• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the IRS scandal worse than Watergate?

Is the IRS scandal worse than Watergate?

  • Total voters
    44
shrubnose said:
So you think that President Obama should be informed when a light bulb is changed at the Pentagon?

Interesting, very interesting.





"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.
Click to expand...
It might not be his fault that he didn't know about this (IF he didn't know about this), but if it isn't his fault, then someone failed to tell him about it, and that person should be fired. The lady who was in charge of that office should definitely be fired.
 
CanadaJohn said:
All is good here and hope likewise with you - hope you're out of the tornadoes rollng across the country today.
Click to expand...

I'm in Georgia, when we get tornados they almost always head north of Atlanta and rarely hit the south of the city. They cut down all the trees up there and replaced everything with asphalt and concrete. But these idiots are now trying to the the same going south. I guess it is called progress, but so much forests and farm land has been ate up by urban sprawl, I wonder if sometime in the near future there won't be any farmable land left to grow crops.
 
Perotista said:
I'm in Georgia, when we get tornados they almost always head north of Atlanta and rarely hit the south of the city. They cut down all the trees up there and replaced everything with asphalt and concrete. But these idiots are now trying to the the same going south. I guess it is called progress, but so much forests and farm land has been ate up by urban sprawl, I wonder if sometime in the near future there won't be any farmable land left to grow crops.
Click to expand...

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:

Soylent Green? I've been reading your posts on here, and all the movies you have. Do you have that one? I do, and I've probably watched it 20 times over the years! :eek:
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Pero. :2wave:

Soylent Green? I've been reading your posts on here, and all the movies you have. Do you have that one? I do, and I've probably watched it 20 times over the years! :eek:
Click to expand...

Yep, that is probably what this world will come to. I live 30 miles south of Atlanta, the city limits proper and urban sprawl, at least suburb sprawl is this far south. I suppose if humans are processed and put into pills and tubes, sort of like sausage, then it wouldn't be considered cannibalism. Your choice, Soylent Green or Red?
 
mpg said:
It might not be his fault that he didn't know about this (IF he didn't know about this), but if it isn't his fault, then someone failed to tell him about it, and that person should be fired. The lady who was in charge of that office should definitely be fired.
Click to expand...




I believe that if Obama had known about this he would have put a stop to it.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Good grief, what in those 27 pages of clippings from foreign news services (TASS!, East Germany! China!!!) on the 1960 campaign makes Kennedy equal to Joe McCarthy? Beyond that, are you trying to argue that Kennedy was as corrupt as Nixon?
Click to expand...

That's all you did was just read 27 pages !!! It's a starting point for further knowledge of two men (JFK & Nixon) you have little knowledge of. Read all 138 pages.

The Kennedy Klan has a well established machine to protect JFK's legacy.

Do you understand how intelligence services gather and analyse information ?

As you may have noticed, most if not all Communist nations in the world back in 1960 considered JFK to be a "reactionary" and extremely right of Nixon which is probably true. JFK was no liberal. He would be comparable today as a neoconservative.

I wouldn't say JFK was any more corrupt than Nixon but Nixon never broke in to a court house (burglary) to start his political career like JFK did. Nixon also wouldn't put his country through what Al Gore did in 2000 in 1960. You are aware that Nixon actually won in 1960 ? When you have a couple hundred thousand dead people who casted votes back in November of 1960, that's called corruption. Before Obama stumbled on the scene, when you thought of corrupt Chicago politics you thought of the Democrat Party and JFK. Now we have Obama to look at when you talk about political corruption.

As for JFK and McCarthism:

JFK DEFENDS PATRIOT MCCARTHY

>" Rising at his seat, he shouted,
"How dare you couple the name of a great American patriot with that of a traitor!"
The other diners lapsed into shocked silence,
and JFK departed without hearing the rest of the program.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK) wrote PROFILES IN COURAGE while lying flat on his stomach for weeks while his back wound was healing. His book profiled a dozen or so politicians who risked political gain in order to vote strictly for what they believed were the best interests of the American people. JFK had personally done this himself on more than one occassion. One of the major times was when he voted FOR the St. Lawrence Seaway even though it would cause some hardships for some of his constituents in Massachusetts. But to JFK the overall benefit to the United States outweighed the regional benefit to just one state - his home state at that!

