If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   When Charles Rangel tells you to come clean, you know it must be bad   (politico.com) divider line 178
    More: Ironic, Charles Rangel, obama, security question, Ways and Means Committee, McConnell v. FEC  
•       •       •

2257 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 May 2013 at 2:54 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



178 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-15 05:29:39 PM

The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: The poor schmuck who got Obama'd because of his youtube video must have gotten one HELL of an audit.

Is that the guy who violated his parole by posting a video on Youtube?

Yup.

So Obama made him violate his parole?

No.  He did that on his own.  Obama/Hillary blessed him with the blame for Benghazi.


Well to be fair, he was responsible for what happened in Cairo that same day.
 
2013-05-15 05:30:38 PM

Isitoveryet: JustGetItRight: Isitoveryet: during previous administrations none of this would be an governmental overreach & if you had a problem with it, you would be asked what you were hiding.

An Attorney General from the previous administration has stated they considered the same course of action and decided it was too much.

I would like to know more.

The_Forensicator: Good news is, Barack never knows or finds out about shiat until he sees it on the news.  That there is some solid President'n.

One would expect more from a omniscient being huh?


I think the White House Chief of Staff, McDonough, is the critical moran here.
 
2013-05-15 05:31:01 PM
 
2013-05-15 05:32:26 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/15/exclusive-prominent-cathol i c-prof-claims-irs-audited-her-after-speaking-out-against-obama-and-dem anded-to-know-who-was-paying-her/

Nothing to see here.  Move along.


The Blaze huh?

Sounds legit.
 
2013-05-15 05:32:45 PM

Nemo's Brother: neversubmit: JustGetItRight: I think the AP thing's got the potential to have a huge impact.

It is one thing to have Drudge linking critical stories from right wing sites. It will be quite another if suddenly those links are AP instead of infowars. Nothing will come of it from a legal standpoint, but if the press gets a real mad on they'll make life a living hell on the administration.

The Corporations are just reminding Mr. Obama who's the boss.

[www.bartcop.com image 500x597]

Thanks to Bill Clinton and the Telecommunications Act of 96.  Clinton farked us all in the name of his Walmart stock and love of China.


Heh, came for this.
 
2013-05-15 05:34:14 PM
LOL the Blaze!!! holy crap.

Where if you own the site, your face is front page material all day, everyday.

/shakes head
 
2013-05-15 05:34:15 PM
Congress spends a decade completely trampling on our rights, then they are shocked, SHOCKED when the laws they passed are used.
 
2013-05-15 05:35:19 PM

karmaceutical: This whole mess is getting out of hand.  Boehner is calling for criminal charges and prison sentences for guilty parties.  Guilty of what, I don't know.  Guilty of testing the veracity of claims made on an application I guess.  The GOP has no idea when to take their foot off the gas.


I am not one to typically wander into the derp that is a political discussion on Fark, but if you can't see why a government agency singling out groups on the basis of political affiliation is anathema to core American ideals, then what are you even doing here?  You are just contributing to the derp.  It is so central, that the founding fathers addressed it in the very first amendment to the Constitution. It grants citizens the right to speak freely and openly about their government without fear of reprisal by that government.  That right was apparently infringed here. Here, it looks like the government took sides and persecuted individuals/groups on the basis of political affiliation.  That shiat will fly in places like Russia and Iran, but it shouldn't here.
 
2013-05-15 05:36:30 PM

Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: The poor schmuck who got Obama'd because of his youtube video must have gotten one HELL of an audit.

Is that the guy who violated his parole by posting a video on Youtube?

Yup.

So Obama made him violate his parole?

No.  He did that on his own.  Obama/Hillary blessed him with the blame for Benghazi.

Well to be fair, he was responsible for what happened in Cairo that same day.


Angry Buddha: Isitoveryet: JustGetItRight: Isitoveryet: during previous administrations none of this would be an governmental overreach & if you had a problem with it, you would be asked what you were hiding.

