General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2136754

    Shhh! Don’t say Anything

    Locked

    by av . ·

    Is this America that I’m living in or am Iiving a lie? Can I be targeted for my beliefs now by the IRS? Sounds like a Communist country or even worse. Is most of the news I see on TV leaving most of the news out on purpose? I’m uninformed. I’m a dupe. I’m fed up. I’m pissed off. WTF is going on with our government? What about our free press? Its not free anymore. No one will risk it now for fear of persecution. Our government knew Benghazi was a terrorist attack, but told Americans it was a protest because of a movie. Really?

    I thought the Obama administration was supposed to be the most transparent, ever.

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #2428672

      transparent?

      by john.a.wills ·

      In reply to 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?

      • #2428622

        I don’t get it

        by aidemzo_adanac ·

        In reply to transparent?

        When a a Republican government is in power, the president is quickly excused by republicans as everyone knows he doesn’t REALLY have full control of what the government does.

        When a democratic government is in place, anything and everything the government does is 100% attributed to the democratic president in power.

        Why do democratic presidents actually have more say in how the country is run that republican presidents doi?

        Then again, I guess it makes total sense. The left and the right must oppose, whether they make sense or not. Otherwise you’d actually have UNITED states in America instead of the DIVIDED states of America.

    • #2428669

      No need to translate

      by av . ·

      In reply to Shhh! Don’t say Anything

      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

    • #2428626

      I gave up on our government a long time ago

      by jck ·

      In reply to Shhh! Don’t say Anything

      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.

      • #2428621

        Words of wisdom

        by aidemzo_adanac ·

        In reply to I gave up on our government a long time ago

        Not words of a republican or democrat but a view from above, or outside.

        Very astute!

        • #2428619

          Truth of it is…

          by jck ·

          In reply to Words of wisdom

          I’ve been a registered Republican since I was 19 when I registered to vote.

          Thing is though, I don’t let *any* political alignment, organization, or other influence tell me what to think.

          Do I think Obama is great? Not really. He hasn’t stood up to people in his own party. And, he’s pretty much not dealing with Congress as much as he should.

          Of course, neither did Bush.

          Clinton at least told guys like Tom Foley and Dan Rostenkowski what to do to balance a budget…including to eat some crow and give up pet projects to get it done.

          But, America has this foolish, naive concept that you can still work your butt off and get somewhere no matter what the odds. Well, folks…it’s a pipe dream. Face facts. America has changed since the middle of the 20th century.

          Your neighbor won’t talk to you about something they are concerned about now. They just sue you to get it changed, or they call code enforcement or some other agency.

          It’s all about “me” now, and not “we”. That’s our biggest failure.

        • #2428607

          Well said

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to Truth of it is…

          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.

      • #2428587

        Every president has done questionable things

        by av . ·

        In reply to I gave up on our government a long time ago

        But, in the case of the IRS and the AP records grab, there is a question of the legality of their acts.

        Sure Bush awarded Halliburton contracts in Iraq to the company that Cheney was previously associated with, but that in itself was not illegal. Neither was Clinton’s pardon of personal friends. Both things are questionable ethically, but they pale in comparison to what is happening now. The AP record dragnet and IRS targeting is an assault on our constitutional rights.

        Benghazi looks like a cover up because the administration out and out lied to Americans while knowing the truth that it was a terrorist attack and not because of a movie. It was done for political benefit to Obama because it was prior to the election.

        I don’t know what we can do about the PACs and SIGs, but we can’t allow our constitutional rights to be violated by the Obama administration or tolerate a President that lies for political expediency.

        AV

        • #2428574

          How blind can you be?

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to Every president has done questionable things

          the same deceit and lies came from the Bush Administration even after knowing better, in fact Bush’s ignoring of intel resulted in thousands of US soldiers deaths, who are also mothers and fathers.

          Bush KNEW there were no WMD, his inspectors reported that they were finally allowed to inspect the facilities that they were supposed to and found nothing. Therefore no need for further action, according to the Bush administration’s previous threats of taking action were concerned.

          Some intel showed truck movement that COULD be movement of WMD’s but was highly doubted, even by insiders on the ground, Bush’s administration ignored that. The intel later fed to them by an ‘informant’ known as curveball was also questionable and later found false but it was enough for the Bush administration, Bush said if inspectors were not permitted to finish inspections he would use force ‘to ensure inspections were completed’ he actually pulled them himself when they said nothing was found when inspections were well underway, he then sent American mothers and fathers to war over what was known to be false intelligence and against the terms he had set forth, regarding failed inspections.