Another example of JFK himself having political courage was how he never spoke out against Senator Joseph McCarthy who was being persecuted and prosecuted and literally destroyed for his courage in exposing Communists in high places in the USA State Department. JFK recognized that the hatred directed toward McCarthy was an attempt to distract the American people from what McCarthy was fighting against - Communism. "< McCarthy & JFK


I can never figure out why todays liberals or those socialist and progressives who hide under the Democrat tent and hide behind the label of liberalism would try to identify with JFK ?
 
shrubnose said:
I believe that if Obama had known about this he would have put a stop to it.
Click to expand...
The question is whether or not he should've known. You're 2 for 2 in dodging.
 
mpg said:
It might not be his fault that he didn't know about this (IF he didn't know about this), but if it isn't his fault, then someone failed to tell him about it, and that person should be fired. The lady who was in charge of that office should definitely be fired.
Click to expand...

I had someone who's a professional civil servant with in the Burial of Land Management. He said it's as if no one is actually in charge throughout the entire Executive branch of government for the past four years. And as a result, nobody no longer give a damn.

Just about every one of Obama's appointments in the past four years and four months were of unqualified, incompetent, "second rate" individuals.

Why is that ?

It may be because Obama just isn't an elitist but Obama isn't, he thinks he's an elitist but he's also a narcissist. That explains why he chose to be a community organiser. He would have never have made it in the private sector. -> Narcissistic personality disorder - MayoClinic.com

Narcissist usually tend to surround themselves with people who they look down upon and believe they are better than they are. No way would Obama have someone who's better than he is or is more competent than he is. That's one of the traits of narcissism. But when the narcissist is incompetent, you know who he's going to surround himself with ?

One of the major problems with Obama's disorder is that his feelings get hurt to easily. A perfect example would be Obama firing General McCHrystal because Obama's feeling got hurt. General McCHrystal was the only soldier who knew how to fight the Taliban and Obama fired him. We lost Afghanistan on that day.

In fact more Generals, Flag Officers and those in command in our military have either been fired, relieved of commands or forced in early retirement by Obama than any other President since WW ll. If you hurt Obama's feeling or weren't politically correct enough for Obama your career is over. The result is there are so many in the military who look at each other and wonder if they are next, they also no longer give a damn and are being relieved of their commands. It went as far down the ranks that even a Marine NCO was ordered by Obama to be court martial because the Marine hurt Obama's feelings.

Remember Obama's Secret Service Agents who were whoring around in Columbia ? It's because they no longer give a damn. IRS agents targeting conservatives ? They no longer give a damn. 52 % of Americans also seem not to give a damn back in November.

In the private sector, Obama wouldn't last. I seriously doubt he could have survived flipping burgers without being fired. Obama skated through life from high school to the White House.
 
SgtRock said:
One of the organizations was asked by the IRS what the contents of it's members prayers was. It's none of their business. That's between the individual and his god.
Click to expand...
If it was a religious exemption I think they have that right. I could pray to the computer gods and I'm pretty sure the Feds wouldn't allow me to be a tax-free entity. Years ago the Psychedelic Venus Church tried it but I don't think they were successful.
 
Gipper said:
Are you really going to claim that very few businesses or organizations don't have a decided political lean while legitimately qualifying for tax exempt status?
Click to expand...
It's not a matter of their lean, it's a matter of how much money they spend, if any, on political pursuits. Our professional organization sent us a statement each year showing what part of our membership fees we could deduct as a business expense that year because part of our money was used for our PAC activities, which was not deductible.
 
mpg said:
The question is whether or not he should've known. You're 2 for 2 in dodging.
Click to expand...




Not really trying to dodge.

I don't believe that the president can be expected to know when a light bulb gets changed at the Pentagon.

If you can't depend on those serving under you to get the job done in the right way, you need to make some changes.

There is some of that going on right now.
 
shrubnose said:
Not really trying to dodge.

I don't believe that the president can be expected to know when a light bulb gets changed at the Pentagon.

.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's anyone in the Obama administration that knows how to change a light bulb.
 
APACHERAT said:
Could you list those specific social issues ?
Click to expand...




Since it's you asking the question the first thing that comes up is immigration. Some GOPers are trying to deal with this issue in a humane, thoughtful way, lots of others- not so much. This has the real potential to do serious damage to the GOP if not handled right.

Then we come to birth control and lots of GOPers wanting to get the government off of Wall Streets back and into America's bedrooms, another loser for the GOP. A few GOPers have moved closer to the middle on this, not many.

On gay marriage, more GOPers are coming around, still a lot of opposition.

Those three issues cost the GOP quite a few votes last November.

How they play out in the future is up to the GOP.

That's the way that I see it.
 
