Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 43361 - 43380 of total 52606 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - May 15, 2013 - 07:31pm PT
Thanks Coz
You really elevated the conversation
Please stop by again soon
Credit: Dr. F.
Your right wing co-horts thank you
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
May 15, 2013 - 07:35pm PT
That could require Joe and Craig to stand down and listen....

Too busy genuflecting.

Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - May 15, 2013 - 07:40pm PT
Credit: Dr. F.
Obama is ready to take down the Tax evaders, the takers, the leechs, the right wing/tea baggars wanting to be subsidized by the rest of us

You should be ashamed, what public welfare are you providing, none, in fact, you are removing public welfare so you can enrichen yourselves,
Credit: Dr. F.

"The Conservative Movement is a Racket" Joe Scarborough
jghedge

climber
May 15, 2013 - 07:53pm PT

...yawn...

Gee, what happened to Benghazi?

Did everyone else finally figure out that Petraeus pulled the references to terrorism from the talking points, exactly as he testified he did last November, and as the emails released today confirm?

And as I posted to this thread a few days ago, that that would be the end of it, and was proven correct?


What's the next episode of wingnut hysteria to be offered up for our entertainment?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
May 15, 2013 - 07:58pm PT
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/05/listen-up-future-deep-throats-this-is-how-to-leak-to-the-press-today/
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - May 15, 2013 - 08:02pm PT

The Real Scandal: Washington Goes Nuts Over IRS Doing Its Job




Voter intimidation groups say they were intimidated by the IRS.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/real-scandal-official-washington-goes-nuts-over-irs-doing-its-job?paging=off

May 14, 2013

There is a deepening IRS scandal about the government’s review of Tea Party groups that sought legal status as tax-exempt charities, but it’s not what House Republicans and some Democrats including the President are spewing into the microphones and TV cameras.

Let us consider what may be an more accurate assessment of what happened. The IRS was doing its job. Its staff was overwhelmed by the thousands of obvious political groups that sought the cover of being designated as charities in the 2010 and 2012 elections; so they could raise money and hide their donors names. Some IRS employees spent far too much time or were assigned to spend time on lowest-hanging fruit—political amateur groups from the Tea Party movement—and not enough on the bigtime players, such as Karl Rove, who was lawyered up. And the IRS still has not ruled on the tactics and likes of the Roves (Crossroads GPS), Koch brothers (Americans for Prosperity) and the pro-Obama groups (Organizing for America and Priorities USA) that put millions into thepresidential election via groups pretending to be charities.

“It is breathtaking that the IRS seems to be harassing mom and pop Tea Party organizations while ignoring what appears to be the blatant abuses of the 501(c)(4) tax status right under its noe by groups pumping tens of millions of dollars into partisan political advertising,” said Gerald Hebert, director of the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington campaign finance reform organization that urged the IRS to reject the ruse. “It must enforce the law rather than turning a blind eye to widespread abuses.”

Sadly, there’s no shortage of blind eyes in this made-for-DC scandal. The Republican-controlled House had been hearing complaints in 2011 from Tea Party groups that they were harassed by the IRS—because these tiny (and sometimes not so tiny) political clubs weren’t getting rubber-stamped as social welfare organizations. The New Yorker’s legal correspondent, Jeffrey Toobin, blogs about that apparent irony, saying, “It might be useful to ask: Did the IRS actually do anything wrong?”

It’s amazing to see who the Washington Post quotes today as answering a loud ‘Yes’ to that question, as it reports that the agency’s DC office apparently was involved in the vetting of the non-profit applications. The Post turns to NRA board member and attorney Cleta Mitchell, who tried to secure non-profit tax status for the GOP’s voter intimidation group, True the Vote. This is truly political theatre of the absurd: a group whose purpose is intimidating black and brown voters is claiming it was unduly scrutinized by the IRS—because the agency somehow suspects, correctly, that they might not be a charity?

