Obama Scandal

[gunnarthor]

When I was in college, I wrote my senior paper on the differences between the Johnson, Nixon and Clinton impeachments. One thing that bothered me was, at the beginning of Watergate, most Americans didn't know what it was and later, most Americans still didn't care. It was a constant GOP talking point against the Post. So I'm not sure arguing that people don't know/don't care about something doesn't mean it shouldn't be a real issue. Frankly, it shouldn't even be part of the discussion.

 

That said, Benghazi is more an effort to try and prevent Hilary Clinton to run than anything else.

 

AP and IRS might be more.

[Brock Beauchamp]

When I was in college, I wrote my senior paper on the differences between the Johnson, Nixon and Clinton impeachments. One thing that bothered me was, at the beginning of Watergate, most Americans didn't know what it was and later, most Americans still didn't care. It was a constant GOP talking point against the Post. So I'm not sure arguing that people don't know/don't care about something doesn't mean it shouldn't be a real issue. Frankly, it shouldn't even be part of the discussion.

 

My point is that the people who do know about it (and don't have a partisan reason to pursue the issue) generally seem pretty apathetic about it. To me, that means one of two things:

 

1. There's really nothing to get too worked up about because it's just another case of a departmental pissing contest.

 

or

 

2. We're so worn down by various instances of government dumb****ery (largely because of the absolutely awful things done by the previous administration but not excluding this administration, either) that we just can't get worked up about a "scandal" of this (probably lack of) magnitude.

 

Almost everyone I know who keeps a level head about politics, both leftist and righty, feels the former. And if there truly is a scandal in there somewhere, I have the feeling that the people trumpeting the case for the latter often turned a blind eye to the absolute shenanigans pulled from 2001-2009 because it was "their guy". Maybe I'm in the apathetic camp... Dunno. But after spending the last few years of the Bush administration just shaking my head in disgust, I'm really having a hard time getting fired up about Benghazi because it's not even close to the level of privacy invasion, detainment, and pure nonsense pulled by Bush (which has sadly continued under Obama).

 

AP and IRS might be more.

 

Agreed. I heard about both of these situations and just shook my head. It's sad that I keep my expectations of politicians so low that they barely register and they still manage to let me down.

[Ultima Ratio]

And you really need to step off that high horse of yours.

 

But you've shown us how to ride so beautifully. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Yes, "no one with a brain" and people who disagree with you "have no conscience" are tame but your most recent attempt at decorum. I only treat a couple posters this way, following their lead in the futile attempt to put a mirror up - but all too ofter we love what we see regardless.

[Brock Beauchamp]

But you've shown us how to ride so beautifully. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Yes, "no one with a brain" and people who disagree with you "have no conscience" are tame but your most recent attempt at decorum. I only treat a couple posters this way, following their lead in the futile attempt to put a mirror up - but all too ofter we love what we see regardless.

 

Let it go, man. If you feel I'm descending into the realm of personal insults (even though not once have I aimed anything resembling a personal insult at you), ignore my posts.

 

But what isn't acceptable is thinking that it's okay to start directly insulting another poster because they made a vague reference that you interpreted as an insult aimed at you, even though you hadn't posted in the thread yet.

 

A refresher of the forum rules:

Furthermore, we expect each member to treat other members with respect. This doesn’t mean just not making personal attacks. It means giving them the benefit of the doubt. It means not being deliberately combative. It means turning the other cheek sometimes, even when you’re not being treated with respect. We expect this because we believe it encourages civil analysis and debate.

 

I turned the other cheek in the gay marriage thread and opted to leave instead of continuing a pointless debate with you, one that was bordering on personal insults as you repeatedly questioned my ability to form a logical argument.

 

Now I suggest you do the same.

[Squirrel]

But you've shown us how to ride so beautifully.

 

Actually, he has. As a moderator/administrator of this site, and dealing with all the variant personalities and discussions, I think he's led a pretty good example of being fair and open-minded, and given quite a bit of leeway when others wanted to take a more 'prudish' route.

 

Not that he needs me to speak for him, just saying, from one who reads quite a bit here.

[TheLeviathan]

Actually, he has. As a moderator/administrator of this site, and dealing with all the variant personalities and discussions, I think he's led a pretty good example of being fair and open-minded, and given quite a bit of leeway when others wanted to take a more 'prudish' route.

 

Not that he needs me to speak for him, just saying, from one who reads quite a bit here.

 

Brock isn't the Czar of us anymore...quit kissing up.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Banning Levi in three... two...

[Squirrel]

Brock isn't the Czar of us anymore...quit kissing up.

 

Pfft ... he already knows I'd vote for him if he ran for office despite his skeletons ... even though I'm a bleeding heart. I just think he's pretty fair.