          Yet you complain about Obama breaching your Constitutional Rights?
          The same thing happened in 1998, during Bush’s term but nothign was done then either.

          However, I am confident that, with your unrealistic political bias, all that is attributed to Obama’s government too.

          The fact that Americans are so blindly one sided is actually hilarious when looking in from the outside. It’s as if they actually believe that one administration is more honest than the other, simply because they support their policies, like their dad did or his dad etc.

          The divided states of America, and you wonder why the world laughs at you? No, it’s not because people are jealous, in fact SO FAR FROM IT, it’s because the general populace is so ignorant and blind that its laughable to onlookers.

        • #2428519

          No it isn’t quite the same

          by av . ·

          In reply to How blind can you be?

          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

        • #2428481

          The IRS was snooping for Koch dollars…

          by ansugisalas ·

          In reply to No it isn’t quite the same

          I’d say they had probable cause.

        • #2427101

          I’d have to agree

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to No it isn’t quite the same

          Sorry, first of all 1998 was in error I was thinking of something else entirely different and then was thinking or 2003 when GWB sent troops into Iraq. Either way the point is still valid in that respect.

          With respect to me commenting on the same thing happening, it was in reference to your comments about Obama and Bengahzi. YOU suggest he knew otherwise but didn’t say anything due to an upcoming election, aka, political posturing/decisive ignorance for the benefit of his own agenda. GWB did the same thing by ignoring ‘evidence’ and moving forward to invade the country, even after stating a different course of action until then.

          The IRS comment I cannot disagree with, that was not part of my reply and was where I think I had lost you.

          I didn’t actually think you were one sided, you’ve been much more centred in the past too. Your comment seemed to be leading that way though, focusing on one president’s deceit while ignoring the last president’s deceit.

        • #2427100

          In other words

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to I’d have to agree

          You just spouted off and attacked AV without thinking or without knowing what you were talking about. Sounds pretty typical to me.

          Even if what you say is (was) true ([I]focusing on one president’s deceit while ignoring the last president’s deceit[/I]), it doesn’t matter. The same sentiment could apply to you (and others), but in reverse. While you were quick to point out the Republican Bush’s alleged deceits, you don’t focus on and condemn the Democrat Obama’s deceits. But then again, you never have applied the same standards to yourself.

        • #2427096

          Not at all

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to In other words

          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.

        • #2427098

          There is a difference

          by av . ·

          In reply to I’d have to agree

          We know that Obama knew almost immediately it was a terrorist attack while continuing to publicly state it was a protest over a movie. Thats a bold-faced lie and he never acknowledged the truth until after the election.

          GWB believed Saddam had WMDs. There was intelligence to support it either way. He decided to ignore evidence to the contrary and was mislead by intelligence he believed to be true. Thats not a lie, its poor judgment.

          AV

        • #2427095

          He knew it was false intel

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to There is a difference

          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.

        • #2427094

          A suggestion

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to There is a difference

          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.

        • #2427093

          I agree with that Max

          by av . ·

          In reply to There is a difference

          This is about Obama.

          AV

        • #2427068

          How convenient

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to There is a difference

          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.

        • #2427064

          MAx

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to There is a difference

          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.

    • #2428623

      It’s not just Obama

      by aidemzo_adanac ·

      In reply to Shhh! Don’t say Anything

      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.

    • #2428605

      Understanding powerful government

      by mjd420nova ·

      In reply to Shhh! Don’t say Anything

      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.

      • #2428603

        What no mention of the money wasted on elections

        by hal 9000 ·

        In reply to Understanding powerful government

        The amount of money spent by people attempting to get nominated for office is Obscene let alone the amount spent to get them elected.

        It guarantees that if you want to stand for office any office you have to be affiliated with some sort of Political Party and Immediately all but rules out any Independents.

        It’s promotion of the Party System for the benefit of the Party System and to hell with the population as they simply are not important enough to matter. 😉

        Col

        • #2428588

          If they got rid of campaign funding…

          by jck ·

          In reply to What no mention of the money wasted on elections

          and the PACs and SIGs and all…you would get rid of a lot of the influence peddling.

          BTW, watch the Frontline Special from the USA Corporation for Public Broadcasting about the lack of prosecution of banking executives by the US Department of Justice.

          At the end, they talk about how the chief guy in charge of investigating all the bank fraud and stuff for the US government (a guy named Lanny Breuer) left the post early in 2013 after never bringing charges against any top-level bank executive in 4 years.