APACHERAT said:
I don't think there's anyone in the Obama administration that knows how to change a light bulb.
Click to expand...




Actually I think that a lot of them are pushing the increased use of LEDs.

Which seldom need to be changed.
 
Last edited:
shrubnose said:
Since it's you asking the question the first thing that comes up is immigration. Some GOPers are trying to deal with this issue in a humane, thoughtful way, lots of others- not so much. This has the real potential to do serious damage to the GOP if not handled right.

Then we come to birth control and lots of GOPers wanting to get the government off of Wall Streets back and into America's bedrooms, another loser for the GOP. A few GOPers have moved closer to the middle on this, not many.


On gay marriage, more GOPers are coming around, still a lot of opposition.

Those three issues cost the GOP quite a few votes last November.

How they play out in the future is up to the GOP.

That's the way that I see it.
Click to expand...

Re: Immigration:
The GOP believes that as a nation we are a nation of laws and that America's immigration policies should be what's best for America not what's best for the immigrant, gang bangers, terrorist and the Democrat Party.

When you actually read the Senates Immigration Bill, you'll also oppose it. Legalising all illegal alien gang members !

TheMan.jpg

Re: Birth Control:
What's the problem here ? There's been birth control options since man first discovered sheep. Why should I have to pay for it ?

Re: Gay Marriage:
Again a small fraction of society forcing their life style on the majority.
The issue are the words, "marriage." Call it something else that allows the same rights and privileges as marriage and there's no longer a controversy. But noooo.
 
APACHERAT said:
Re: Immigration:
The GOP believes that as a nation we are a nation of laws and that America's immigration policies should be what's best for America not what's best for the immigrant, gang bangers, terrorist and the Democrat Party.

When you actually read the Senates Immigration Bill, you'll also oppose it. Legalising all illegal alien gang members !

View attachment 67147675

Re: Birth Control:
What's the problem here ? There's been birth control options since man first discovered sheep. Why should I have to pay for it ?

Re: Gay Marriage:
Again a small fraction of society forcing their life style on the majority.
The issue are the words, "marriage." Call it something else that allows the same rights and privileges as marriage and there's no longer a controversy. But noooo.
Click to expand...



On immigration, I agree that our laws should be enforced.

What kind of country has no control over its borders?

I'm not real happy about paying for other people's birth control either.

On gay marriage I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it works out.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll
 
shrubnose said:
Actually I think that a lot of them are pushing the increased use of LEDs.

Which seldom need to be changed.
Click to expand...

The LED's are evolving. Big difference today compared to twenty years ago.

But it's the stupidity of the liberal environmentalist who killed the incandescent light bulb and forced Americans to rebulb with CFL's (Compact Fluorescent Lighting) As usual the left got it wrong again. Now all Americans will eventually be exposed to mercury poisoning and we all will either being wearing prescription glasses or having laser eye surgery. (Is that covered under Obama Care ?)

The government's insane light bulb laws could be far more damaging than you thought:

Eco-friendly LED lights may damage your eyes, according to new research.

A study has discovered that exposure to LED lights can cause irreparable harm to the retina of the human eye.

Government Stupidity- The government's insane light bulb laws could be far more damaging than you thought
 
CaptinSarcastic said:
Well duh, an attack on diplomats under Bush can't be used as attack issue on Obama, huge, massive difference.
Click to expand...

Yea terrorists under Bush were our friends and the people who died at US diplomatic missions deserved it... where as when it happens under Obama, then it is a national tragedy and heads have to roll because some terrorists had the balls to attack a minor US diplomatic station that was doubling as a CIA outpost in a country that has just come out of a civil war that overthrew a former frienmeny of the US.... well the Bush administration.
 
SgtRock said:
Why the IRS scandal is worse than Watergate. Watergate was a political scandal in which the DNC offices in DC were broken into and President Nixon and his administration attempted to cover it up. The IRS scandal involves the government in the form of the IRS going after American Citizens including groups, organizations, and individual citizens based on their political or religious ideology. If a smoking gun is found that directly ties the president to this he must be impeached. If however he was kept in the dark those who kept it from the president must be fired. There is evidence that officials in the white house knew about this in June 2012, during the campaign. Those who were directly involved must go to prison. This is huge and every American regardless of their political persuasion should demand that heads roll. This scandal could be the catalyst that lights a fire under our politicians asses to rewrite the tax code and abolish the IRS. Just think what a flat tax or national sales tax would do for our economy. And another thing, most people are afraid to talk about the IRS because their worried that they too will be targeted. We should not have to be afraid of our government on the other hand the government should fear us. WE ARE THE PEOPLE!