An Attorney General from the previous administration has stated they considered the same course of action and decided it was too much.

I would like to know more.

The_Forensicator: Good news is, Barack never knows or finds out about shiat until he sees it on the news.  That there is some solid President'n.

One would expect more from a omniscient being huh?

I think the White House Chief of Staff, McDonough, is the critical moran here.


I really don't know.  But all poking fun and whatnot aside, something ain't right here.  Who knows if we'll find out, or it will just be a resignation/fall on sword type of deal.  All I know is this shiat is seriously cutting into WEINER for MAYOR links.
 
2013-05-15 05:39:15 PM

Pumpernickel bread: karmaceutical: This whole mess is getting out of hand.  Boehner is calling for criminal charges and prison sentences for guilty parties.  Guilty of what, I don't know.  Guilty of testing the veracity of claims made on an application I guess.  The GOP has no idea when to take their foot off the gas.

I am not one to typically wander into the derp that is a political discussion on Fark, but if you can't see why a government agency singling out groups on the basis of political affiliation is anathema to core American ideals, then what are you even doing here?  You are just contributing to the derp.  It is so central, that the founding fathers addressed it in the very first amendment to the Constitution. It grants citizens the right to speak freely and openly about their government without fear of reprisal by that government.  That right was apparently infringed here. Here, it looks like the government took sides and persecuted individuals/groups on the basis of political affiliation.  That shiat will fly in places like Russia and Iran, but it shouldn't here.


It works pretty well if ya don't get caught, or you have the passive endorsement of segments of the population.
 
2013-05-15 05:40:54 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/15/exclusive-prominent-cathol i c-prof-claims-irs-audited-her-after-speaking-out-against-obama-and-dem anded-to-know-who-was-paying-her/

Nothing to see here.  Move along.


Just like when Glenn Beck gave us the real scoop on the Boston bombing.
 
2013-05-15 05:41:13 PM
This has to be a tough one for right wingers. On one hand, the dirty liberal AP is conspiring with terrorists. On the other hand, this makes Obama look bad.

They need to count on their constituent's willful ignorance to pull this one off.

/not a tough sell
 
2013-05-15 05:42:22 PM

mediablitz: This has to be a tough one for right wingers. On one hand, the dirty liberal AP is conspiring with terrorists. On the other hand, this makes Obama look bad.

They need to count on their constituent's willful ignorance to pull this one off.

/not a tough sell


You are upset about?  It's hard to tell.
 
2013-05-15 05:43:14 PM
I'd also add that if this happened under Bush, right wingers would be saying anyone supporting the AP hates America and supports terrorism.

But notice how liberals are condemning this? Yeah, both sides are the same...
 
2013-05-15 05:44:15 PM

The_Forensicator: mediablitz: This has to be a tough one for right wingers. On one hand, the dirty liberal AP is conspiring with terrorists. On the other hand, this makes Obama look bad.

They need to count on their constituent's willful ignorance to pull this one off.

/not a tough sell

You are upset about?  It's hard to tell.


No, he is going to defend it.
 
2013-05-15 05:44:59 PM

The_Forensicator: mediablitz: This has to be a tough one for right wingers. On one hand, the dirty liberal AP is conspiring with terrorists. On the other hand, this makes Obama look bad.

They need to count on their constituent's willful ignorance to pull this one off.

/not a tough sell

You are upset about?  It's hard to tell.


In your world, is one required to always be upset? Poor, poor you...
 
2013-05-15 05:45:04 PM

Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: The poor schmuck who got Obama'd because of his youtube video must have gotten one HELL of an audit.

Is that the guy who violated his parole by posting a video on Youtube?

Yup.

So Obama made him violate his parole?

No.  He did that on his own.  Obama/Hillary blessed him with the blame for Benghazi.

Well to be fair, he was responsible for what happened in Cairo that same day.


No.  To be fair, the people in Cairo were responsible for what happened in Cairo.
Heck, I was upset that Angie didn't make the top two in American Idol, but I didn't engage in violent protests over it.
 
2013-05-15 05:46:15 PM

Pumpernickel bread: karmaceutical: This whole mess is getting out of hand.  Boehner is calling for criminal charges and prison sentences for guilty parties.  Guilty of what, I don't know.  Guilty of testing the veracity of claims made on an application I guess.  The GOP has no idea when to take their foot off the gas.

I am not one to typically wander into the derp that is a political discussion on Fark, but if you can't see why a government agency singling out groups on the basis of political affiliation is anathema to core American ideals, then what are you even doing here?  You are just contributing to the derp.  It is so central, that the founding fathers addressed it in the very first amendment to the Constitution. It grants citizens the right to speak freely and openly about their government without fear of reprisal by that government.  That right was apparently infringed here. Here, it looks like the government took sides and persecuted individuals/groups on the basis of political affiliation.  That shiat will fly in places like Russia and Iran, but it shouldn't here.


You sound far too reasonable. Shoo.
 
2013-05-15 05:46:31 PM

I alone am best: The_Forensicator: mediablitz: This has to be a tough one for right wingers. On one hand, the dirty liberal AP is conspiring with terrorists. On the other hand, this makes Obama look bad.

They need to count on their constituent's willful ignorance to pull this one off.

/not a tough sell

You are upset about?  It's hard to tell.

No, he is going to defend it.


Yes, my pointing out earlier how our rights have been trampled for a decade and NOW Congress is upset is me defending.

Simple world you live in. Politics tab must be your second home.
 
2013-05-15 05:47:37 PM

Mrtraveler01: Tumunga: So now, if you don't think Benghazi is a scandal, just look how thick the wool sheet is that Obama threw over your eyes.

This is about the IRS scandal.

Benghazi wishes it could be a scandal on the scale of the IRS scandal.

Wake me up when you have any evidence of wrongdoing as far as Benghazi is concerned.


Just look at what you're paying attention to now...The One has blown the biggest smoke screee outa his ass.
 
2013-05-15 05:48:32 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: The poor schmuck who got Obama'd because of his youtube video must have gotten one HELL of an audit.

Is that the guy who violated his parole by posting a video on Youtube?

Yup.

So Obama made him violate his parole?

No.  He did that on his own.  Obama/Hillary blessed him with the blame for Benghazi.

Well to be fair, he was responsible for what happened in Cairo that same day.

No.  To be fair, the people in Cairo were responsible for what happened in Cairo.
Heck, I was upset that Angie didn't make the top two in American Idol, but I didn't engage in violent protests over it.


Well one thing is for certain. Making a video to troll the Islamic community while on probation for internet fraud isn't the smartest thing in the world to do.

I guess we can all agree that the video guy is a dumbass then correct?
 
2013-05-15 05:48:34 PM

The_Forensicator: But all poking fun and whatnot aside, something ain't right here. Who knows if we'll find out, or it will just be a resignation/fall on sword type of deal.


If you're talking about the AP thing, it's unlikely that anybody will resign, chiefly because it's doesn't look like there was any wrongdoing from the DOJ to begin with. The letter that Cole wrote to the AP explains (within the usual limitations of any comment on an ongoing investigation) what was done and why it was done.
 
2013-05-15 05:49:12 PM

Tumunga: Mrtraveler01: Tumunga: So now, if you don't think Benghazi is a scandal, just look how thick the wool sheet is that Obama threw over your eyes.

This is about the IRS scandal.

Benghazi wishes it could be a scandal on the scale of the IRS scandal.

Wake me up when you have any evidence of wrongdoing as far as Benghazi is concerned.

Just look at what you're paying attention to now...The One has blown the biggest smoke screee outa his ass.


The IRS thing and Benghazi are all tied together?
 
2013-05-15 05:49:18 PM

mediablitz: I alone am best: The_Forensicator: mediablitz: This has to be a tough one for right wingers. On one hand, the dirty liberal AP is conspiring with terrorists. On the other hand, this makes Obama look bad.

