Orwellian USA

[Night Strike]

So your answer to my question is a resounding "no" then...I'm not surprised.

What liberal groups were put through the IRS inquisition like the conservative ones were? Why didn't they testify to Congress when the conservative groups did? The Democrats in the hearing didn't call any witnesses.

[Woodruff]

So your answer to my question is a resounding "no" then...I'm not surprised.

What liberal groups were put through the IRS inquisition like the conservative ones were? Why didn't they testify to Congress when the conservative groups did? The Democrats in the hearing didn't call any witnesses.

IRS Inquisition? Good Lord, man...you really are too much. I would have thought a religious man such as yourself would have a more appropriate view of what an inquisition is, but I guess that's expecting too much of you.

At any rate, take a gander at these:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/18/breaking-full-house-committee-transcripts-shed-new-light-on-genesis-of-irs-targeting/

and

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/06/04/bad-news-republicans-irs-audit-determined.html

As to why none were called as witnesses, that's almost certainly because it was unnecessary...the scandal really wasn't one. Was it worthy of investigation? Absolutely. But that doesn't make it a scandal. Try to venture outside of your Fox News World from time to time to catch some fresh air.

[Night Strike]

So your answer to my question is a resounding "no" then...I'm not surprised.

What liberal groups were put through the IRS inquisition like the conservative ones were? Why didn't they testify to Congress when the conservative groups did? The Democrats in the hearing didn't call any witnesses.

IRS Inquisition? Good Lord, man...you really are too much. I would have thought a religious man such as yourself would have a more appropriate view of what an inquisition is, but I guess that's expecting too much of you.

At any rate, take a gander at these:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/18/breaking-full-house-committee-transcripts-shed-new-light-on-genesis-of-irs-targeting/

and

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/06/04/bad-news-republicans-irs-audit-determined.html

As to why none were called as witnesses, that's almost certainly because it was unnecessary...the scandal really wasn't one. Was it worthy of investigation? Absolutely. But that doesn't make it a scandal. Try to venture outside of your Fox News World from time to time to catch some fresh air.

Do you realize that neither article shares what these "other groups" were demanded to turn over or who those groups were? Were they just held up a little bit of time, or did they have to provide every single member's name, speech, internet posting, etc. as Tea Party groups have already proven they were put through?

[Phatscotty]

It doesn't matter which particular group's civil rights were violated, or which race or creed or religion (leave that to the bigots), it matters that civil rights are being violated on a regular basis. It's time to start chaining ourselves to hotel doors that deny us service, and to start marching on institutions that violate civil rights.

[ooge]

So your answer to my question is a resounding "no" then...I'm not surprised.

What liberal groups were put through the IRS inquisition like the conservative ones were? Why didn't they testify to Congress when the conservative groups did? The Democrats in the hearing didn't call any witnesses.

IRS Inquisition? Good Lord, man...you really are too much. I would have thought a religious man such as yourself would have a more appropriate view of what an inquisition is, but I guess that's expecting too much of you.

At any rate, take a gander at these:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/06/18/breaking-full-house-committee-transcripts-shed-new-light-on-genesis-of-irs-targeting/

and

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/06/04/bad-news-republicans-irs-audit-determined.html

As to why none were called as witnesses, that's almost certainly because it was unnecessary...the scandal really wasn't one. Was it worthy of investigation? Absolutely. But that doesn't make it a scandal. Try to venture outside of your Fox News World from time to time to catch some fresh air.

Do you realize that neither article shares what these "other groups" were demanded to turn over or who those groups were? Were they just held up a little bit of time, or did they have to provide every single member's name, speech, internet posting, etc. as Tea Party groups have already proven they were put through?

Your proving why it is so affective to claim there is a scandal when the evidence does not support it,if the claim satisfys a persons bias they will believe it no matter what evidence comes out that debunks it. Mark Twain" A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes" Scandal is a political tactic.

[Phatscotty]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

Because it's clear that your only concern is clearing CEO Obama, so yes there is also plenty of room for your own bias.

[Woodruff]

It doesn't matter which particular group's civil rights were violated, or which race or creed or religion (leave that to the bigots), it matters that civil rights are being violated on a regular basis. It's time to start chaining ourselves to hotel doors that deny us service, and to start marching on institutions that violate civil rights.

So you would support homosexuals in their efforts to be married. I'm glad you've finally seen the light.

[Woodruff]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

And you direct this at Ooge, but not Night Strike...huh.

[ooge]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

Because it's clear that your only concern is clearing CEO Obama, so yes there is also plenty of room for your own bias.

Honestly man can you ever be anything but hyper partisan and everything a personal attack...I tried with you but I give up. Isa new the truth but chose not to reveal it to promote a scandal,its that simple or put it another way republicans doing the only thing they know how to do politicize everything. Go back about 10 pages in this thread and I stated this was made up scandal then.

[Phatscotty]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

Because it's clear that your only concern is clearing CEO Obama, so yes there is also plenty of room for your own bias.

....politicize everythingn.

were you expecting something else from politicians???