          Where’d he go to work? He’s now a big legal guy…for major banks…defending them against the charges and legal cases stemming from the whole financial collapse.

          Think there was some shenanigans there? Just maybe?

          B-)

        • #2428537

          Of course not

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to What no mention of the money wasted on elections

          Dog and Pony shows make up the bulk of network TV these days. Its like watching another reality show with a good production budget.

          [i]”16 candidates start out on a journey, one will be eliminated each week by a public vote. Will the alliances rule? Will the weak become stronger and take control? Tune in next week to see who will be on the block on , ‘I Wanna be an American President!'[/i]

          And, just like a reality show, the people that win don’t go through with anything they said they would if they won.

      • #2428585

        I’ve always been in favor of term limits for Congress

        by av . ·

        In reply to Understanding powerful government

        We have way too many people in Congress that are embedded for life. If we always have the same people in Congress, we’ll always get the same results.

        Like it or not, big money controls our government, not the people. Maybe the “little people” of this country need to have our own special interest group. Together we could compete against the big money donors.

        AV

        • #2428572

          AV for AP!

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to I’ve always been in favor of term limits for Congress

          You could campaign yourself, from American Voter to American President.

          I think the government would still be biased and one-sided but that’s nothing new, for any government, anywhere.

          Funny, we just had a provincial election, some were really ruffled by the last minute outcome that went against predictions, as if they didn’t see Bush get reelected !

          As of now, all is silent again, not a mention of government and politics as we all just carry on knowing it’s just the same group of liars and cheats running our nation, instead of a new group of liars and cheats.

          Americans take such a vested interest in politics, for many it is a life consuming focus, as if they still think that every American’s vote counts.

          In BC, we actually had about 50% actually turning out to vote, I guess it shows nobody gives a rats arse which rat is in office. It doesn’t impact our news each day, it doesn’t impact our views on life or the world around us. The media tries to run with political stories but they get tuned out for the hockey game instead.

          Politics is politics, if you actually think that a vote counts these days, you don’t know much about politics. If you actually think WHO is in office makes a big difference, you really don’t know much about politics.

          Either way, someone laughs, someone cries and the world spins at the same speed regardless.

        • #2428524

          Term limits are built in to our government’s design

          by nicknielsen ·

          In reply to I’ve always been in favor of term limits for Congress

          They are called “elections”. The problem is that the vast majority of voters who say they want a change go out every two years and automatically vote for the D or the R, perpetuating the corruption in the system. Why? Because they’ve been indoctrinated in to the “two-party” system” where the only realistic choices are one of the major parties and voting for anybody else is a “waste”. Oh, and our guy ain’t so bad, it’s all those other guys who need to go.

          What was the definition of insanity again?

        • #2428518

          We need more than that

          by av . ·

          In reply to Term limits are built in to our government’s design

          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

      • #2428538

        Many have tried solving the nations problems by cleaning up the WhiteHouse

        by aidemzo_adanac ·

        In reply to Understanding powerful government

        There was John Wilkes Booth, Charles J. Guiteau, Leon Czolgosz, Lee Harvey Oswald, Richard Lawrence, John F. Schrank, Severino Di Giovanni, Giuseppe Zangara, Stern Gang, Oscar Collazo and Griselio Torresola, Richard Paul Pavlick, Arthur Bremer, Samuel Byck, Lynette Fromme, Raymond Lee Harvey, John Hinckley, Jr., Saddam Hussein, Wali Abdelhadi Ghazali and Raad Abdel-Amir al-Assadi, Ronald Gene Barbour,Frank Eugene Corder, Francisco Martin Duran, Osama bin Laden, Robert Pickett, Mohamed Atta, Vladimir Arutyunian, Jerry Blanchard , Raymond H. Geisel, Tharin Gartrell, Nathan Johnson, Shawn Adolf, Paul Schlesselman and Daniel Cowart and who even knows how many others.

        Some succeeded in their task but failed to make changes, many came close and still failed to make changes, others were stopped while planning to impart such changes.

        Seems to be that when people give up on the democratic voting process and seek other means, they end up dead or in jail. Should be enough to increase voting at the legal polling booths.

        • #2428489

          Nah…

          by jck ·

          In reply to Many have tried solving the nations problems by cleaning up the WhiteHouse

          Increasing voting just means you are bringing in those who didn’t care much to vote before, which would most likely bring a lot more uninformed and uninterested voters into the mix. That’s when the mass advertising/mudslinging/lie broadcasting usually dictates who wins.

          Even though it’s way outside the norm of what most people consider plausible, I have for years advocated the use of a draft to put people in the US congress. Make it a lottery.

          But…A homeless guy gets elected to Washington? Sure why not. He could give you a unique insight that almost no aristocratic individual will ever be able to give you on what it’s like to try and bring yourself out of an almost unrecoverable life.

          Put housewives, barbers, farmers, steel workers, garbage men, et al, in Congress…and let them decide what’s best for the country. I almost bet they’d make a lot more progress than those 500 or so bought-out drones we have up there right now.

        • #2427404

          I like that idea

          by nicknielsen ·

          In reply to Nah…

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

        • #2427352

          Exactly

          by jck ·

          In reply to I like that idea

          We need a cross-section of normal working-class people to get together.

          Why a bill can’t be written in normal, laymen’s English within less than 100 pages is beyond me.

          It’s why more and more I am convinced that when I retire, I’m taking my investment funds and my SSI check to another country. I’m not real turned on with Obamacare after it got passed around Congress and changed from a basic healthcare coverage bill…to a bill that satisfies the health insurance and medical manufacturing industries’ need to make profit.

          OK…I could go on…but…it’s becoming tl;dr again

        • #2427063

          How so?

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to Nah…

          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.

    • #2427129

      Sad replies to a great message

      by maxwell edison ·

      In reply to Shhh! Don’t say Anything

      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.

      • #2427119

        As is this one

        by nicknielsen ·

        In reply to Sad replies to a great message

        To call this a scandal requires ignoring that over 300 organizations were sent the intrusive questionnaires, that only about 70 were tea party organizations, and that the only organization denied tax-exempt status had the word ‘progressive’ in its name.

        The true scandal is that any organization paying for political advertising of any sort is allowed to claim tax-exempt status and not disclose its donors..

        • #2427112

          So Nick is on the record as one who is not troubled by this alleged. . . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to As is this one

          ….. abuse of power.

          Duly noted.

        • #2427105

          Where did I say that?

          by nicknielsen ·

          In reply to So Nick is on the record as one who is not troubled by this alleged. . . .

          Or even imply it?

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

        • #2427104

          In this case, a resounding yes

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Where did I say that?

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

          In this case, not only yes, but hell yes.

          Take a stand and get off the fence, dude, and spare me your tiresome word games.

          (Fence sitters are almost always bound to find a picket in a most uncomfortable spot.)

          P.S. By the way, this is how to answer a direct question – with a direct answer. Try it sometimes, Nick.

        • #2427074

          Take your straw man

          by nicknielsen ·

          In reply to In this case, a resounding yes

          and put it where it will do the most good.

          This whole “scandal” attempts to correlate multiple visits of the IRS director to the White House with an increased focus on 501(c)(4) applications by the IRS (most likely due to the massive increase in such applications after the [i]Citizens United[/i] decision). Its primary claim–tea party groups were singled out–ignores facts that show otherwise. It’s a triviality intended to distract the easily distracted from the much more scandalous conduct of this administration with regard to freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and other constitutionally guaranteed rights. It’s bullsh!t bait, and you bit. Hook, line, and sinker.

        • #2426697

          Just to get it all the way right…

          by keighlar ·

          In reply to Take your straw man

          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.

        • #2426684

          Be careful, Nick

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Take your straw man

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

        • #2426683

          The intrusive questionnaires

          by nicknielsen ·

          In reply to Take your straw man

          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.

        • #2426682

          Nick, like another member pointed out

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Take your straw man

          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?

        • #2426678

          Another false dichotomy?

          by nicknielsen ·

          In reply to Take your straw man

          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.

        • #2426703

          Reality check

          by aidemzo_adanac ·

          In reply to Where did I say that?

          Your focus was not that Obama was at fault, which is your fault. For you to suggest other means behind this “alleged abuse of power” is a straw man argument. Nobody else does these sort of things in office, and if they do it is to be forgotten and never mentioned again as it distracts from current reality. This all came from someone who bases his entire existence and the evolution of America on 200+ year old views of the world. You must focus on the present, if it suits the agenda. If not, America has a few hundred years of outdated dogma you can regurgitate as being relevant to the core foundations that made everything you know today. Ignore the present reality and focus on what people thought not long after discovering the world wasn’t flat. Then again if the past does not support your comments, focus only on the immediate and any variation is simply a straw man argument.