They need to count on their constituent's willful ignorance to pull this one off.

/not a tough sell

You are upset about?  It's hard to tell.

No, he is going to defend it.

Yes, my pointing out earlier how our rights have been trampled for a decade and NOW Congress is upset is me defending.

Simple world you live in. Politics tab must be your second home.


Relax and breathe slowly..No one is going to call Barack any bad names ok?  Everything is juuuuust fine.  Shhh.
 
2013-05-15 05:50:06 PM

Tumunga: Just look at what you're paying attention to now...The One has blown the biggest smoke screee outa his ass.


it's like the President has a laser pointer & the kittens just don't have a fighting chance nor do they have the attention span to complete taking a shiat.

or, all this crap is just B.S. to start with.
 
2013-05-15 05:50:22 PM

Cletus C.: Pumpernickel bread: karmaceutical: This whole mess is getting out of hand.  Boehner is calling for criminal charges and prison sentences for guilty parties.  Guilty of what, I don't know.  Guilty of testing the veracity of claims made on an application I guess.  The GOP has no idea when to take their foot off the gas.

I am not one to typically wander into the derp that is a political discussion on Fark, but if you can't see why a government agency singling out groups on the basis of political affiliation is anathema to core American ideals, then what are you even doing here?  You are just contributing to the derp.  It is so central, that the founding fathers addressed it in the very first amendment to the Constitution. It grants citizens the right to speak freely and openly about their government without fear of reprisal by that government.  That right was apparently infringed here. Here, it looks like the government took sides and persecuted individuals/groups on the basis of political affiliation.  That shiat will fly in places like Russia and Iran, but it shouldn't here.

You sound far too reasonable. Shoo.


yeah, seriously.  You won't fit in here if you care about the Constitution (watch out for that audit) and aren't rabidly anti-Tea Party.
 
2013-05-15 05:51:37 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: You won't fit in here if you care about the Constitution (watch out for that audit)


The Tea Party doesn't care about it either. ;)

Well any of them minus the 2nd Amendment that is.
 
2013-05-15 05:53:06 PM

Pumpernickel bread: karmaceutical: This whole mess is getting out of hand.  Boehner is calling for criminal charges and prison sentences for guilty parties.  Guilty of what, I don't know.  Guilty of testing the veracity of claims made on an application I guess.  The GOP has no idea when to take their foot off the gas.

I am not one to typically wander into the derp that is a political discussion on Fark, but if you can't see why a government agency singling out groups on the basis of political affiliation is anathema to core American ideals, then what are you even doing here?  You are just contributing to the derp.  It is so central, that the founding fathers addressed it in the very first amendment to the Constitution. It grants citizens the right to speak freely and openly about their government without fear of reprisal by that government.  That right was apparently infringed here. Here, it looks like the government took sides and persecuted individuals/groups on the basis of political affiliation.  That shiat will fly in places like Russia and Iran, but it shouldn't here.


His point was about whether or not there was any criminal wrongdoing here, which is entirely separate from vague discussions about whether or not what happened was "anathema to core American ideals".
 
2013-05-15 05:54:23 PM

Isitoveryet: there's really nothing in there that is damning of what is currently going on.


I didn't say there was, and more to the point the DOJ very likely didn't do one single thing that was against the law.

What they did do was shait all over what has been a pretty friendly media.  If they decide to become unfriendly I don't think the administration will fare very well at all.

To be blunt, Republicans are pretty accustomed to facing an unfriendly press.  As Carney's been demonstrating on a pretty regular basis these days, outside of Fox and Drudge, that's a foreign concept to the Obama administration.
 
2013-05-15 05:57:12 PM

JustGetItRight: What they did do was shait all over what has been a pretty friendly media.


If the media (or, at the very least, the AP) had been "pretty friendly" to the administration, there wouldn't be any need for these subpoenas in the first place.
 
2013-05-15 05:58:11 PM

mediablitz: I'd also add that if this happened under Bush, right wingers would be saying anyone supporting the AP hates America and supports terrorism.

But notice how liberals are condemning this? Yeah, both sides are the same...


How do you arrive at these conclusions?  What you say doesn't make any sense.  I think your perception of those with political views different from your own is wildly different than how they really are.   Take me for example.  I lean more right than left, but I date a Muslim woman from the Middle East.  Do I fit into your narrow view of Republicans, or were you certain that only liberals could be accepting of those from other ethnicities and faiths?
 
2013-05-15 05:58:33 PM

Mrtraveler01: Well one thing is for certain. Making a video to troll the Islamic community while on probation for internet fraud isn't the smartest thing in the world to do.

I guess we can all agree that the video guy is a dumbass then correct?


No, it's not smart, I suppose, but making a troll video wasn't what got him in trouble.  It was using a pseudonym in making it.  One of the terms of his probation was to not use any fictitious names, but ordinarily, that is to prevent someone from engaging in fraud.  Here, he was just making a movie and exercising his First Amendment rights.  So, yes, he did use a pseudonym (not uncommon for writers or other artists) but not in connection with anything outright illegal.  Yes, he's a dumbass, but other than technically violating the terms of his probation, he wasn't doing anything criminal.  And then the Administration selling that as some sort of catalyst for simultaneous attacks on US interests in separate countries on 9/11 was pretty pathetic.
 
2013-05-15 05:59:43 PM

Biological Ali: Pumpernickel bread: karmaceutical: This whole mess is getting out of hand.  Boehner is calling for criminal charges and prison sentences for guilty parties.  Guilty of what, I don't know.  Guilty of testing the veracity of claims made on an application I guess.  The GOP has no idea when to take their foot off the gas.

I am not one to typically wander into the derp that is a political discussion on Fark, but if you can't see why a government agency singling out groups on the basis of political affiliation is anathema to core American ideals, then what are you even doing here?  You are just contributing to the derp.  It is so central, that the founding fathers addressed it in the very first amendment to the Constitution. It grants citizens the right to speak freely and openly about their government without fear of reprisal by that government.  That right was apparently infringed here. Here, it looks like the government took sides and persecuted individuals/groups on the basis of political affiliation.  That shiat will fly in places like Russia and Iran, but it shouldn't here.

His point was about whether or not there was any criminal wrongdoing here, which is entirely separate from vague discussions about whether or not what happened was "anathema to core American ideals".


Well, the Constitution does happen to be law.  It isn't just a bunch of suggestions.
 
2013-05-15 06:00:37 PM

mediablitz: I alone am best: The_Forensicator: mediablitz: This has to be a tough one for right wingers. On one hand, the dirty liberal AP is conspiring with terrorists. On the other hand, this makes Obama look bad.

They need to count on their constituent's willful ignorance to pull this one off.

/not a tough sell

You are upset about?  It's hard to tell.

No, he is going to defend it.

Yes, my pointing out earlier how our rights have been trampled for a decade and NOW Congress is upset is me defending.

Simple world you live in. Politics tab must be your second home.


Deflect some more.

OH YEAH SO WHAT ABOUT THIS HERE LOOK OVER THERE AT THAT! WHAT ABOUT THAT THING THAT IS NOT THIS THING HERE? WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT! ILL TELL YOU WHAT, TERRORISM THATS WHAT! POOR SOUL.....
 
2013-05-15 06:00:51 PM

Nabb1: And then the Administration selling that as some sort of catalyst for simultaneous attacks on US interests in separate countries on 9/11 was pretty pathetic.


So what were the other riots in separate countries about then?
 
2013-05-15 06:00:58 PM

Nabb1: No, it's not smart, I suppose, but making a troll video wasn't what got him in trouble. It was using a pseudonym in making it. One of the terms of his probation was to not use any fictitious names, but ordinarily, that is to prevent someone from engaging in fraud. Here, he was just making a movie and exercising his First Amendment rights. So, yes, he did use a pseudonym (not uncommon for writers or other artists) but not in connection with anything outright illegal. Yes, he's a dumbass, but other than technically violating the terms of his probation, he wasn't doing anything criminal. And then the Administration selling that as some sort of catalyst for simultaneous attacks on US interests in separate countries on 9/11 was pretty pathetic.


Wait, what? Should the administration have lied and said the protests were over something else?
 
2013-05-15 06:01:01 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: yeah, seriously. You won't fit in here if you care about the Constitution (watch out for that audit) and aren't rabidly anti-Tea Party.


I am sorry you fell for the big lie that anyone other than GOP goons care about the right every man woman & child here in America are afforded.
It's not your fault, you just need to question your authoritarian figures from time to time, maybe consider another news source that doesn't need to scare people into getting behind their agendas.
 
2013-05-15 06:03:47 PM

Biological Ali: Nabb1: No, it's not smart, I suppose, but making a troll video wasn't what got him in trouble. It was using a pseudonym in making it. One of the terms of his probation was to not use any fictitious names, but ordinarily, that is to prevent someone from engaging in fraud. Here, he was just making a movie and exercising his First Amendment rights. So, yes, he did use a pseudonym (not uncommon for writers or other artists) but not in connection with anything outright illegal. Yes, he's a dumbass, but other than technically violating the terms of his probation, he wasn't doing anything criminal. And then the Administration selling that as some sort of catalyst for simultaneous attacks on US interests in separate countries on 9/11 was pretty pathetic.

Wait, what? Should the administration have lied and said the protests were over something else?


Well, then why did the State Department issue a statement in September saying that it never concluded that was the cause?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/10/10/state_department_s ay s_innocence_of_muslims_didn_t_prompt_benghazi_attack.html
 
2013-05-15 06:05:20 PM

Pumpernickel bread: Well, the Constitution does happen to be law. It isn't just a bunch of suggestions.


Which still doesn't have any bearing on what karmaceutical was talking about. If you think specific people should face criminal charges for breaking specific laws, you should by all means say which people (and which laws) you had in mind. But this has nothing to do with general arguments about free speech, which is what you seemed to be getting at.
 
2013-05-15 06:06:19 PM
 
2013-05-15 06:07:31 PM

Mrtraveler01: tenpoundsofcheese: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: Mrtraveler01: The_Forensicator: The poor schmuck who got Obama'd because of his youtube video must have gotten one HELL of an audit.

Is that the guy who violated his parole by posting a video on Youtube?

Yup.

So Obama made him violate his parole?

No.  He did that on his own.  Obama/Hillary blessed him with the blame for Benghazi.

Well to be fair, he was responsible for what happened in Cairo that same day.

No.  To be fair, the people in Cairo were responsible for what happened in Cairo.
Heck, I was upset that Angie didn't make the top two in American Idol, but I didn't engage in violent protests over it.

Well one thing is for certain. Making a video to troll the Islamic community while on probation for internet fraud isn't the smartest thing in the world to do.


My guess is that if you are on probation for fraud you probably aren't the sharpest tool in the shed to begin with (either that or you are really unlucky and have a bad lawyer).

I guess we can all agree that the video guy is a dumbass then correct?

Yup.  That was an incredibly stupid thing to do.
 
2013-05-15 06:07:34 PM

Nabb1: Biological Ali: Nabb1: No, it's not smart, I suppose, but making a troll video wasn't what got him in trouble. It was using a pseudonym in making it. One of the terms of his probation was to not use any fictitious names, but ordinarily, that is to prevent someone from engaging in fraud. Here, he was just making a movie and exercising his First Amendment rights. So, yes, he did use a pseudonym (not uncommon for writers or other artists) but not in connection with anything outright illegal. Yes, he's a dumbass, but other than technically violating the terms of his probation, he wasn't doing anything criminal. And then the Administration selling that as some sort of catalyst for simultaneous attacks on US interests in separate countries on 9/11 was pretty pathetic.

Wait, what? Should the administration have lied and said the protests were over something else?

Well, then why did the State Department issue a statement in September saying that it never concluded that was the cause?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/10/10/state_department_s ay s_innocence_of_muslims_didn_t_prompt_benghazi_attack.html


Yes, your link says it didn't spawn the attacks in Benghazi.  So again what started the riots in other countries throughout the Middle East?
 
2013-05-15 06:09:01 PM

Fart_Machine: Nabb1: Biological Ali: Nabb1: No, it's not smart, I suppose, but making a troll video wasn't what got him in trouble. It was using a pseudonym in making it. One of the terms of his probation was to not use any fictitious names, but ordinarily, that is to prevent someone from engaging in fraud. Here, he was just making a movie and exercising his First Amendment rights. So, yes, he did use a pseudonym (not uncommon for writers or other artists) but not in connection with anything outright illegal. Yes, he's a dumbass, but other than technically violating the terms of his probation, he wasn't doing anything criminal. And then the Administration selling that as some sort of catalyst for simultaneous attacks on US interests in separate countries on 9/11 was pretty pathetic.

Wait, what? Should the administration have lied and said the protests were over something else?

Well, then why did the State Department issue a statement in September saying that it never concluded that was the cause?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/10/10/state_department_s ay s_innocence_of_muslims_didn_t_prompt_benghazi_attack.html

Yes, your link says it didn't spawn the attacks in Benghazi.  So again what started the riots in other countries throughout the Middle East?


Oh, just keep f*cking that chicken.
 
2013-05-15 06:09:43 PM
Republican senators who have long been critics of Attorney General Eric Holder were noticeably muted on Tuesday when asked to respond to the news of the Justice Department seizing reporters' records as part of a broader probe into national security leaks.

"Well, I think we need to see how this plays out," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), one of Holder's biggest critics and who last year demanded that the attorney general resign amid the Fast and Furious gun-running probe. "I have questions about it, but I'm wiling to wait and see how this plays out, whether it was narrowly targeted or whether it was a net that was too broadly cast," Cornyn said.

"I want to see the details - what was their rationale, why did they do it - before offering an opinion," said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who earlier this week accused the administration of engaging in a "cover-up" in Benghazi. "For me, to rush to a judgment without knowing all the facts is just not appropriate."


Like I said: Tough one for right wingers. AP is hated liberal scum, but there HAS to be a way to blame Obama. They are suddenly wanting to "know all the facts" first...
 
2013-05-15 06:09:52 PM
So you gotta look at the IRS agent's situation. They're paid to find organizations that don't qualify for tax exempt status, got an astro turf organization...

www.prwatch.org

complaining about paying taxes and calling the IRS thugs out to steal their money.


www.hsaforamerica.com

 Now I'm not saying they should have profiled Tea Party organizations...

fsrn.org

but I understand.

/with apologies to Chris Roc
 
2013-05-15 06:10:55 PM

Pumpernickel bread: mediablitz: I'd also add that if this happened under Bush, right wingers would be saying anyone supporting the AP hates America and supports terrorism.

But notice how liberals are condemning this? Yeah, both sides are the same...

How do you arrive at these conclusions?  What you say doesn't make any sense.  I think your perception of those with political views different from your own is wildly different than how they really are.   Take me for example.  I lean more right than left, but I date a Muslim woman from the Middle East.  Do I fit into your narrow view of Republicans, or were you certain that only liberals could be accepting of those from other ethnicities and faiths?


Some people like hairy women.  I kid.  I kid.

It's not about the views of liberals.  It's about the views of those in your own party.  Would they accept you dating a Muslim terrorist?  (I kid, again).

To me, it would make sense that Republicans would date a Muslim.  You're both conservatives.
 
2013-05-15 06:11:54 PM

Biological Ali: Pumpernickel bread: Well, the Constitution does happen to be law. It isn't just a bunch of suggestions.

Which still doesn't have any bearing on what karmaceutical was talking about. If you think specific people should face criminal charges for breaking specific laws, you should by all means say which people (and which laws) you had in mind. But this has nothing to do with general arguments about free speech, which is what you seemed to be getting at.


He is saying that the government violated their civil rights which could amount to a criminal violation.

http://ww w.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2013/05/15/holder-potential-civ il-rights-violations-irs/mY2lq0Ua7J11XZcHS3ZlgO/story.html
 
2013-05-15 06:12:43 PM

Nabb1: Fart_Machine: Nabb1: Biological Ali: Nabb1: No, it's not smart, I suppose, but making a troll video wasn't what got him in trouble. It was using a pseudonym in making it. One of the terms of his probation was to not use any fictitious names, but ordinarily, that is to prevent someone from engaging in fraud. Here, he was just making a movie and exercising his First Amendment rights. So, yes, he did use a pseudonym (not uncommon for writers or other artists) but not in connection with anything outright illegal. Yes, he's a dumbass, but other than technically violating the terms of his probation, he wasn't doing anything criminal. And then the Administration selling that as some sort of catalyst for simultaneous attacks on US interests in separate countries on 9/11 was pretty pathetic.

Wait, what? Should the administration have lied and said the protests were over something else?

Well, then why did the State Department issue a statement in September saying that it never concluded that was the cause?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2012/10/10/state_department_s ay s_innocence_of_muslims_didn_t_prompt_benghazi_attack.html

Yes, your link says it didn't spawn the attacks in Benghazi.  So again what started the riots in other countries throughout the Middle East?

Oh, just keep f*cking that chicken.


You can just admit you've got nothing.  We understand.
 
2013-05-15 06:14:11 PM
Doc Lee: tenpoundsofcheese: Doc Lee: tenpoundsofcheese: Doc Lee: Question.  Why are we giving tax exempt status to indisputably anti-American for-profit corporations like Fox New's Tea Party?

Funny!
You should have added a "but...but...but...Bush" to show off your "brilliance".

Should I bring up the fact that your hero Michele Bachmann called for the IRS to investigate the tax exempt status of Planned Parenthood not once, but twice since 2008?

1.  She isn't my hero.  Lame strawman.
2.  Don't you know the difference between someone making a request and someone actually doing something?

Introducing legislation to do just that is doing nothing?  Tacking it on to just about every single PPACA repeal is doing nothing? Your hero wouldn't be happy that you don't know just how hard she is fighting for you.

Should I also bring up the fact that she openly regretted not being able to bring down other liberal groups in the same way?

Sure.  Bring it up.  It is totally irrelevant to the fact that the IRS actually did something, knew about it for several years and only disclosed it when a report was about to come out.

The NAACP and ACORN laugh at your short term memory.

Should I bring up the fact that you have no issue with groups violating IRS rules when those groups are arguing for your pathetic side but think they should be investigated when it's a liberal group?

wtf are you talking about the Churches?  If you want to make that point be specific otherwise people will accuse you of moving the goal posts. The threads recently about the IRS have all been about the Tea Party, Patriots, etc.
Besides you are wrong, I do have an issue with the Churches doing that and said so in the thread that was about that a while ago.

Wasn't talking about the Tea Party, although, by their very nature as a subsidiary of a for-profit media outlet, they shouldn't be counted as a non-profit organization.

Citation that they are a subsidiary of a for-profit media outlet?
Or are you going to try and move the goal posts again?
 
2013-05-15 06:16:25 PM

Isitoveryet: tenpoundsofcheese: yeah, seriously. You won't fit in here if you care about the Constitution (watch out for that audit) and aren't rabidly anti-Tea Party.

I am sorry you fell for the big lie that anyone other than GOP goons care about the right every man woman & child here in America are afforded.
It's not your fault, you just need to question your authoritarian figures from time to time, maybe consider another news source that doesn't need to scare people into getting behind their agendas.


The media I listen to are Fair and Balanced.
Unlike other media which are Unfair and out of balance.  (imbalanced?  unbalanced?)
 
Displayed 50 of 178 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report