[Hornhead]

The “nobody with a brain” comment was foolish and unfortunately the language of debate these days. The civility of discourse (for now) exceeds that of BYTO in its final years, but the generosity in labeling folks crazy, mentally challenged, etc needs adjusting if the assessors seek to retain any credibility. If you don’t agree with views of another, so be it. Intelligent, decent people can have opposing views. I understand the opposition to my views very well. They make sense on the surface and may have once been my own positions. However, shallowness in thought and depth of emotion permeate many of those stances. I have emotions too and compassion for homosexuals. But these things called values, or standards if you prefer, come first. Values should be held in greater esteem than personal preference, popular opinion, and compassion which, as an overarching standard, quite often produces detrimental consequences.

 

 

 

Out of curiosity, where does Benghazi rate in comparison to Abu Ghraib on the scandal scale?

[mikecgrimes]

I am very interested to hear what you think was "really" going on in Benghazi.

 

It was Fast and Furious times ten. You know the first major scandal the media covered?

[mikecgrimes]

Banning Levi in three... two...

 

Classless move by you Brock, but thats nothing new.

[TheLeviathan]

Classless move by you Brock, but thats nothing new.

 

Luckily, Brock is as good at hitting the ban button as some posters are about sensing sarcasm.

[mikecgrimes]

So "many people don't know about it" has transformed into "no one knows about it". I know about it. Most of the posters in this thread apparently know about it. The GOP tried to use it as a wedge issue in the last election so apparently they knew about it. Thereby, anyone who followed the election knew about it.

 

Lots of people know about it. In my observations, most who do not carry a partisan agenda do not care about it.

 

And you really need to step off that high horse of yours. Five posts ago, you accused me of insulting you after the fact while this post can easily be interpreted as an insult aimed directly at me.

 

If you don't know what it was all about then you don't know about it. If you come up with examples of more then 4 people dying under Bush then you don't know about it.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Classless move by you Brock, but thats nothing new.

 

Don't make me ban you, too.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Luckily, Brock is as good at hitting the ban button as some posters are about sensing sarcasm.

 

Hey, I'm almost up to an average of one ban per year now.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Have to admit I'm a bit surprised at vitriol targeted towards Brock. While I don't always agree with him, I find his posts to be pretty intelligent and well thought out.

 

That said, the left sucks... and the right sucks.... Vote Libertarian.

[Frozented9]

Re IRS scandal I don't know how many of you work for large corporations but to expect the head to know exactly is going on in any small section of that organization is naive. The IRS employs 100000+ people I would doubt that the section that did this is more than a couple hundred. In my experience the leader of that section would have been told I don't care how you move these cases just do it.

 

These things just kinda happen no different than a banker making stupidly large risky bets because if he doesn't make his quota or beat the market his job is on the line.

[mikecgrimes]

Re IRS scandal I don't know how many of you work for large corporations but to expect the head to know exactly is going on in any small section of that organization is naive. The IRS employs 100000+ people I would doubt that the section that did this is more than a couple hundred. In my experience the leader of that section would have been told I don't care how you move these cases just do it.

 

These things just kinda happen no different than a banker making stupidly large risky bets because if he doesn't make his quota or beat the market his job is on the line.

 

Very possible if these things had taken 3 or 4 months, when it's 3 or 4 years and it has been well known for over a year (an election year) the simple excuse no longer works. If my cable is out 6 hours or even 6 days thats a low level problem if it's out for 6 months thats on the guy in charge.

[Frozented9]

Very possible if these things had taken 3 or 4 months, when it's 3 or 4 years and it has been well known for over a year (an election year) the simple excuse no longer works. If my cable is out 6 hours or even 6 days thats a low level problem if it's out for 6 months thats on the guy in charge.

 

What it though? These applications would ave not started coming in until after citizens united which was decided in 2010 and I would not think the applications would have started in mass for about 6 months. From my experience it can take 6-8 months for a realize how ****ed up the caseload situation is.

 

This is based off of experience in the mortgage industry where we can see heavy volume out of nowhere with less than a weeks notice. If that happens to us it can take months to respond they way we know needs to. Just because it takes time to train people in and make them useful.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Re IRS scandal I don't know how many of you work for large corporations but to expect the head to know exactly is going on in any small section of that organization is naive. The IRS employs 100000+ people I would doubt that the section that did this is more than a couple hundred. In my experience the leader of that section would have been told I don't care how you move these cases just do it.

 

These things just kinda happen no different than a banker making stupidly large risky bets because if he doesn't make his quota or beat the market his job is on the line.

 

This may be true, but part of being at the top is being responsible for those who work underneath you, because the buck stops with that person... That person is also responsible for creating the culture that allows people to get away with this. The person in charge of the IRS may not have known about it, but that same person still carries a lot of responsibility for it.

[Frozented9]

Totally agree the head of the IRS should be fired. I just don't believe in vast right or left wing conspiracy's.