So this is a simple question. Is the IRS scandal worse than Watergate?
Click to expand...
It's a little too early for anyone to really say if this is or is not "worse" than Watergate. As Bob Shieffer noted on yesterday's Face the Nation, “I don’t want to compare this in any way to Watergate … but I have to tell you, that is exactly the approach the Nixon administration took. You’re taking exactly the same line,” Mr. Schieffer said.
CBS' Bob Schieffer unleashes on White House official: 'Why are you here today?' - Washington Times

PeteEU said:
So when is Bush going to jail for the 16 Americans that died in over 30 embassy and consular attacks under his watch? When are the investigations starting?
Click to expand...
Wow, could not even address the thread topic before you did your routine Bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush shtick. Who could have guessed? Sadly for you, the obvious answer is never. While there are literally dozens of intelligent answers to that idiotic attempt to drag Bush into yet another thread about someone or something else, the most obvious to it is 2013 and while you suffer from Bush Derangement Syndrome, the real world does not. Try to keep up. With something other than your well documented obsession with Bush and trying to use it to cover for, excuse and rationalize well virtually any topic that does not involve Bush. It is not only ineffective but just mind numbingly beside the point. As in not the point or the topic no matter how much you really wish it was.

PeteEU said:
The IRS so called scandal is nothing like Watergate. What the IRS did, was basically doing their job. They are suppose to check and recheck people.. it is their job! Should they have done a few more "left wing" groups to even things out.. sure, but in the end, they were just doing their jobs. If they found one, just one attempt of fraud then it is all justified.
Click to expand...
Well it appears as an afterthought, as in after knee jerk Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush thought, you have landed on just plain trite and empty Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bushism/rationale. Clearly the IRS were going above and beyond what is their job to do, what is actually legal to do in the commission of said job or an APOLOGY would not need be offered. Somehow as this gets investigated and more details and accountability come to light, well let's just say it would probably behoove any rational person at IRS to avoid using the PeteEU Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush gambit. In fact I bet even the most ardent of Bush obsessives would counsel avoiding that excuse, as it will likely be more of a self laid snare than an effective dodge.:roll:

Just to be provide an example, when I last logged in you were over in a thread about the AP phone records. What was your "take" on it? Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-mainstream-media/160551-govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-records-probe-21.html#post1061818396

PeteEU said:
What, are you seriously saying a terrorist attack on a US diplomatic post under Bush is not comparable to one under Obama?
Click to expand...
Yeah that is what he is telling you, but then that is not the topic. I don't think you have ever been accused of not consistently dragging Bush into as many threads and topics as you can. So aside from your need to drag Bush into this topic, it seems arguing this further is just an infatuation you can't help but indulge. Fine by me. Has nothing to do with the current event, is not an excuse for them either. So yeah, this time instead of all those "murders" you were going on about in a thread about the AP? Now you are not only trying to drag Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush into a thread about the IRS too but you want to drag in Bengazi now? Why, were not the dozen or so threads actually about Benghazi you tried unsuccessfully to drag Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush into not enough? Or was the way it was laughed at so frustrating that you just had to try one last time to drag Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush into another topic/thread he is not a part of.

PeteEU said:
Yea terrorists under Bush were our friends and the people who died at US diplomatic missions deserved it... where as when it happens under Obama, then it is a national tragedy and heads have to roll because some terrorists had the balls to attack a minor US diplomatic station that was doubling as a CIA outpost in a country that has just come out of a civil war that overthrew a former frienmeny of the US.... well the Bush administration.
Click to expand...
Yip, not only can everything about the Benghazi situation, the AP phone situation and the IRS situation be explained by a simple interjection of Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush, but hell everything under the sun can too, right? Seriously, catch a clue.There is plenty in all of these situations that should cause concern for rational people in general regardless their political affiliation. I know it just gals you that the current administration is also being called to answer for what has become a list serious issues, but Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush is not an answer, excuse or even rational explanation for any of it. It is simply a reflection of your obsession with Bush and little else. Let me help you with one more clue, you won't be seeing any of your Bu bu bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush excuse making used by a single person in any of these scandals you keep trying to drag him into. There are clear and obvious reason for that too, but somehow someway I suspect you are clueless as to why, though I bet you can post reams of rationalizations about why you think it should. Guess what, it is 2013 and that Bu bu bu bu bu bu Bush OCD dog don't hunt.:shock:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom