Shhh! Don't say Anything

transparently corrupt, perhaps. In some ways the world is getting worse (not necessarily in a communist way) and Obama, having nothing like natural-law morals - or, more likely, being immoral - is leading the charge. But each of us must consider how we may be contributing to the malaise. "Reformeer de kerk, begin met jezelf" is a saying I heard in the 1960s - need I translate?

Transparently corrupt is a good way to describe it. The problem is that a lot of people don't seem to care what is going on with our government. I just don't get that. Up until recently, most mainstream media outlets never reported anything negative about the Obama administration until they absolutely had to. The opposite would be true if we were talking about the GWB administration.

AV

They're all corrupt. Get over it.

Bush Jr. and his boys at the Pentagon sent $Bs in no-bid work to Halliburton, in whom his Vice President still owned 10,000s of shares in. That not corrupt?

Clinton pardoned personal friends and "friends of friends" who'd committed blantant acts of fraud and broke various federal regulations. That not corrupt?

It's nothing new. America is the land of the free...to buy what you want if you have enough to bribe someone....and the home of the brave...enough to use loopholes and skirt the law to get what they want.

Want to change America? Get rid of open-market capitalism. Put controls on markets. Don't let commodities such as oil, natural gas, et al, that are required for the operation of our nation be used as chips in a speculative game of financial poker by the financial elite on Wall Street while normal Americans suffer increased out of pocket expenses.

Until you stop letting business pull strings and have back-office meetings in private with leaders, stop letting things like PACs and SIGs have the majority of ear time with elected officials, and stop letting corporations and other organizations use other peoples' money to drive the politics of this country...it will remain just the same.

The same broken, corrupt, dysfunctional country where those who figure out the best way to get over on another person are who succeed.

Love thy neighbor, kids...not backstab them.

I've been saying it here for over a decade now. I get several Canadian new channels, an Asian news channel, BBC channels and of course the flood of US networks that we get here too (in fact more US than Canadian by a long shot).

For year sand years I have said that the news in the US is like an edited version of the real events. As soon as the story starts to make the US or US government seem slightly to unfavourable, it's edited out.

The same story on UK or Canadian news shows the full story, turn the channel and you get the Readers Digest condensed version where the US shines like s star. Even interviews, with key people around the world, are all chopped and edited to a point where it casts an entirely different light. Generally making the rest of the world to look like the bad guys and the US shine, even when it's a story about how the US really screwed something up.

When I read posts on TR, I try to take them with a grain of salt, knowing that the media skews and spins reality to propose something new to the people of America. I've equated US news to WWII propaganda more than once and if more American people saw the unedited speeches and interviews, they'd certainly have a very different view of America and US politics.

Bit this is decades before Obama; from what I can recall, this spans many presidencies, Dems and Reps alike and is not something the president controls or has any oversight on.

Yes there is freedom of press, as long as the government has the freedom to dictate what the press has to say on national network TV.

The sad part is that when many Americans see similar stories from outside of America, they dismiss it is BS or propaganda because it differs from what the local news stated. Dismissing the fact that OMITTING and EDITING is the task of a propaganda machine, not showing the full story.

Man, it's like listening to the gospel today! I have always stood firm that politicians, no matter what side, have an alternate agenda. They will say what they need to get into office and do what they really want after that, IF they are allowed to do anything.

As for the neighbours, it had to be about 10 years ago now that I said it would happen, well it was happening then but went unnoticed/ignored.

As I've always said, super powers never remain super powers. England, China, Russia etc. they were and then they weren't.
It has NOTHING to do at all with freedom, liberty or the constitution. You can have all the pride you want bu tit doesn't help.

Because of centuries of history, a country like England is now so class separated that if you were born poor, you will most likely die poor, If you are born into money, you will die with money. That class separation is still fairly new in North America because Canada and the USA are so young still. The American dream (lets call it a North American dream because it was the same in Canada too)is not longer a reality for most. It is rare now that the average Joe gets to make his millions with a cottage business turned corporation. Of course it does happen, it does in Europe too, but you can't EXPECT it to happen.

Class separation is here, we need to realize that it is now, the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, which is where capitalism fails the general population.

being very business centric myself, I believe strongly in the foundations of capitalism, however it has got to the point now where companies simply do whatever they want and play the freedom and capitalism card as needed, it's like a safety net for sketchy business practices.

Problem is, they run the government too as the US election is entirely based on funding and who puts on the best dog and pony show.

I'd actually hate to see where the world is in 50-60 years, just the last 30 have been an eye opener. A country I once adored (USA) is now just another in a mess of mixed up nations getting nowhere due to its political stranglehold, where people are no longer people, they are voters and beyond that simply a nuisance to be addressed when the noise gets to be too much.

Sad but inevitable. Yet I am sure there are still many millions of Americans who still don't see it. Maybe some real news would be a reality check, but denial always exists.

The government that has the power to give the people everything they want, thay also have the power to take it away. Want to stop the politicans rape of the public, drop the federal income tax and institute a federal sales tax. Regardless of how you make your money, you pay the taxes when you spend it. The corrupt politicans need to get voted out of those moldy seats they've held for decades. They leach from the corporations and businesses within their constituents in return for slanted voting on committees and bills. This is not representation of the public but of their greed and monetary influences. Time to stop pointing fingers and solve the nations problems.

Bush and the WMD's is not the same as the IRS targeting individuals because their religious beliefs or political viewpoints oppose Obama's agenda.

I don't know what you're talking about in 1998. Bush wasn't in power then.

FYI, I didn't like Bush either, and we've had many exchanges about that in the past. So, you can't say I'm one-sided.

AV

We need an imposed term limit because people do just what you say. They pick D or R and then we end up with the same tired political hacks over and over.

AV

The housewives, barbers, farmers, steel workers, garbage men, and even computer techs couldn't do worse than what we have now.

john.a.wills gave a good reply; mjd420nova articulated a position that could, if enacted, gut the IRS and put an end to theft (and politics) by tax code; I agree with Nick and his assertion that term limits are already imposed by election (I, too, oppose legislated term limits - except for the office of president; I like that one to be limited to two terms), but he failed to address a single thing you said and/or asked about. The rest of the replies are pretty pitiful.

This IRS scandal in inexcusable, but yet, that's exactly what the others have done - excused it. Calling it [I]"politics as usual"[/I], or some other nonsense. And they attack you, AV, someone who has, over the years, showed extreme "bipartisanship". Of course, these are the same idiots who don't apply the same nonchalance attitude towards Republican scandals (and who will, most likely, accuse me of not applying my same standards to Republican scandals, but they'd be dead wrong.)

And then there are the ones who remain silent - either because they can't admit they were duped by Obama (and his willing accomplices in the media), or they are among the scores of members who no longer come to TR.

This is the most egregious abuse of power I've seen in my lifetime. This is worse than Nixon's "enemies list". Using the strong arm of government to attack and silence your political opponents. The director of the IRS visited the Bush White House three or four times over his eight years. The director of the IRS under Obama visited the White House over one hundred times during Obama's first four. Anyone who doesn't think the IRS scandal didn't start at the top is an idiot. And if there was any reason to totally abolish the IRS, this is it.

Great message, AV, but, unfortunately, pretty sad replies.

The IRS has, historically, been the one government agency former presidents have intentionally separated themselves from. No other president has gotten as cozy with the IRS as Barack Hussein Obama, visiting with IRS leaders over one hundred times over his first term - absolutely unprecedented, and possibly more than every other president combined. .

The IRS is the one government agency that strikes fear into the American citizen more than any other (although the Department of Homeland Security is closing in fast!).

The IRS is the one government agency that can seize assets without court order.

The IRS can make demands without the need for subpoena.

The IRS can execute searches without warrant.

The IRS can garnish wages with impunity.

The IRS can shut down a business without the due process of law.

The IRS is the one government agency with which the American citizen is presumed guilty and must prove one's innocence, instead of being presumed innocent with the government having to prove guilt.

The thing more troubling to me than the current IRS scandal is seeing how so many American citizens are putting their political bias (or pure ignorance) over principle, and apparently don't give a damn.

What if this was the GWB White House? You people (the ones excusing BHO) would be screaming for impeachment; and quite frankly, I'd join you in the chorus.

Or even imply it?

Or do you again, as is your habit, simply equate failure to condemn with endorsement?

IN fact not even reasonably close, why would you instigate such BS?

I screwed up a date, end of. Get over it.

My comment was not focused on Obama's deceit but at hypocrisy of implying Obama was deceitful, as if it is a new avenue for a president, ANY president, Prime Minister, Grand Pooh Bah or head honcho of ANY nation.

You can dig and dig all you like, it was an observation not a defense of anything Obama. I have no reason whatsoever to defend or deny Obama...unlike yourself.

It was questioned right away and confirmed false before he made his speech confirming they had PROOF of WMD.

His speech writer has since come forward and been interviewed by several networks and has said that, when his team raised the question because it had been known to be false evidence, that he was told it was too late to change now.

And that's just one such example, where he was told to write a speech based on known false intel.

Again though it's not even about GWB this isn't anti-Bush or Anti-Republican or Pro Democrat or Obama in ANY way, no matter how badly you'd like to make it so. And I know how hard it is for an Americans to see any fault as being even between both parties, without pushing the political agenda button. All I am saying is that you can't point a finger at Obama when almost every other political figure to walk the Earth, representing almost any nation on Earth, is known to do the exact same thing, knowingly present misinformation.

They all do it, not just America's presidents, you have nothing to try and defend there, it's everywhere, they call it politics. If you believe for half a second that it hasn't happened during every president's term, ever in the history of America or any other nation, you are gullible and misguided.

George Washington couldn't tell a lie? Bulls*t, they ALL do!
As for poor judgement, knowingly offering false information is also a case of poor judgement, how fine do you want to draw that line?

I should have known that you and Max would jump up and down if someone was to suggest that a president, other than Obama, was deceiving people.

Nobody else would KNOWINGLY lie to the people!?!? Nooooo, not a politician, not a purposeful and known lie!

I just wonder ho you guys convince yourselves of that to the point where you will defend such a crooked stand.

Yeah, yeah, disingenuous, uninformed, Anti-American, Anti-Republican, paint it with whatever brush you want to, you should really let yourself accept reality one day though.

Don't get distracted into a GWB segue. He's been gone for more than four years. To hang GWB out into this discussion is tantamount to a straw-man argument, only intended to distract from the real question - Obama's behavior and policy positions. (And that's a.a's specialty - creating straw man arguments.)

You started a discussion focusing on Obama and the IRS scandal (among other Obama related issues), and these people bring GWB into it only as a distraction from answering your initial query; a.a and jck are particularly guilty. If that's all they have, let their shallowness reflect on them.

Don't fall into the trap; just say no; refuse to discuss GWB; end of story. If they're too timid, or too partisan, or too biased - or too uninformed - to discuss Obama, then their silence will speak volumes.

P.S. To dismiss this latest Obama IRS scandal because [I]"they all lie"[/I] is just another straw-man argument. ([I]"All politicians"[/I] is their straw man, which allows them to avoid focusing in on Obama.) And their ridicule of anyone who challenges them (like a.a has ridiculed you) only shows they have no intellectual ammunition to discuss the real question.

This is about Obama.

AV

A false assertion is made, I explained that Obama is most certainly not the only one and in fact equated him to ALL politicians found worldwide with an alternate agenda. To offer an example from 'the other ' administration I commented that Bush had done it too.

AV implied that this is unique to the Obama administration, which it is not, as per my example it has been going on regardless of if it is a US president, Canadian or British PM etc. This knowing better and saying otherwise has gone on since the dawn of time.

So Maxwell, this isn't about Bush and I never implied it was, you create such defenses automatically, programming.

For you to not see the forest through the trees is expected but in such a simple, obvious case, it doesn't take vision you just need to get over denial that Bush JR, Clinton, Bush Sr. Reagan, Teddy Roosevelt , Gerorge Washington, Adolf Hitler, Queen Elizabeth II, Girma Wolde-Giorgis, Mohamed Morsi....it doesn't matter WHOM, ALL politicians lie, cheat and steal, ALL politicians provide false info to the public when they know it is false.

You can bury your head in the sand, you can close your eyes and plug your ears while humming, you can rpetend its an AntiAmerican shot at the US< you can pretend its bias against GWB Jr, you can even suggest aliens were involved, fact of the matter is, it is NOT about Bush, I haven't MADE it about Bush (you need to read better and stop focusing on what you feel are keywords) it is about EVERY politician, white, black, red, yellow, indigo, chartreuse or checkered.

What Americans enjoy is pointing out one issue where they "feel" that someone they didn't vote for was deceitful and that makes their choices and knowledge superior to the rest of the population.

Whether it is blind ignorance to not see that everyone else has done it too, denial, lack of education or whatever you want to chalk it up as, fact of the matter is, people must point a finger and say "see, I told you so, I knew it all along, what were you thinking ?" Not realizing that they have made the exact same choices and 'errors' in judgement themselves as NO president, prime minister, king or queen anywhere in the world is or ever will be any different.

If you had a clue what you were saying, you'd be dangerous.

Nobody is creating a straw man argument. AV implied Obama is not looking out for American's best interests and that, God help us all, he may have told the public something that he actually knew was untrue. NOT a politician? How preposterous !!

The fact that it has been done during every presidential term, since the founding of America, is reality.

With GWB jr being the very last president in office prior to Obama, and a Republican, it is an excellent and relevant example of how the grass isn't greener on the other side.

Perhaps you cleverly chose to simply ignore the fact that I have equated it to ALL politicians, more than once, or perhaps it was just pure ignorance as you instantly focus on one you choose to defend, it doesn't change the facts though.