[ooge]

[quote="Phatscotty"]

[Woodruff]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

Because it's clear that your only concern is clearing CEO Obama, so yes there is also plenty of room for your own bias.

....politicize everythingn.

were you expecting something else from politicians???

I was expecting something different from you,you disappoint me. I am afraid you have been bashed so often by others in this forum that you have developed a complex of some kind.

You seem to be putting the cart before the horse there...

[ooge]

[quote="Woodruff"]

[Woodruff]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

Because it's clear that your only concern is clearing CEO Obama, so yes there is also plenty of room for your own bias.

....politicize everythingn.

were you expecting something else from politicians???

I was expecting something different from you,you disappoint me. I am afraid you have been bashed so often by others in this forum that you have developed a complex of some kind.

You seem to be putting the cart before the horse there...

Your saying he has always been this way?

I can't speak to that. I'm saying the reason he gets bashed so often by others in this forum is because he acts this way all the freaking time. Everyone has instances of poor behavior...his is become universal to him in these fora.

[Phatscotty]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

Because it's clear that your only concern is clearing CEO Obama, so yes there is also plenty of room for your own bias.

....politicize everythingn.

were you expecting something else from politicians???

I was expecting something different from you,you disappoint me. I am afraid you have been bashed so often by others in this forum that you have developed a complex of some kind.

Well you don't make yourself easy to talk to. I can never get a response on a topic that doesn't jump to something else

Just sayin, politicizing things is what politicians do. You said you were in your 50's or something, right? You should know this by now

[Phatscotty]

It's okay. We know exactly who we are dealing with and what kind of people they are. This is why the IRS scandal is important.

How The Obama Machine Jackbooted The Tea Party To Win The 2012 Election…

Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan is, by most accounts, a political moderate, leaning ever so slightly to the right, and as often critical of Republicans as she is Democrats. That reality makes her position on how Barack Obama used the IRS to intimidate the Tea Party in the months leading up to the 2012 Election that much more worthy of attention. The other reason her words should taken seriously on this matter is very simple – SHE’S RIGHT.

Where Was the Tea Party?

One of the great questions about the 2012 campaign has been “Where was the tea party?” They were not the fierce force they’d been in the 2010 cycle, when Republicans took back the House. Some of us think the answer to the question is: “Targeted by the IRS, buried under paperwork and unable to raise money.”

The Democrats had been badly shaken by the Republican comeback of 2010. They feared a repeat in 2012 that would lose them the White House.

…More: “The bottom line is that the Tea Party movement, when properly activated, can generate a huge number of votes—more votes in 2010, in fact, than the vote advantage Obama held over Romney in 2012. The data show that had the Tea Party groups continued to grow at the pace seen in 2009 and 2010, and had their effect on the 2012 vote been similar to that seen in 2010, they would have brought the Republican Party as many as 5-8.5 million votes compared to Obama’s victory margin of 5 million.”

Think about the sheer political facts of the president’s 2012 victory. The first thing we learned, in the weeks after the voting, was that the Obama campaign was operating with a huge edge in its technological operation—its vast digital capability and sophistication. The second thing we learned, in the past month, is that while the campaign was on, the president’s fiercest foes, in the Tea Party, were being thwarted, diverted and stopped.

Technological savvy plus IRS corruption. The president’s victory now looks colder, more sordid, than it did. Which is why our editor, James Taranto, calls him “President Asterisk.”

It cannot be underestimated here what Noonan is so clearly implying – Barack Obama and his massive campaign organization that INCLUDED the use and abuse of the Internal Revenue Service, CHEATED to secure re-election victory in 2012. Her position is supported again by the editor of the Wall Street Journal calling Barack Obama “President Asterisk”.

If the editor of the Wall Street Journal is willing to go to print with that description, it indicates then a likelihood others within the media are now realizing just how far the Obama Machine went to defeat Mitt Romney in 2012. They cheated. They abused their power. They shredded campaign law. If the Tea Party had not been intimidated into near silence, Barack Obama would most likely have been a one-and-done president.

Noonan’s article is not a one – off here. It is a signal of more to come…

[ooge]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

Because it's clear that your only concern is clearing CEO Obama, so yes there is also plenty of room for your own bias.

....politicize everythingn.

were you expecting something else from politicians???

I was expecting something different from you,you disappoint me. I am afraid you have been bashed so often by others in this forum that you have developed a complex of some kind.

Well you don't make yourself easy to talk to. I can never get a response on a topic that doesn't jump to something else

Just sayin, politicizing things is what politicians do. You said you were in your 50's or something, right? You should know this by now

I never said 50's were do you come up with this stuff. politicizing is what politicians do? Not always at this level,things changed under Gingrich,Newt is the most important politician over the past 20 years all for bad reasons.

[ooge]

It's okay. We know exactly who we are dealing with and what kind of people they are. This is why the IRS scandal is important.

How The Obama Machine Jackbooted The Tea Party To Win The 2012 Election…

Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan is, by most accounts, a political moderate, leaning ever so slightly to the right, and as often critical of Republicans as she is Democrats. That reality makes her position on how Barack Obama used the IRS to intimidate the Tea Party in the months leading up to the 2012 Election that much more worthy of attention. The other reason her words should taken seriously on this matter is very simple – SHE’S RIGHT.