          It’s amazing how someone so misguided can portray himself as educated and clever, regardless of such an illogical and inconsistent thought process.

      • #2427062

        What if you actually elected a GOOD president one day?

        by aidemzo_adanac ·

        In reply to Sad replies to a great message

        If you elected a president that proved his worth, for BOTH sides, united Americans, improved the economy, helped ease world disdain toward America etc.

        Would you not want a longer term if he/she proved his/her worth and value at the helm? What if you had an excellent president and then ended up with the same divided nation BS that you face today, just because someone else HAD to be put in office.

    • #2427108

      The IRS

      by maxwell edison ·

      In reply to Shhh! Don’t say Anything

      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.

      • #2426702

        I agree

        by aidemzo_adanac ·

        In reply to The IRS

        to break it down though, you say
        [i]”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…[/i]

        You then add [i]The IRS is the one government agency that strikes fear into the American citizen more than any other…[/i]

        I don’t think it takes any stretch of your imagination to agree that people fear what they don’t know or understand. I’m not singling out Americans but the majority of mankind, it’s either a learned or natural trait in humans. It stretches back to the dawn of time, astronomy, wars, geography, language etc. We fear what we don’t know and trust.

        That said, for the nations representative leader to spend time working with, at any capacity, the IRS is it really something to fear? If people already fear the IRS, lets make it distrust out of lack of knowledge (more accurate?), then anyone they TRUST that associates with t hem creates unrest, a sense of distrust and fear also.

        When Dennis Rodman went and did his photo op with Kim Jong Un, it raised public fears of what he was up to. We are supposed to fear Kim Jong Un, perhaps rightly so, because of the unknown. What’s he doing? What are his plans? America has been stung for not acting against the unknown before, AlQaeda and nobody wants a repeat of that. It got to the point that every day, peaceful Muslim men and women who were US citizens for decades were accosted and ridiculed in public, due to fear. LIstening to Dennis Rodman, he didn’t know anything about Un’s political agenda, nor did he care. He was prompted to meet with him, he said he SEEMED like a nice enough man but didn’t understand or get involved with policies…and nor is it his place to. Either way, he was dragged through the mud for aligning with a questionable enemy. Foolishly dragged through the mud. ROdman isn’t about to impart political change based on meeting one nutbag, or a dozen of them for that matter.

        Because Obama met with the IRS and became interested and involved in their operations, should we fear him now? Should we fear the tax man for his unrivaled and seemingly lawless power? Perhaps.

        If this was the GWB White House, yes people would cry and complain, they will do no matter what party is in office and no matter what the issue is, most Americans are bred to dislike one party, regardless of whether positive or negative actions, and support the other just as blindly. Perhaps you don’t feel you do it as easily or as blindly as most, but it seems inherent in everyone anyway.

        British Royalty was dancing cheek to cheek with known Nazis between WI and WWII. That didn’t result in either war though.

        I honestly feel that a politician meeting with the IRS is not a reason to fear repercussions. The Hell’s Angels have a sordid history too, but I’ve known many and they were really kind, caring and upstanding citizens too.

        Perhaps it’s a mater of keeping friends close and enemies closer. TO condemn anyone , GWB or Obama or Queen Sheba, for meeting with the IRA and becoming interested and involved in their actions is hardly a reason to fear someone though. That whole blame due to association thing just doesn’t ring as logical to me.

        But I do agree, I don’t trust the CRA either (Canada’s IRS), I wouldn’t say I fear them but I most certainly don’t trust them (for unknown reasons really), perhaps merely as I don’t understand them, but I don’t condemn others due to association. That’s just the type of ignorance that we need to rid society of, it creates racism, hatred and is a core to a lot of today’s youth problems.

        • #2426617

          This is just down-right silly

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to I agree

          I would reply to what you said, but I will freely admit, I don’t really know what you’re on about.

          (Edited because I can.)

    • #2426669

      For NickNeilsen: progressive?

      by john.a.wills ·

      In reply to Shhh! Don’t say Anything

      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.

      • #2426644

        In the poilitical sense

        by nicknielsen ·

        In reply to For NickNeilsen: progressive?

        And in the political sense, ‘progressive’, just like ‘conservative’, bears only a minimal relationship to the classical definition of the word.

        Strangely, I see Occupy as trying to regress to a time when more Americans understood the social contract inherent in the American ideal, the idea that it does the country no good for me to have all I want if others don’t have all they need.

Viewing 7 reply threads