It' snot a straw man argument at all, in fact it is very relevant and applies directly to support my comments that Obama is NOT the first and will most definitely NOT be the last.

I didn't say it was about Bush, you just WISH for me to make it that way so you can dismiss reality.

In your most obvious and simplistic way, you wish to twist and turn a clear comment into a vague and cloudy one where you can suggest that something else was implied, which it wasn't. Perhaps there are actually other people who will not see through your BS, perhaps some may even feel you are making a valid point, focused on what was not said, perhaps some people are even dumber than I give them credit for, it doesn't change what was really said though, no matter how much you try to twist it.

You even stretch as far as to say, just because ALL politicians do it, it doesn't excuse Obama (or anyone else) from doing it too.

Nice cover you finally saw what was actually being said after realizing yourself that I hadn't made it about Bush, as you were trying so hard to suggest. When you realized that your preceding comment was a waste of keystrokes, as you argued something that wasn't said, you then focus on what was REALLY said and again dismiss it as a straw man argument.

Focusing on what you feel is purposeful deceit from Obama is a straw man argument to begin with, clearly anything to follow falls into suit if relevant to the straw man topic initially raised.

Of course Obama is deceitful, he's a bloody president, what else would he be doing in office??!?! Does it excuse him? No more than any other president. Does it make him a bad president? No more than any other president.

So why is it excusable from all the others preceding him and inexcusable from Obama?

Focusing on Obama's intentional deceit was the straw man right from the get go.

Someone that is more devoutly focused on politics will have an alternate agenda and will be more apt to vote based on media spins.
Americans are either infatuated with their political stand, in which case more susceptible to believing a smear campaign that support their choice or denies an opponent, or they are completely out of the loop ( I have yet to find that American). They read the BS, they follow the lies, they get personally invested into a party. IN most cases they are people who have grown up being Republican or Democrat before even understanding the differences. It's passed down through the generations, what to believe and what to discount as 'they are the bad guys, only believe what our guy says"

On the other hand, someone NOT growing up with political bias or influences, would take more of a bipartisan approach to such decisions, which I have seen first hand. What does THIS person support that directly effects MY needs? There is less chance of political; bias and false influences as they are more in tune, even if not as politically aware as yourself, to what THEY need.

So hionestly, I think the absolute oposite would happen. More people would have a more realistic vote based on what they hear, believe and want for themselves, as opposed to voting because the whole family has always voted that way, because the guys at work vote that way or because the mud slinging always comes form 'the other side' which is despicable.

The IRS mess is getting confused. No one is, or at least should be, saying that conservative groups were simply singled out. The numbers do not support that. What IS being said is they were singled out for additional scrutiny. All evidence certainly does point to that being true. The information being asked of these organizations is absolutely inane and none of the government's business. And don't forget... the IRS isn't even contesting the allegations.

This administration is hip deep in scandal. One scandal is always taking attention away from another. There seems to be no end to them.

Your antagonist slip is showing. And it's making you look pretty foolish.

were sent to 300 organizations, of which only 70 were tea party organizations. So, of the organizations 'singled out' for additional scrutiny, just over a quarter were tea party. If that is 'singling out', it's not in the math system I learned in school.

As I said, this is a triviality intended to distract the easily distracted; it's political sleight of hand to get the people looking the other way while the plutocrats take even more out of the country. And, given the tempest in the teapot, it appears to have worked.

Not even the IRS, itself, is contesting the allegations; yet, for some reason, you are.

Looks to me like your antagonism towards me has put you between a rock and a hard place: agree with me, or (be the only person in the USA (other than those on MSNBC) to) defend the IRS. You chose the latter. Enough said.

P.S. Guess which Mark Twain quote I'm reminded of?

And still based on incomplete information.

The allegation in the press is not that the IRS sent out inappropriate questionnaires, but that the tea party groups were singled out for this attention. That allegation fails on the facts. Allow me to explain it again, in simple, easily-parsed sentences.
- The IRS created a questionnaire.
- This questionnaire contained very intrusive questions not relevant to tax-free status.
- Over 300 of these questionnaires were sent to 501(c)(4) applicants.
- 70 of those applicants were tea party groups, [b]none of which were denied tax-exempt status[/b].
- A single group–the Maine chapter of Emerge! America (a [u]progressive[/u] organization)–had its application denied.

If you want to see this as a defense of the IRS, Max, I can't stop you. But if you're going to accuse me of something, you need to consider all the facts in question. When you don't, I only hear bleating sheep.

And you continue to be distracted by trivialities.

You call "Emerge! America" a progressive organization. That tells us nothing. People can want to progress in any of all the ten directions, whichever one they're facing. Even Occupy, chaotic though it may seem to us outsiders, is probably trying to progress to something or other.