Where Was the Tea Party?

One of the great questions about the 2012 campaign has been “Where was the tea party?” They were not the fierce force they’d been in the 2010 cycle, when Republicans took back the House. Some of us think the answer to the question is: “Targeted by the IRS, buried under paperwork and unable to raise money.”

The Democrats had been badly shaken by the Republican comeback of 2010. They feared a repeat in 2012 that would lose them the White House.

…More: “The bottom line is that the Tea Party movement, when properly activated, can generate a huge number of votes—more votes in 2010, in fact, than the vote advantage Obama held over Romney in 2012. The data show that had the Tea Party groups continued to grow at the pace seen in 2009 and 2010, and had their effect on the 2012 vote been similar to that seen in 2010, they would have brought the Republican Party as many as 5-8.5 million votes compared to Obama’s victory margin of 5 million.”

Think about the sheer political facts of the president’s 2012 victory. The first thing we learned, in the weeks after the voting, was that the Obama campaign was operating with a huge edge in its technological operation—its vast digital capability and sophistication. The second thing we learned, in the past month, is that while the campaign was on, the president’s fiercest foes, in the Tea Party, were being thwarted, diverted and stopped.

Technological savvy plus IRS corruption. The president’s victory now looks colder, more sordid, than it did. Which is why our editor, James Taranto, calls him “President Asterisk.”

It cannot be underestimated here what Noonan is so clearly implying – Barack Obama and his massive campaign organization that INCLUDED the use and abuse of the Internal Revenue Service, CHEATED to secure re-election victory in 2012. Her position is supported again by the editor of the Wall Street Journal calling Barack Obama “President Asterisk”.

If the editor of the Wall Street Journal is willing to go to print with that description, it indicates then a likelihood others within the media are now realizing just how far the Obama Machine went to defeat Mitt Romney in 2012. They cheated. They abused their power. They shredded campaign law. If the Tea Party had not been intimidated into near silence, Barack Obama would most likely have been a one-and-done president.

Noonan’s article is not a one – off here. It is a signal of more to come…

Peggy Noonan was in the Reagan administration she is NOT a moderate. Were was the Tea party,the better question to ask is were was the general electorate in 2010? if you are not aware that a midterm election only gets out 30% of the vote verses a general election that gets out 70% then you are going to be confused by the numbers. Fact the lower the turnout the better republican candidates do.This is a historical fact. That is why I never tell anyone who to vote for,I just tell them to make sure they vote. No big prediction democrats get wiped out again with the next midterm.

[ooge]

John Stewart showing how Noonan has no credibility.

[Phatscotty]

John Stewart showing how Noonan has no credibility.

oh, did Noonan write an article critical of the Obama machine, and then Stewart does his regularly broadcasted all edited smear job?

how timely

[Phatscotty]

Oogey, you have a point, IF it's true that every single person involved is telling the truth. Are you sure that every single person you rest your analysis on is telling the truth?

Because it's clear that your only concern is clearing CEO Obama, so yes there is also plenty of room for your own bias.

....politicize everythingn.

were you expecting something else from politicians???

I was expecting something different from you,you disappoint me. I am afraid you have been bashed so often by others in this forum that you have developed a complex of some kind.

Well you don't make yourself easy to talk to. I can never get a response on a topic that doesn't jump to something else

Just sayin, politicizing things is what politicians do. You said you were in your 50's or something, right? You should know this by now

I never said 50's were do you come up with this stuff. politicizing is what politicians do? Not always at this level,things changed under Gingrich,Newt is the most important politician over the past 20 years all for bad reasons.

Do Democrats ever politicize things?

Yeah you said you were 50something years old registered Republican in live chat, didn't you? (that's why I asked) see how ya are???

[ooge]

Do Democrats ever politicize things? you are to far gone to see the difference. hint obvious one. Clinton gets impeached for an affair, Bush does not get impeached for far worse.Could the democrats impeached Bush? yes.could The Obama administration pursued The Bush white house for its actions?yes.Did They though no. Why? Because doing so rips the country apart,it may be good politics but it is bad for the country. My conclusion remains the same with republicans, it is politics first country last.

as for my age? not relevant but I would have never said 50's,not sure how you came up with that. your in your 30's I am guessing.

[ooge]

John Stewart showing how Noonan has no credibility.

oh, did Noonan write an article critical of the Obama machine, and then Stewart does his regularly broadcasted all edited smear job?

how timely

No. This was a while back after Noonan was over exaggerating these scandals as they broke and showing hypocrisy. Scotty by all means quote sources and articles but try and find some middle of the road or respected sources. For example if I wanted to tell you the republican party has moved to far to the right and is in disarray,I would quote Jeb Bush and Bob dole. Two Republicans.I would not quote Michael Moore.That would be to easy to dismiss it.

[Phatscotty]

then by all means, keep attacking the messengers and ignoring all the messages.

[ooge]

then by all means, keep attacking the messengers and ignoring all the messages.

if the message is trying to push an agenda and is not accurate, I will.