The Obama White House are hardly angels in the murky campaign finance world. They were the first presidential campaign to reject public funds in 2008. For years, Obama’s team has embraced any tactic that would allow it to raise huge sums of campaign money, including these same 501(c)(4) groups to win re-election. Their attitude is typical Washington: there’s no problem if it helps their side win.

That’s the real scandal here: how business hums along in the Washington political money circles and the biggest abusers don’t even get slaps on their wrists.

“Congressional hearings must serve as a reminder to the IRS that maintaining a ‘see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil’ stance on illegal political activity by tax-exempt groups is completely unacceptable,” the Campaign Finance Center’s Hebert said.

No doubt there will be more congressional hearings. But as the GOP’s scandal machinery revs up, you can be sure they will not be looking at the real bottom line—whether anyone who wants to create a political group can masquerade as a charity, and not pay taxes on the group’s income and hide donor’s names. Instead, they will be playing to Fox News, claiming the Obama administration is trampling on the First Amendment right to lie in political campaigns and receive government tax breaks for doing it.
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - May 15, 2013 - 08:06pm PT

Ayn Rand USA: In 20 Years Corporate Profits Are Up 4X and Their Taxes Have Fallen by 50% -- Meanwhile the Workers' Payroll Tax Has Doubled

May 12, 2013 |
By Paul Buchheit



Corporations have decided to let middle-class workers pay for national investments that have largely benefited businesses over the years.

Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged" fantasizes a world in which anti-government citizens reject taxes and regulations, and "stop the motor" by withdrawing themselves from the system of production. In a perverse twist on the writer's theme the prediction is coming true. But instead of productive people rejecting taxes, rejected taxes are shutting down productive people.

Perhaps Ayn Rand never anticipated the impact of unregulated greed on a productive middle class. Perhaps she never understood the fairness of tax money for public research and infrastructure and security, all of which have contributed to the success of big business. She must have known about the inequality of the pre-Depression years. But she couldn't have foreseen the concurrent rise in technology and globalization that allowed inequality to surge again, more quickly, in a manner that threatens to put the greediest offenders out of our reach.


read the rest
http://www.alternet.org/economy/ayn-rand-usa-20-years-corporate-profits-are-4x-and-their-taxes-have-fallen-50-meanwhile
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
May 15, 2013 - 08:26pm PT
Welcome to the Oligarchy, Dr. F. Orwell saw it coming.

coz

Gym climber
Belmont
May 15, 2013 - 08:32pm PT
I love how you guys shoot down the media, then post it to make a point.

Now Craig, if I had called you a Nazi, you would have started crying. Really that's all you got, I thought you where smart, banter and humor, have to do with IQ... I played you, like a fiddle...

That was worded to get you worked up.... so calm down and read my point below and no cutting and pasting or name calling, just respond with your gut... Deal


OK, if Obama is a true liberal, why pray-tell did he elect the VP of Monsanto, to supervise the FDA?
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
SoCal
Topic Author's Reply - May 15, 2013 - 08:33pm PT
Rand Paul Thug with boot on women's head
Credit: Dr. F.

Your insane Coz
I have no idea what you are talking about
Talk about being trolled

I never said Obama was a liberal, he is an old school republican
I just think he's better than Mitt or McLame

Coz, we will have to debate tomorrow, I go to bed early, and get up extra early
happy dreams
jghedge

climber
May 15, 2013 - 09:58pm PT

Requiem For A Grand Old Party - By Pat Buchanan

http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/requiem-for-a-grand-old-party/


Has the bell begun to toll for the GOP?

The question arises while reading an analysis of Census Bureau statistics on the 2012 election by Dan Balz and Ted Mellnik.

One sentence in their Washington Post story fairly leaps out:

“The total number of white voters actually decreased between 2008 and 2012, the first such drop by any group within the population since the bureau started to issue such statistics.”

America’s white majority, which accounts for nine in 10 of all Republican votes in presidential elections, is not only shrinking as a share of the electorate, but it is declining in numbers, as well.

The Balz-Mellnik piece was primarily about the black vote.

