of you on the right have been positively obsessed with Barack Obama and his alleged horribles to the exclusion of pretty much all perspective and rational thought?

          1. [The Tea Party] might rip apart the GOP, though, and that would be fun.

          2. Necroing a dead thread, I realize, but no, it just happens that the current president, much to both our mortification, is a Democrat. When, if, in 2016, unless the GOP runs another empty suit like Romney, they manage to secure the office, I’m certain you and I will join hands in denigrating every other word out of his mouth. Except I won’t compare the man to Obama, and hopefully by then you’ll have gotten over Bush II.

            1. I take that back, actually. By then I’ll probably feel nostalgic for Obama, just as Obama made some nostalgic for Bush.

              Is that why you’re so keen on Bush? Does he fill you with the nostalgia of a time when the left was indisputably right and mostly out of power, when things were simple and the notion of a dark horse candidate like Obama still seemed majestic?

      3. They never come up with any new moves. How many times can they play the old “Republicans of yesterday were noble” jedi mind trick?

        Let us not forget the “Hoover was a do-nothing libertarian” and “big-government worked perfectly fine under FDR through Carter, forget Eisenhower and Nixon whom we hated, until Reagan scrwed things up.”

    2. “compromise”, “balanced” and “common sense” = orwellian for “go along with the lefty”

      Fuck compromise. There is no compromising with these people. They take and take and take, little by little.
      Lefties remind me of my prior boss. He was a raving lunatic who couldn’t wipe his ass without having a meeting about it first, but he was a relentless fuck who never went home and never let up.
      That’s how liberals/progressives succeed.

    3. And none of that applies to Gingrich and the Republicans of 94?

  18. Can’t the Republicans go back to being reasonable in the mold of Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan

    And Nixon. Nixon wasn’t all bad, you know. He hated guns, and never let the Constitution get in the way of a good idea.

    1. And Eisenhower. Nevermind how horrible the 1950s supposedly were. Or Hoover since he really wasn’t some do-nothing libertarian except when we attack the GOP.

      1. Goldwyn Smith| 5.29.13 @ 4:43PM |#

        And Eisenhower. Nevermind how horrible the 1950s supposedly were.

        Yeah, some anticapitalist progtard pulled out the “Eisenhower was a good republican!”-card on me recently… claiming he “raised taxes on the rich to 90%, and hated the Military Industrial complex, and believed in progressive jobs programs…”

        I looked it up. The top marginal tax rates were leftovers from the New Deal… the highest effective rate being like 50% over $1m, but with the range in the $100s of K being more like the 40%s…

        …and which Eisenhower managed to lower every single year in office, when upon his departure in 1961 he’d lowered effective tax rates on *everybody* by about 15% since 1954.

        The progs… their attention to detail is not very good.

        1. Also, the tax code was filled with various loopholes, which meant that almost nobody ever paid that top rate.

  19. “Despite so-called scandals, more Americans approve of the job Obama is doing than disapprove”

    Really? More people approve of this jackass?

    Read more: http://blogs.e-rockford.com/ap…..z2Up2bkt3P

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.