Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:


You left out the key quote:

"I– I don’t think we know what the facts are." - Mitch "Yertle" McConnell

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/irs-scandal-mcconnell-paul-obama-19
1839606.html

Ok Mitch. Ok Rand. You gonna take off your frilly tutus and actually do anything about it? No, I didn't think so.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:


You left out the key quote:

"I– I don’t think we know what the facts are." - Mitch "Yertle" McConnell



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

They don't call it 'Chicago thug politics' for nothing.

They are who we said they were. Straight up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
No one has come out and said that they have hard proof that the president was involved in any way, shape or form.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
No one has come out and said that they have hard proof that the president was involved in any way, shape or form.

---

Since when have Republicans like Rappy and Jongsie ever needed evidence or proof?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
No one has come out and said that they have hard proof that the president was involved in any way, shape or form.

---

Since when have Republicans like Rappy and Jongsie ever needed evidence or proof?






"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
We're only at the beginning of all three scandals. Step by step they will all continue to unfold on their own. The small fish will lead to the bigger fish, and the bigger fish will lead to the top fish. Look for a few firings inside the White House soon to include Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, and White House Chief Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler. Also Eric Holder signed and approved the Fox News Reporter James Rosen's phone tap, using the Espionage Act as cause. He's likely to be gone very soon too. All three of them will be called to testify under oath before Congress. These proceedings are going to go on and on for years. By the time Obama goes on tv to say he's not a crook, the only difference between him and Nixon will be that Nixon didn't use a teleprompter to say it.


When even the Huffington Post turns on the Obama Administration something is surely rotten in Denmark.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/huffington-post-time-for-eric-holder-to-
go/article/2530445

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Would you guys please get your head out of Rachel Maddow's lap and just LOOK at what is actually going on here ?

---

Quote:

---

The good little useful idiots, all lining up to decry the scandals as much ado about nothing...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
This is part the the Repub strategy for Obama's second term: Dig up irrelvent stuff from the past... STUFF THEY KNEW ABOUT A YEAR AGO...

---

Quote:

---

The New York Times pointed out, quite a bit later than a year ago, that the Justice Department labeled Fox News reporter James Rosen a "co-conspirator" when subpoenaing his e-mails. But maybe they're "Repubs" too?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
You say that as if it's supposed to sound far-fetched. Didn't neo-con pundit and Bush admin mouthpiece Judith Miller work for them when she helped the administration lie us into war with Iraq?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yes, Geezer... BUT BUSH.

Because there is really nothing so nauseating as a hypocrite who cheers on vile actions when 'his' side engages in it, and decries it otherwise.

So when THEY kill civilians en masse, it's called terrorism. When WE do it, it's called "collateral damage".

When they grease the wheels with a little political donation it's called corruption". When we do it, it's called "free speech".

When they install a government that tortures people, it's called tyranny. When we do it, it's called freedom.

When Bush disappeared people to secret overseas prisons and tortured them, when Bush thought long and hard where to detain people without charges (some place under American control but not on American territory, like... oh, I dunno... a military ship at sea or foreign base like Guantanamo), spliced into AT&T's SF router without a warrant, blew a hole in the Federal budget to prosecute a war that had absolutely no reason for being, and set up the economy for a long, hard fall ... you called it "leadership".

You're disgusting, did you know that? A pervert of the first class. I would ask you to look into your conscience to try to find any shred of honor, except that I know you have neither.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:


Would you guys please get your head out Rachel Maddow's lap and just LOOK at what is actually going on here ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
You say that as if it's supposed to sound far-fetched. Didn't neo-con pundit and Bush admin mouthpiece Judith Miller work for them when she helped the administration lie us into war with Iraq?

---

To paraphrase SignyM...

"This is part the the Liberal strategy for Obama's second term: Dig up irrelvent stuff from the past... STUFF THEY KNEW ABOUT YEARS AGO..."

In other words, "BUT BUUSSSHHH....."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yes, Geezer... BUT BUSH.

Because there is really nothing so nauseating as a hypocrite who cheers on vile actions when 'his' side engages in it, and decries it otherwise.

So when THEY kill civilians en masse, it's called terrorism. When WE do it, it's called "collateral damage".

When they grease the wheels with a little political donation it's called corruption". When we do it, it's called "free speech".

When they install a government that tortures people, it's called tyranny. When we do it, it's called freedom.

When Bush disappeared people to secret overseas prisons and tortured them, when Bush thought long and hard where to detain people without charges (some place under American control but not on American territory, like... oh, I dunno... a military ship at sea or foreign base like Guantanamo), spliced into AT&T's SF router without a warrant, blew a hole in the Federal budget to prosecute a war that had absolutely no reason for being, and set up the economy for a long, hard fall ... you called it "leadership".

You're disgusting, did you know that? A pervert of the first class. I would ask you to look into your conscience to try to find any shred of honor, except that I know you have neither.

---

It must be nice for you to have this little set-piece stereotype speech in your head, so you don't have to consider what people actually say or do, but just default to "Not like me...evil". Saves a lot of time, I bet.

You know, I could probably find examples of the Obama administration doing pretty much the same things you listed above, same-same as the Bush Administration or most any other administration in the past.

---

So you're saying that Obama is no worse than "most any other administration in the past", then?

It's about time you finally admitted that.

Quote:

---

The big difference is that the Obama administration is doing them NOW. There is a chance to limit or stop them, which you can't do to things that occurred in the past.

---

Ah, the old bury-your-head-in-your-ass routine - no sense in ever worrying about what's happened, because that's in the past.

Hey, Benghazi was more than 6 months ago, right? Why can't you just leave the past in the past and move on? Ditto Fast-n-Furious, the IRS, subpoenaed phone records, etc. It's ALL in the past. In fact, every single thing that has ever happened in the universe happened in the past. Why are you so hung up on Obama's ancient history?






"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

Quote:

---

The big difference is that the Obama administration is doing them NOW. There is a chance to limit or stop them, which you can't do to things that occurred in the past.

---

Quote:

---

You know, I could probably find examples of the Obama administration doing pretty much the same things you listed above, same-same as the Bush Administration or most any other administration in the past.

---

Quote:

---

It must be nice for you to have this little set-piece stereotype speech in your head, so you don't have to consider what people actually say or do, but just default to "Not like me...evil". Saves a lot of time, I bet.

---