Sixty-six percent of the black electorate turned out, to 64 percent of the white electorate. Black turnout in 2012 was higher by 1.7 million than in 2008. Hispanic turnout rose by 1.4 million votes.

But from 2008 to 2012, the white vote fell by 2 million.

This is the crisis of the Grand Old Party:

Minorities, peoples of color – Hispanic, black, Asian – gave 80 percent of their votes to Obama. And while the minorities’ share of the electorate was 26 percent in 2012, minorities constitute 36.3 percent of the population.

And their share of both the electorate and the population is inexorably rising.

Obama won only 39 percent of White America, lowest ever of any victorious presidential candidate. But he did not need any more white votes, when he was carrying people of color 4 to 1.


While the total Hispanic vote rose by 1.4 million between 2008 and 2012, some 12 million eligible Hispanics did not bother to vote. And when one considers that Romney lost Hispanics 71-27, any Democratic effort to get out the Hispanic vote is going to be problematic for the GOP.

Only 48 percent of eligible Asians voted. But when they did, they went 70 percent Democratic. Asians’ numbers, too, are growing, and as more go to the polls, the GOP crisis deepens.

The Republican response to this gathering disaster?

Led by Sens. Marco Rubio, John McCain and Lindsey Graham, Republicans are pushing for amnesty and “a path to citizenship” for the 11 to 12 million illegal aliens in the country today.

Who are these folks? Perhaps half are Hispanic, but 90 percent are people of color who, once registered, vote 4-to-1 Democratic. One would not be surprised to hear that the Senate Democratic Caucus had broken out into chants of “Go, Marco, Go!”

Setting aside the illegals invasion Bush 41 and Bush 43 refused to halt, each year a million new immigrants enter and move onto a fast track to citizenship. Between 80 and 90 percent now come from the Third World, and once naturalized, they vote 80 percent Democratic.


Eighteen states, including four of the seven mega-states – California, New York, Illinois and Pennsylvania – have gone Democratic in six straight elections. Two others, Florida and Ohio, have gone Democratic twice in a row. And white folks are now a minority in the last mega-state, Texas.

In Ohio, which produced seven Republican presidents, more than any other state, Republicans are dropping out, and may be dying out.

“Eight years ago, blacks and whites voted at about the same rate (in Ohio),” write Balz and Mellnik. In 2008, “the participation rate for whites dropped to 65 percent, while the rate for blacks rose to 70 percent. Last November, the turnout rate among whites fell to 62 percent, while the rate for blacks ticked up to 72 percent.”

From these Census figures, white folks are losing interest in politics and voting. Yet, whites still constitute three-fourths of the electorate and nine in 10 Republican votes.

Query: Is the way to increase the enthusiasm and turnout among this three-fourths of the electorate for the GOP to embrace amnesty and a path to citizenship for 12 million illegal foreign aliens?

Or is it to demand the sealing of America’s borders against any and all intruders?

Just asking.


dirtbag

climber
May 16, 2013 - 06:43am PT
They used to be a party about ideas.

They were often bad ideas, but at least they were ideas.

Now, they are about generating outrage to rile up the ignorant.
Hawkeye

climber
State of Mine
May 16, 2013 - 08:28am PT
Seeing as you two lovers

coz is jealous of your relationship
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
May 16, 2013 - 08:45am PT
OK, if Obama is a true liberal, why pray-tell did he elect the VP of Monsanto, to supervise the FDA?

He's not, as you know. Anyone who thinks Obama is anywhere left of center really is a moran.

Rand Paul Thug with boot on women's head

That's it, good doctor.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 16, 2013 - 09:11am PT
it's the end of the world as we know it...

white house press corps(e) actually praises jay carney for NOT answering their questions:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/05/jay-carneys-moment-of-truth-164071.html#.UZPy70jcq78.twitter


winston smith is dead
jghedge

climber
May 16, 2013 - 09:31am PT
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/05/jay-carneys-moment-of-truth-164071.html#.UZPy70jcq78.twitter

"“It’s an entirely different environment in that briefing room now,” Jon Karl, the ABC News White House correspondent told POLITICO. “Jay Carney’s job just got a lot more difficult. He’s facing incoming from all directions.”


Hahahahaha, poor Bookworm

You mean this Jon Karl? The guy who based his Benghazi "cover-up" story on fake emails?

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/14/when-abc-news-claimed-it-had-obtained-the-bengh/194076

http://gawker.com/cnn-says-abcs-benghazi-scoop-used-a-fake-quote-505835408

http://qwstnevrythg.com/2013/05/abc-admits-that-they-never-read-benghazi-emails-that-they-smeared-obama-with/


Sooo much wingnut bitterness now that their fake scandal has imploded...


Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
May 16, 2013 - 09:58am PT
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/05/16/irs-allegedly-targeted-latino-run-conservative-group/


they even went after Hispanics,,, RACIST BASTIDS!





and Benghazi~~~

The talking points were first generated by the CIA for a briefing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Nonetheless, the emails themselves raise more questions than they answer. For example, there is extensive discussion on the evening of September 14 about whether the talking points should mention Ansar al-Sharia, a jihadist militia the original CIA draft stated was a likely participant in the attacks. Victoria Nuland, the State Department spokeswoman at the time, asked whether or not mentioning the group would prejudice the investigation, and the FBI in later emails did not object. Still, the final version excised the reference to the Ansar al-Sharia as well as a reference to Facebook posts the group had created suggesting a link to the attacks.

Nor do the emails provide a record of the secure video teleconference from September 15 in which the final decisions were ultimately made on what the final version of the talking points would look like. Senior government officials such as the State Department’s director for policy planning, Jake Sullivan, participated in the teleconference.

DOCUMENT
PAGES
Zoom
p. 1

p. 2

p. 3

«
Page 1 of 100
»
The assertion that the attacks were a spontaneous revolt sparked by demonstrations in Cairo that day against an anti-Muslim internet video was in the original CIA draft of the talking points and the final version as well.

What stands out from the 100 pages of email is just how little the U.S. intelligence community actually knew about the Benghazi attacks during the development of the talking points. One email for example from an official at the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) dated September 15 says, “As time progresses, we are learning more, but we still don’t have a complete picture of what happened.” The same email goes on to say, “At this point, we are not aware of any actionable intelligence that this attack was planned or imminent. The intelligence community is combing through reporting from before and after the attack to determine the full extent of who was involved.”

But despite the caution from the NCTC, the final talking points ended up asserting that the attacks stemmed from a demonstration that never happened. The mistake is all the more glaring in light of testimony last week from Gregory Hicks, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. embassy in Tripoli on the night of the attacks. He told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that he told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that Benghazi was an act of terrorists on the evening of the attack . Indeed, Hicks said the U.S. embassy in Tripoli believed it would be attacked by terrorists that evening as well.



jghedge

climber
May 16, 2013 - 10:02am PT

What's wrong, Rong?

No more Benghazi to hysterically rant about?

Moved on to the next fake scandal?

Gee, what happened?


Hard to believe that something you were sooo emotionally invested in just blew up in your face, isn't it?



rSin

Trad climber
calif
May 16, 2013 - 10:11am PT
we all know which lovers talked the bush administration into gutting the cia...
Credit: rSin




Another CIA Debacle

The Real Benghazi Scandal

by MELVIN A. GOODMAN


When congressional Republicans complete manipulating the Benghazi tragedy, it will be time for the virtually silent Senate intelligence committee to take up three major issues that have been largely ignored. The committee must investigate the fact that the U.S. presence in Benghazi was an intelligence platform and only nominally a consulate; the politicization by the White House and State Department of CIA analysis of the events in Benghazi; and the Obama administration’s politicization of the CIA’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG), which has virtually destroyed the office and deprived congressional intelligence committees of their most important oversight tool.

When U.S. personnel were airlifted from Benghazi the night of the attack, there were seven Foreign Service and State Department officers and 23 CIA officers onboard. This fact alone indicates that the consulate was primarily diplomatic cover for an intelligence operation that was known to Libyan militia groups. The CIA failed to provide adequate security for Benghazi, and its clumsy tradecraft contributed to the tragic failure. On the night of the attack, the small CIA security team in Benghazi was slow to respond, relying on an untested Libyan intelligence organization to maintain security for U.S. personnel. After the attack, the long delay in debriefing evacuated personnel contributed to the confusing assessments.

The Senate intelligence committee should investigate why the State Department changed the CIA analysis of Benghazi before it went to the Hill. The Congress is entitled to the same intelligence analysis that is provided to the White House–with few exceptions. In the wake of the intelligence hearings in the mid-1970s in response to intelligence abuses during the Vietnam War, the CIA lost its exclusive relationship with the president and had to accept a rough equilibrium between the White House and the Congress. It serves both branches of government, and is accountable to both. It cannot act on presidential requests without clearance from the Congress.

The success of the Bush and Obama administrations in weakening the CIA’s OIG has ensured that CIA failures have gone unexposed and uncorrected. The statutory Inspector General was created in the wake of the Iran-Contra scandal to assure integrity at the CIA. After the office published reports critical of both CIA’s performance before 9/11 and its implementation of the renditions and detentions program, however, the CIA’s operations managers wanted the office shut down.

Successive directors have complied. CIA director Michael Hayden authorized an internal review of the OIG in 2007 that had a chilling effect on the staff. CIA director Leon Panetta went even further, appointing an Inspector General in 2009 who lacked both professional experience in managing intelligence investigations as well as the watchdog mentally that the position requires. When nine CIA operatives and contractors were killed by a suicide bomber at a CIA base in eastern Afghanistan, Panetta proclaimed that the bombing involved no operational failures and allowed the operational bureau responsible for the program to investigate itself rather than pursue an IG inspection. Even when the OIG documented Agency lies to the Congress concerning a secret drug interdiction program in Peru, no significant disciplinary action was taken.

As a result, the Agency’s flaws have gone uncorrected. The politicization of intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq War in 2003 was the worst intelligence scandal in the CIA’s history, but there were no penalties for those who supported CIA director George Tenet’s efforts to make phony intelligence a “slam dunk” as well as Deputy Director John McLaughlin’s “slam dunk” briefing to President George Bush. The CIA’s production of an unclassified white paper for the Congress on the eve of the vote to authorize force in October 2002 marked the misuse of classified information to influence congressional opinion, but there were no consequences.

The destruction of the torture tapes, a clear case of obstruction of justice in view of White House orders to protect the tapes, led to no recriminations at the CIA. The controversy over the use of drone aircraft; the intelligence failure that accompanied the Arab Spring in 2011; and the inadequate security presence in Libya in the wake of the killing of Muammar Gaddafi have not received the necessary scrutiny. Any CIA component in the Middle East and North Africa is a likely target of militant and terrorist organizations because of the Agency’s key role in the Bush administration’s war on terror and the Obama administration’s increasingly widespread use of drone aircraft.

The ability of the Nigerian underwear bomber to board a commercial airline in December 2009 marked an intelligence failure for the entire intelligence community, but there was no serious attempt to examine the breakdown in coordination between five or six intelligence agencies, let alone pursue accountability. Instead, President Obama halted all efforts to return home Yemeni prisoners at Guantanamo. Like the use of the drone, the Guantanamo prison recruits far more recruits for terrorism than any other U.S. action.

If more attention is not given to the biblical inscription at the entrance to the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, that only the “truth will set you free,” the decline of the CIA and the intelligence community will continue.

Melvin A. Goodman, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, was an analyst at the CIA for 24 years. He is the author of the recently published National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism (City Lights Publishers)


http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/05/15/the-real-benghazi-scandal/
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 16, 2013 - 11:06am PT
corrupt? possibly

incompetent? certainly


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/some-question-whether-ap-leak-on-al-qaeda-plot-put-us-at-risk/2013/05/15/47003ed4-bd77-11e2-89c9-3be8095fe767_print.html

Messages 43361 - 43380 of total 52606 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews