Hello:

Right wingers are looking for scandal everywhere they can. But, I got one I'll bet they won't embrace. Remember when they were yelling and hollering about the Senate NOT passing a budget? THAT was their scandal of the day...

Guess what? The Senate DID pass a budget, but can you imagine who's blocking the budget conference committee?? That's right. It's right winger Ted Cruz..

I thought right wingers WANTED the Senate to pass a budget... No, huh? What DO they want?

excon

I don't believe there was ever a call for the Senate to finally get off their a$$es and pass an IRRESPONSIBLE budget. Thank God for Cruz, someone needs to protect our interests and he seems to have the balls to do it. Love the guy.

WmjM9JHnktg

Hello again,

Darrell Issa rips Jay Carney on IRS abuses: A 'paid liar' (http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/02/darrell-issa-rips-jay-carney-on-irs-abuses-a-paid-liar-video/) While the right wing is rubbing their hands in glee, the rest of the world sees a partisan BEING partisan, and is NOT to be trusted to run an investigation..

The problem with his partisanship, is if he DOES uncover corruption, nobody is going to believe it. Of course, you wingers ALREADY believe it.

A Sam Irvin, he's NOT.

excon

I think you misunderestimate the public's disdain for the IRS, especially if they've been screwing us over more than normal.

Hello again, Steve:

I think you misunderstand what Issa is trying to do.. And, I don't disagree with YOU, at all. If Issa uncovers bad conduct, there will be NO sympathy for the IRS. The public will believe ANYTHING about them. The IRS sucks, and everybody knows it, with the millions they waste..

But Issa doesn't want the IRS. You don't either.. He wants Obama. But, when he says stuff (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/issa-my-gut-tells-me-too-many-people-knew-irs-wrongdoing-was-going) like:
My Gut Tells Me That Too Many People Knew That This (IRS) Wrongdoing Was Going On'nobody, who ISN'T a rabid right winger, will believe him.

Excon

I think it's the right who misread the publics disdain for the IRS. It's a lot more stuff that's a lot more important to ordinary people and is only one department of government that needs fixing.

The more important question everyone wants to know is the solutions that come from it. Impeaching Obama and throwing rocks is what you guys do, but implementing fixes isn't something you righties have ever done.

I think its the right who misread the publics disdain for the IRS. Its a lot more stuff that's a lot more important to ordinary people and is only one department of government that needs fixing.

The more important question everyone wants to know is the solutions that come from it. Impeaching Obama and throwing rocks is what you guys do, but implementing fixes isn't something you righties have ever done.

As dysfunctional as this government is I can't help but laugh every time you holler about the right not fixing anything. But I get it, you're just following the rulebook.

As dysfunctional as this government is I can' help but laugh every time you holler about the right not fixing anything. But I get it, you're just following the rulebook.
Name three things they have fixed.

Hello again, Steve:

I think you misunderstand what Issa is trying to do.. And, I don't disagree with YOU, at all. If Issa uncovers bad conduct, there will be NO sympathy for the IRS. The public will believe ANYTHING about them. The IRS sucks, and everybody knows it, with the millions they waste..

But Issa doesn't want the IRS. You don't either.. He wants Obama. But, when he says stuff (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/issa-my-gut-tells-me-too-many-people-knew-irs-wrongdoing-was-going) like: nobody, who ISN'T a rabid right winger, will believe him.

excon

These people don't watch the Sunday shows, and MSNBC only has a half million viewers on a good night.

Name three things they have fixed.

You first.

Hello again, Steve:


These people don't watch the Sunday shows, and MSNBC only has a half million viewers on a good night.These people?? You're talking about the American public. I don't think Issa is going to fool 'em.

As I said, YOU are the ones who believe Obama is up to his neck in scandal. It FITS your narrative from the beginning. But, YOU are the ONLY ones who believe it.

If you want to convince the American public, like Sam Irvin convinced them about Nixon, you're going to need a serious attack dog, and Issa is a joke...

Excon

You first.
Ah, as I thought. You can't, can't you, because there aren't even three.

Hello again, Steve:

These people??? You're talking about the American public. I don't think Issa is gonna fool 'em.

As I said, YOU are the ones who believe Obama is up to his neck in scandal. It FITS your narrative from the beginning. But, YOU are the ONLY ones who believe it.

If you wanna convince the American public, like Sam Irvin convinced them about Nixon, you're gonna need a serious attack dog, and Issa is a joke...

excon

Yes, the American public. You aren't going to get much traction with that line of attack because a) most didn't watch Issa and b) they're going to side with him against the IRS. Toss in the fact that the administration's defense seems to be "we're stupid and incompetent" and you're going to need to find another argument to sway the public.

Hello again, Steve:

I don't know what's so hard, here. The public HATES the IRS. They DON'T hate Obama.

excon

Ah, as I thought. You can't, can't you, because there aren't even three.

I made no argument for anything being fixed by anyone, I laughed at Tal's logic.

Hello again, Steve:

I dunno whats so hard, here. The public HATES the IRS. They DON'T hate Obama.

excon

I don't know what's so hard here, if they didn't hear Issa it ain't going to matter and if they did it ain't going to matter.

I made no argument for anything being fixed by anyone

But you said:

I can' help but laugh every time you holler about the right not fixing anything.

But you said:

I see you're sticking with making a fool of yourself. Have fun with that, I am.

Ah yes, the right-winger tactic: "if you repeat something often enough it makes it true".

I think its gotten to the point that you totally forget what you type 10 minutes after you type it - then you get offended when people show it to you.

Dude, I keep trying to help but you insist on being an idiot. Quoting me out of context and assigning your own interpretation to it doesn't make it true. Now leave me the hell alone, troll.

People should be held accountable for what they say.
At no point have I hurled personal insults at you but that's all you throw back at me. So much so that you get posts deleted.

The quote totally in context BTW.

People should be held accountable for what they say.

Good, because that's what I'm doing with you.


At no point have I hurled personal insults at you but that's all you throw back at me. So much so that you get posts deleted.

Oh, boo hoo, cry me a river. The personal insult you hurled at me is your constant attacks on my integrity, consistently misrepresenting my remarks and if this were ion real life, bordering on harassment, which is apparently OK with the mods here as long as it's you doing so .


The quote totally in context BTW.

Not even closer Bucko, I referred to the PRESENT administration, a fact you omitted.

Your version: "I can' help but laugh every time you holler about the right not fixing anything."

What I actually said: "As dysfunctional as this government is I can't help but laugh every time you holler about the right not fixing anything."

The only ones in position to fix things are Democrats and they've FAILED miserably so it's laughable to whine about Republicans not fixing things considering how dysfunctional the present administration is. Got it?

Now, I'll thank you for ceasing to pretend you know and understand better than I do what I've said and if you continue to stalk me I'll continue to humiliate you.

What I actually said: "As dysfunctional as this government is I can't help but laugh every time you holler about the right not fixing anything."

The only ones in position to fix things are Democrats and they've FAILED miserably so it's laughable to whine about Republicans not fixing things considering how dysfunctional the present administration is. Got it?
Then I will rephrase my question that seems to be under discussion -- "what have the righties EVER fixed? Name three things."

Then I will rephrase my question that seems to be under discussion -- "what have the righties EVER fixed? Name three things."

Ended slavery, ended Jimmy Carter's presidency and won the cold war.

The Republican Party of the 1800's, when it was the liberal, progressive party of the North, was the party that took a stronger stand against slavery, while the racist, southern Democrats wanted to appease the South, and let slavery continue. Thank god for liberal, progressive ideas.

Hello again, Steve:

These people??? You're talking about the American public. I don't think Issa is gonna fool 'em.

As I said, YOU are the ones who believe Obama is up to his neck in scandal. It FITS your narrative from the beginning. But, YOU are the ONLY ones who believe it.

If you wanna convince the American public, like Sam Irvin convinced them about Nixon, you're gonna need a serious attack dog, and Issa is a joke...

excon

Ah, I see you got the memo (http://www.democrats.org/news/press/memo_the_month_of_gop_overreach).

Did you get this memo (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/03/college-republicans-report_n_3378568.html) yet?

Did you get this memo (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/03/college-republicans-report_n_3378568.html) yet?

Um, that was not rocket science. I mean geez Tal, after 12 years of a liberal indoctrination only to go to the people's republic of higher education what would you expect? I give you guys that much, you've done a damn good job of brainwashing our children. Shame on you, but you do it well.

The Republican Party of the 1800's, when it was the liberal, progressive party of the North, was the party that took a stronger stand against slavery, while the racist, southern Democrats wanted to appease the South, and let slavery continue. Thank god for liberal, progressive ideas.

Maybe for a brief period during Teddy Roosevelt's term... other than that the Republican party has never been accused of being liberal progressive. But nice revisionist history .

Ended slavery, ended Jimmy Carter's presidency and won the cold war.

That's a fairly short list, what have they done lately? Oh! I know the answer to that one

maybe for a brief period during Teddy Roosevelt's term ...other than that the Republican party has never been accused of being liberal progressive. But nice revisionist history .

Im not sure that is true. It was Richard Nixon that got civil rights laws passed and also he led the way for the passing of Roe v Wade. At the time it was seen as hyper progressive.

Good point dad . And to that point ;the GOP moderate movement has been an extension of Nixonianism.

Your right wing faction is the one challenging the moderates of the GOP, and making any compromise impossible. They require much attention and red meat and holler rather loudly if they don't get it. Repubs have little choice but to feed the beast or have no voting base to build on in the congress.

I think we all suffer when there is no compromises possible to solve our national issues, no matter how reasonable and small they may be.

Compromise to the Dems means Republic concessions and none from the Dem side. It's always
http://i1.cpcache.com/product/643876846/obama_biden_2012_forward_slogan_rectangle_magnet.j pg?color=NA&height=460&width=460
For the Dems .There is never a shrink in the size of the government or a reduction in spending (except military ) that is acceptable.

There is never a shrink in the size of the government or a reduction in spending (except military ) that is acceptable.Same for the republicans. They will not do what you want them to do, you need to realize that.

Hello again, tom:

for the Dems .There is never a shrink in the size of the government or a reduction in spending For the Republicans, there is NEVER a tax increase on the richest of the rich, to PAY for the spending.

Look.. The spending isn't for hammers @ $400 each like Reagan was paying. It's so children can EAT. I'm all for eating. Bummer that you're not.

It's also important to note that the richest of the rich, have gotten MUCH richer over the last 30 years, while YOU and ME are getting poorer and poorer every day. So, there's NO QUESTION that they can AFFORD to give back.

Excon

Back to actual scandals, the most transparent administration EVER seems to have a fairly widespread habit of using secret email accounts (http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_289563/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=NOPRHOIl)... and demanding $1 million for the release of FOIA info to the media.


Some of President Barack Obama's political appointees, including the secretary for Health and Human Services, are using secret government email accounts they say are necessary to prevent their inboxes from being overwhelmed with unwanted messages, according to a review by The Associated Press.

The scope of using the secret accounts across government remains a mystery: Most U.S. agencies have failed to turn over lists of political appointees' email addresses, which the AP sought under the Freedom of Information Act more than three months ago. The Labor Department initially asked the AP to pay more than $1 million for its email addresses.

The AP asked for the addresses following last year's disclosures that the former administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency had used separate email accounts at work. The practice is separate from officials who use personal, non-government email accounts for work, which generally is discouraged - but often happens anyway - due to laws requiring that most federal records be preserved.

The secret email accounts complicate an agency's legal responsibilities to find and turn over emails in response to congressional or internal investigations, civil lawsuits or public records requests because employees assigned to compile such responses would necessarily need to know about the accounts to search them. Secret accounts also drive perceptions that government officials are trying to hide actions or decisions.

"What happens when that person doesn't work there anymore? He leaves and someone makes a request (to review emails) in two years," said Kel McClanahan, executive director of National Security Counselors, an open government group. "Who's going to know to search the other accounts? You would hope that agencies doing this would keep a list of aliases in a desk drawer, but you know that isn't happening."

Agencies where the AP so far has identified secret addresses, including the Labor Department and HHS, said maintaining non-public email accounts allows senior officials to keep separate their internal messages with agency employees from emails they exchange with the public. They also said public and non-public accounts are always searched in response to official requests and the records are provided as necessary.

The AP couldn't independently verify the practice. It searched hundreds of pages of government emails previously released under the open records law and found only one instance of a published email with a secret address: an email from Labor Department spokesman Carl Fillichio to 34 coworkers in 2010 was turned over to an advocacy group, Americans for Limited Government. It included as one recipient the non-public address for Seth D. Harris, currently the acting labor secretary, who maintains at least three separate email accounts.

Google can't find any reference on the Internet to the secret address for HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Congressional oversight committees told the AP they were unfamiliar with the non-public government addresses identified so far by the AP.

Ten agencies have not yet turned over lists of email addresses, including the Environmental Protection Agency; the Pentagon; and the departments of Veterans Affairs, Transportation, Treasury, Justice, Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security, Commerce and Agriculture. All have said they are working on a response to the AP.

White House spokesman Eric Schultz declined to comment.

I don't know about you but I find the excuse lame and the claim that these accounts are included in requests for info is obviously a lie. I want to know why there is even ONE secret account being used for official business.

The size of government has shrunk, so has the debt, but of course those facts are never acknowledged at all on the right. Nor is the fact that kids and old people are being cut from food, and education programs.

Congress is investigating scandals and service women get raped and assaulted. The right hollers rights, and denies everybody else's rights. Politics over people and mo' money for the rich guys while nothing trickles down.

The size of government has shrunk, so has the debt, but of course those facts are never acknowledged at all on the right. Nor is the fact that kids and old people are being cut from food, and education programs.

Congress is investigating scandals and service women get raped and assaulted. The right hollers rights, and denies everybody else's rights. Politics over people and mo' money for the rich guys while nothing trickles down.

No one wants women getting raped anywhere, so you fix that while we demand accountability from the government crooks. And by the way, your guy in the White House and the Dems in charge are as bad as anyone if not worse at both enriching themselves and their cronies. And you and ex are both right that it ain't trickling down, but you refuse to blame those actually running the show - who by the way continue to be exposed as more and more corrupt by the day.

Hello again, Steve:

but you refuse to blame those actually running the show - who by the way continue to be exposed as more and more corrupt by the day.Blame?? The buck stops at their desk. They need to FIX it.

But, if you mean blame, as in they DID it, then I'd need a little proof first.. Just a tad will do. I've asked, and asked and even asked again, for some. But you ain't got any. All you got is right wing flapping gums.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:
Blame??? The buck stops at their desk. They need to FIX it.

But, if you mean blame, as in they DID it, then I'd need a little proof first.. Just a tad will do. I've asked, and asked and even asked again, for some. But you ain't got any. All you got is right wing flapping gums.

excon

And like I said, only in the left's world does an admission of guilt equal no proof.

Hello again, Steve:


And like I said, only in the left's world does an admission of guilt equal no proof.Lets go over it again, shall we?

Although we can argue about the word "admission" or the word "targeted", it misses the point. WHATEVER word you want to attach to the behavior at the IRS is fine with me. But, if Obama didn't order it, it's NOT a scandal. It's BAD behavior. It's bureaucrats mis-spending the taxpayers money. It's outrageous, and somebody needs to be fired..

But, WITHOUT proof that Obama ordered it, or is involved in ANY way, there's no corruption. There's NO scandal. There's NOTHING. There's only right wingers saying the sky is falling. And you been saying that for a few years now.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Lets go over it again, shall we? Although we can argue about the word "admission" or the word "targeted" all we want. But it's beside the point. WHATEVER word you want to attach to the behavior at the IRS is fine with me. But, if Obama didn't order it, it's NOT a scandal. It's BAD behavior. It's bureaucrats mis-spending the taxpayers money. It's BAD, BAD stuff, and somebody needs to be fired..

WITHOUT proof that Obama ordered it, or is involved in ANY way, there's no corruption. There's NO scandal. There's NOTHING. There's only right wingers saying the sky is falling. And you been saying that for a few years now.

excon

A scandal doesn't have to have Obama's name attached to be a scandal. I have yet to blame the White House although he's not without culpability, but this goes way beyond "bad behavior" whatever the heck you think that means.

I have my doubts that when this blows wide open, and it's about to, that you'll take the blinders off.

I have my doubts that when this blows wide open, and it's about to, that you'll take the blinders off.Hello again, Steve:

Like Benghazi was going to break open a month or so ago?? Or like Fast and Furious did?

Bwa, ha ha ha.

Excon

The dots keep on connecting to the White House . Let's see.. Douglas Shulman visits the White House 158 times ;and unheard of amt of times for a non-policy director. We found out this weekend that many of his meetings were with Stephanie Cutter ;who was 'Obama For America' Deputy Campaign Director .

Now who is Douglas Schulman ? Yes he was appointed by GW Bush . But he is a Democrat partisan . Make no mistake about it . The public record shows that he made contributions to the DNC in 2004 for the Kerry campaign. Yeah Bush knew how to pick them.

Now who is he married to ? Susan L. Anderson, who is an Occupy Wall Street activist and a senior program adviser for the 'Public Campaign'.'Public Campaign' is a nonprofit, 501(c)3 with a close relationship with 'Public Campaign Action Fund', a 501(c)4 organization which is supported by the Ford Foundation, the Streisand Foundation, and various labor unions.

And what did they do ? The focus of 'Public Campaign's' efforts is campaign finance; its slogan is “Clean Money, Clean Elections.”(I bet they didn't wait months to get their IRS status) .

So what we had was a Dem head of the IRS ,who's wife is an activist against conservative money in politics (I looked at Public Campaign's web site and there are whole sections on Koch Bros. Citizen's United ,etc. but none about Soros money in American politics );who held many meetings in the White House with an Obama campaign director . He was head of the IRS when the IRS was targeting Tea Party and other conservative groups during the election cycle.
Smoking gun ? No . But if not... way to many coincidences to ignore .

Hello again, tom:
Smoking gun ? No Yawwwwn... I heard he was Obama's gay lover, and he just couldn't stay away.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Like Benghazi was gonna break open a month or so ago??? Or like Fast and Furious did?

Bwa, ha ha ha.

excon

It ain't over dude, but good to know you don't give a crap how corrupt our government is or how many lives and rights it cost.

Hello again, tom:Yawwwwn.... I heard he was Obama's gay lover, and he just couldn't stay away.

excon

Wouldn't surprise me .


As I said before ; Nixon had defenders until the last day.

Hello again, Steve:


but good to know you don't give a crap how corrupt our government is or how many lives and rights it cost.Because I want PROOF of corruption means I don't care? Dude! You're spinning like a top..

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Because I want PROOF of corruption means I don't care? Dude! You're spinning like a top..

excon

If you can't see proof already you're blind. We have proof, we just don't know how high this goes. Yet - the "few rogue" (88 in all so far) employees involved that got thrown under the bus are about to fight back.

Hello wingers:

How many visits to the White House does it take to say, "STICK IT TO MY ENEMY'S"?

excon

It's suspicious, and that's how investigators sometimes get to the bottom of things, suspicious behavior. I think you know that.

Hello wingers:

How many visits to the White House does it take to say, "STICK IT TO MY ENEMY'S"?

excon

Well a good indicator would be if the head of the IRS had more visits than the Sec State ,the Att General ,the head of HHS ,the head of Homeland Security ,among most of the Emperor's trusted cabinet.
http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Obama-admin-visitors.jpg

Must be all them Easter Egg rolls.

Are there any visit stats for any other presidents?

Perhaps . You are free to look for them if you are interested .

Wow, that many visits is surely nefarious. You got thee tapes?

Nope ,just the visitors log

perhaps . You are free to look for them if you are interested .Obama was the first to release the visitor logs, Bush denied them to interested parties.

And your point is ?

Did IRS chief really visit White House 157 times? – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/31/did-irs-chief-really-visit-white-house-157-times/)

And your point is ? Kathleen Sebilius ,a cabinet member who's agency actually runs Obamacare ,had scheduled visits of less than 50 in the same time.CNN doesn't even come close to explaining that the next person on the log had about half the total visits recorded that Schulman had . They are only guessing how often he was a 'no show'. Nor do they come close to even trying to explain why his predecessor only visited the White House once. We already know that he often met with Stephanie Cutter ,who became 'Obama For America' Deputy Campaign Director . She told Jake Tapper that over the weekend. There is no way he was going there solely because the IRS has an enforcement role in Obamacare.

Yeah there has got to be hanky panky going on. I mean you guys record is perfect with these scandals.

Hello again,

Word is that he only went 11 times.. Poor Republicans. You soooo want there to be a scandal, that you'll make up stuff.

Really.. When I do the math, assuming he took the weekends off, he would have been at the White House 3 + days a week. I don't think even the people that work there are there that much..

excon

Sssssssssssshhhhh!

Hello again,

Word is that he only went 11 times.. Poor Republicans. You soooo want there to be a scandal, that you'll make up stuff.

Really.. When I do the math, assuming he took the weekends off, he would have been at the White House 3 + days a week. I don't think even the people that work there are there that much..

excon

So he just scheduled appointments to see his name on the visitor log ? Your defense of the indefensible is becoming pathetic.

Hello again, tom:

So he just scheduled appointments to see his name on the visitor log ? Your defense of the indefensible is becoming pathetic.




(CNN) (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/31/did-irs-chief-really-visit-white-house-157-times/) – In the early days of President Barack Obama's sweeping new health care law, Douglas Shulman, then the commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, was cleared to visit the White House 157 times over three years, official visitor logs show.

More than 50 of Douglas Shulman's scheduled visits are described as "health care meetings" or "health care reform meetings," according to the visitor logs. Arrival times are only listed for 11 of his visits, and it's not unusual for a person to appear on the visitor logs - which are derived from Secret Service clearance lists - without actually having visited the White House. The majority of the visits were set to be held in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, which houses office suites for administration aides.excon

He went to 11 Easter egg rolls.

Yeah there has got to be hanky panky going on. I mean you guys record is perfect with these scandals.

That was before he had absolute media protection. Nice to know you believe there is nothing too corrupt for this admin to get away with. And by the way, he can't get away with just throwing people under the bus or giving them all executive privilege this time around.

Hello again, Steve:


And by the way, he can't get away with just throwing people under the bus or giving them all executive privilege this time around.Cool. Sounds like you've got some PROOF on the way. I can hardly wait.

Excon

You'll deny any proof, you already have denied the admission of guilt.

Hello again, Steve:


you already have denied the admission of guilt.Nahhh... The IRS is guilty of malfeasance. The White House isn't. How come you can't remember my position one post to another?

Look, Steve. How many times do I have to say that the IRS did bad stuff, but that doesn't mean Obama did?? Now, I'm not DENYING that he did. I just want to see some PROOF, and right wingers flapping their gums AIN'T proof.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Look, it's not only ME talking about proof. It's your favorite right wing senator.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Monday (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/03/lindsey-graham-irs_n_3379066.html)became the latest Republican to reject Darrell Issa's comments that White House press secretary Jay Carney is a "paid liar" in relation to the IRS controversy. But Graham went further than his Republican colleagues, saying there's no evidence that the White House ordered the tax agency to target conservative groups. I guess he's as BLIND as I am.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Nahhh... The IRS is guilty of malfeasance. The White House isn't. How come you can't remember my position one post to another?

Look, Steve. How many times do I have to say that the IRS did bad stuff, but that doesn't mean Obama did??? Now, I'm not DENYING that he did. I just wanna see some PROOF, and right wingers flapping their gums AIN'T proof.

excon

I have yet to say it came straight from Obama, I don't know why you can't remember that. It goes beyond malfeasance though, you 're in denial about what we already know. You are deluding yourself if you think your revisionist tactics will work.

(CNN) – In the early days of President Barack Obama's sweeping new health care law, Douglas Shulman, then the commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, was cleared to visit the White House 157 times over three years, official visitor logs show.

More than 50 of Douglas Shulman's scheduled visits are described as "health care meetings" or "health care reform meetings," according to the visitor logs. Arrival times are only listed for 11 of his visits, and it's not unusual for a person to appear on the visitor logs - which are derived from Secret Service clearance lists - without actually having visited the White House. The majority of the visits were set to be held in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, which houses office suites for administration aides.

Excon

So he just scheduled appointments to see his name on the visitor log ? I would think that CNN would get arm fatigue carrying so much water for the Obots.

By the way . I don't know about anyone else... but I have not come close to directly accusing the emperor of ordering these IRS targets >I said it from the beginning that he is too smart to directly involve himself . Here is how it probably went down .

King Henry II was having a dispute with the ArchBishop of Canterbury Thomas Beckett . Beckett took the dispute too far for Henry's liking . Henry II was away in Normandy when he heard of the latest challenge by Beckett . According to literature he said “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” Other accounts by Edward Grim wrote that Henry actually said “What miserable drones and traitors have I nourished and brought up in my household, who let their lord be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric?”

Either way, Henry II never said directly that he wanted Beckett killed . But his knights knew their marching orders .December 29, 1170, four knights confronted Thomas Beckett inside Canterbury Cathedral . They cut off the top of his head and began stabbing him, leaving him to die, and smearing Beckett's brain matter on the floor of Canterbury Cathedral.

Cool story bro.

Yeah cool story from long ago and means nothing now, just because you can't figure someone else putting him on a list as a possible visitor to some seminars. I have often wondered, and even asked what year would you like us to go back too?

Yeah cool story from long ago and means nothing now, just because you can't figure someone else putting him on a list as a possible visitor to some seminars. I have often wondered, and even asked what year would you like us to go back too?

I was rather fond of 1978.

A good year for some and me too. I was making babies and cutting grass while a third of my fellow workers were being laid off. Some came back a few years later, some didn't. Some got laid off yet again, the rest of us got a pay cut. Good thing beer and marijuana was cheap and plentiful.

Don't want to relive it though, once was enough.

Yeah cool story from long ago and means nothing now, just because you can't figure someone else putting him on a list as a possible visitor to some seminars. I have often wondered, and even asked what year would you like us to go back too?

Didn't know the White House held seminars . I thought the White House was the place where policy decisions are made and approved .

It is but it's a BIG place.

White House Complex - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Complex)

Eisenhower Executive Office Building - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower_Executive_Office_Building)

So you are saying that he was on the White House visitor's log to go to seminars in the Ike office building ;which is not in the White House ? Do you even find that line of reasoning plausible ?

Hello again, tom:


Do you even find that line of reasoning plausible ?As plausible as his being there 3 PLUS days a week for the last 3 years. Do you find THAT plausible?

Excon

The Ike building is part of the WH complex, and my explanation is as plausible as anything you and your right wing brethren have come up with.

Its all opinion and speculation no matter the source until we get the real deal. But you guys have it all figured out.

While Tal and ex are reveling in their blind faith in all things Obama things just keep popping up to demonstrate how misplaced that trust is.


NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order)
National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of millions of US customers of Verizon, one of America's largest telecoms providers, under a top secret court order issued in April.

The order, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, requires Verizon on an "ongoing, daily basis" to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems, both within the US and between the US and other countries.

The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.

The secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) granted the order to the FBI on April 25, giving the government unlimited authority to obtain the data for a specified three-month period ending on July 19.

Under the terms of the blanket order, the numbers of both parties on a call are handed over, as is location data, call duration, unique identifiers, and the time and duration of all calls. The contents of the conversation itself are not covered.

The disclosure is likely to reignite longstanding debates in the US over the proper extent of the government's domestic spying powers.

Under the Bush administration, officials in security agencies had disclosed to reporters the large-scale collection of call records data by the NSA, but this is the first time significant and top-secret documents have revealed the continuation of the practice on a massive scale under President Obama.

Yup, your government has been spying on you since 9/11. Eroded rights have been going on for quite a while and there really is nothing you can do about it - you don't factor in their pay.

Hello Steve:

Yeah, I don't like 'em snooping on me. I'm a Constitutional sort of guy. I said it when Bush was doing it (when it was OK with you), and I say it now. You just beat me to the post.

He's also ramped up droning people, and I'm not sure how I feel about that. Tell me what YOU think, so I'll know what I think. (That's a joke.)

excon

You probably only got the tip of the iceberg as I doubt Verizon is the only one to get such an order. Its broad in scope but for some very specific details, and while I bristle at the idea of FISA enabling this method of data collection, I'm not ready to go hog wild over conspiracy theories just yet.

I do know that radicals and terrorist are highly sophisticated in their use of tools of technology, and we better pay attention to what they are capable of. And lets not ignore the international criminals in this equation either, who can steal millions in a matter of seconds.

We have already seen one guy slipping through the cracks can screw up a lot of law abiding citizens so it's a balancing act. You give law enforcement the tools, or expect them to protect you with a popgun, against a cannon.

Hello Steve:

Yeah, I don't like 'em snooping on me. I'm a Constitutional sorta guy. I said it when Bush was doing it (when it was OK with you), and I say it now. You just beat me to the post.

He's also ramped up droning people, and I'm not sure how I feel about that. Tell me what YOU think, so I'll know what I think. (That's a joke.)

excon

I don't believe I have ever said unlimited, unjustified domestic surveillance was OK with me. But I do have to chuckle every time I see you say you're a constitution guy, you're not OK with my first and second amendment rights. But this, this is like the Obama administration has been juiced by Biogenesis when it comes to domestic spying.

The new order covers not only phone calls overseas to specific #s identified as probable terrorist links , but all domestic calls by Verizon customers over at least a three month period. There is a huge difference between that and what the Bush adm did .

Trevor Timm, a digital rights analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, called the order “shockingly broad.”

“Not only are they intercepting call data into and out of the country, but they are intercepting all call data in the United States, which goes far beyond what the FISA Amendments Act allows,” Timm said.

“This is an abuse of the Patriot Act on a massive scale,” said Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology. “Since the law requires that the telephone records sought be relevant to an investigation, it appears that the FBI and the NSA may have launched the broadest investigation in history because everyone's telephone calls seem to be relevant to it.”

Obama administration defends Verizon records order - POLITICO.com Print View (http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=2C0B60FD-A86C-42F2-A5B2-739869B4C484)

The Dems when they Bush bashed always talked of the potential for abuse while never coming up with a shred of evidence that the act was abused. Yeah the potential was there ;with a lawless Democrat adm.

What are the odds that Glenn Greenwald will be named a con-conspirator in the leak investigation?

Lawless dem administration?? That's pretty inaccurate since repubs signed off on it. Why would they become part of the lawless dem administration?


The top two leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Thursday that the widespread monitoring of Verizon phone calls made in the United States has been going on for years, and that Congress is regularly briefed on it.

Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) also defended the National Security Agency's request to the company for all the metadata about phone calls made within and from the United States.


House Armed Services Committee lawmakers said late Wednesday that they had not seen the Guardian report, and so did not want to comment on it — but a GOP committee aide said the leak of the document is problematic.

“If the story proves accurate, we would have very serious concerns about the magnitude of the leak involved,” the aide said.

Maybe your brethren repubs know something you don't but don't seem to share your concerns about a lawless dem administration in this case.

Congress passed a law five years ago to institutionalize the warrantless surveillance program. Are you saying that they approved this massive data collection ,or was this more abusive over reach by the Obots? The Emperor has expanded the warrantless surveillance to include what he and Janet Napolitano call domestic terrorism.

Its called a reauthorization and if Saxby Chambliss knew about it and said nothing against it, that tells me something, since he has been briefed continuously for 7 (NOT 5) years so why are you berating just the dems, or just Obama for this tyranny, over reach stuff?

Copy of the document:

Verizon forced to hand over telephone data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2013/jun/06/verizon-telephone-data-court-order)


What it looks like is a broad net fishing expidition on the part of the feds that may later lead to further investigations. A national database so to speak of phone records and all ties that lead to them.

Its called a reauthorization and if Saxby Chambliss knew about it and said nothing against it, that tells me something, since he has been briefed continuously for 7 (NOT 5) years so why are you berating just the dems, or just Obama for this tyranny, over reach stuff?

What it shows me is further proof that the government is too big and powerful and it acts beyond it's constitutional limits .

Just like Patriot Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act)
And
Digital Millennium Copyright Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act#Criticisms)

Copy of the document:

Verizon forced to hand over telephone data (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2013/jun/06/verizon-telephone-data-court-order)


What it looks like is a broad net fishing expidition on the part of the feds that may later lead to further investigations. A national database so to speak of phone records and all ties that lead to them.

And I'm sure the gun control advocates still believe the background checks bill would not have led to a national database. "Trust us" says Obama...

Background checks are indeed kept in a database. When data is collected that is how it is kept, for retrieval and reporting.
Not sure why that's evil to you.

Background checks are indeed kept in a database. When data is collected that is how it is kept, for retrieval and reporting.
Not sure why that's evil to you.

Guess you missed the gun control threads. Registration - a database - leads to confiscation and other abuses of our rights. But you probably believe that never happens, the government doing evil with information compiled on its citizens.

Registration - a database - leads to confiscation and other abusesNope, it doesn't.

Registration - a database - leads to confiscation and other abuses of our rights.
You don't have a library card, right? Or a vehicle.

You don't have a library card, right? or a vehicle.

And your point is?

And your point is?
What does he fear will be confiscated because of those databases? His library privileges can be rescinded and his driving privileges can be removed.

What does he fear will be confiscated because of those databases? His library privileges can be rescinded and his driving privileges can be removed.

It's pretty simple, if it's a gun owner database they would confiscate guns.

Do you also trust the government to never do evil with information compiled on its citizens? I mean seriously, the last few weeks should have boosted skepticism of the government protecting our rights but I guess since it's Obama you guys won't complain until the jackboots are kicking your door down.

What does he fear will be confiscated because of those databases? His library privileges can be rescinded and his driving privileges can be removed.

Or as has been done in the past his personal information can be given out without his permission or authority. = Abuse.

Or as has been done in the past his personal information can be given out without his permission or authority. = Abuse.
Libraries are excruciatingly careful about what information is collected and even viewed by staff (only certain people have the high-level password needed to view full patron records), and never by other patrons or police. What happens at the DMV, I have no idea. In today's paper was a short article about an idea of taking away Chicago drivers' licenses and vehicles if they are caught tossing trash out the window and onto the street or parking lot.

Never fear anyway, Obama has taken this privacy thing by the horns.


Obama Administration Releases Nation's Phone Records To Public (http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-administration-releases-nations-phone-record,32712/?ref=auto)
'We Are Making Every Effort To Be Transparent,' Says President

WASHINGTON—On the heels of reports that the National Security Agency has secretly been amassing the private telephone records of Verizon's more than 120 million customers, President Barack Obama announced Thursday that his administration is releasing the entire country's phone records to the public in an effort to handle the situation with complete transparency. “Honesty and openness have always been the hallmarks of my presidency, which is why I believe that everybody should have free access to this essential information,” the president said at a press conference, encouraging the public to visit a newly created online database containing the time, duration, and location of every wireless and landline phone call made by all 315 million Americans. “We—all of us—are laying our cards on the table here. Now, everyone in the country will know who's calling whom, and when, and how often, and for how long. My administration doesn't have any secrets, and from now on, neither will you.” Obama noted that, for the sake of national security, personal emails, consumer reports, and medical histories will remain the exclusive property of the federal government.

if it's a gun owner database they would confiscate guns.Nope. You're saying it like it's a fact, but it simply the spreading of FUD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt).

Never fear anyway, Obama has taken this privacy thing by the horns. Hahahahahhaha... you took a satire article seriously. LOL!

Hahahahahhaha...you took a satire article seriously. LOL!

You're an idiot, for once again not recognizing the sarcasm in my post. Are you really that dense as to believe I don't know when I'm on the Onion's site, I was there on purpose and it isn't the first time I've used the Onion here, dufus.

You changed the font after the fact.. and yes I absolutely do believe that you took it seriously - that's how clouded your judgement is. Idiot.

You changed the font after the fact..and yes I absolutely do believe that you took it seriously - that's how clouded your judgement is. Idiot.

Of course I changed it after the fact, I noted that. The only one whose judgment is clouded here is yours as I have a history of referring to the Onion, you're blinded by some pathetic irrational hatred of me. Get some help, moron, you can't even let me try and lighten the mood with a little humor without being a freakin' killjoy. I bet you're great fun at birthday parties.

Never fear anyway, Obama has taken this privacy thing by the horns.


This has to be the most telling line in the whole story:

Now, everyone in the country will know who's calling whom, and when, and how often, and for how long. My administration doesn't have any secrets, and from now on, neither will you.”

He can't really be that stupid can he??

This has to be the most telling line in the whole story:

Now, everyone in the country will know who’s calling whom, and when, and how often, and for how long. My administration doesn’t have any secrets, and from now on, neither will you.”

He can't really be that stupid can he ???

Thanks, Dad, it's pretty damned obvious my comment was sarcastic and article is satire. NK just can't help being a jerk.

It's pretty simple, if it's a gun owner database they would confiscate guns.

Do you also trust the government to never do evil with information compiled on its citizens? I mean seriously, the last few weeks should have boosted skepticism of the government protecting our rights but I guess since it's Obama you guys won't complain until the jackboots are kicking your door down.

It boasts YOUR skepticism, because that's what you guys are afraid of any way. Most are not. If they can't round up 11 million people how can they round up 360 million guns? Fear is what skews your logic which is loony to normal folks.

I think the dialog has began for things that's long overdue to inch our way forward though. Now if you guys weren't so paralyzed intellectually with fear we could move faster but we understand we have to take it slow with you guys. >sigh< but we are use to dragging your guys dead weight kicking and screaming into the great unknown future.

I actually respect your noisy caution... sometimes. Maybe the sky will fall someday. Who really knows?

It boasts YOUR skepticism, because that's what you guys are afraid of any way. Most are not. If they can't round up 11 million people how can they round up 360 million guns? Fear is what skews your logic which is loony to normal folks.

I think the dialog has began for things that's long overdue to inch our way forward though. Now if you guys weren't so paralyzed intellectually with fear we could move faster but we understand we have to take it slow with you guys. >sigh< but we are use to dragging your guys dead weight kicking and screaming into the great unknown future.

I actually respect your noisy caution..........................sometimes. Maybe the sky will fall someday. Who really knows?

Part of the problem in what your saying as "truth" really isn't. They can if they wanted to round up 11 million people. They choose not to. There is a difference. Isn't "choice" what your side is all about?

It boasts YOUR skepticism, because that's what you guys are afraid of any way. Most are not. If they can't round up 11 million people how can they round up 360 million guns? Fear is what skews your logic which is loony to normal folks.

I think the dialog has began for things that's long overdue to inch our way forward though. Now if you guys weren't so paralyzed intellectually with fear we could move faster but we understand we have to take it slow with you guys. >sigh< but we are use to dragging your guys dead weight kicking and screaming into the great unknown future.

I actually respect your noisy caution..........................sometimes. Maybe the sky will fall someday. Who really knows?

The problem with your little rant is reality is validating our warnings (not our irrational fears, that was your side during the Bush years). Even the NY Times just scolded Obama and shredded his credibility.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/president-obamas-dragnet.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

You can join us in reality or keep your head planted firmly in the sand. Your choice.

It boasts YOUR skepticism, because that's what you guys are afraid of any way. Most are not. If they can't round up 11 million people how can they round up 360 million guns? Fear is what skews your logic which is loony to normal folks.



Tal they haven't tried doing a house to house yet, that is the way you get both at the same time, Ah where to start?

Well you guys live in fear and worry, but realize we can move to a better union as out founders laid out by facing our obstacles and challenges with courage, and thoughtful conviction.

Yes tal stop being at war with each other

Well you guys go ahead and live in fear and worry, but realize we can move to a better union as out founders laid out by facing our obstacles and challenges with courage, and thoughtful conviction.

You've denied every scandalous action of this administration and demonstrated a clear disdain for my rights, where's the conviction and thoughtfulness in that?

If you weren't so scared, and see what needs to be fixed and fix it, then you would be thoughtful toward solutions and not just react out of knee jerk fear and try to eliminate the good with the bad.

If you weren't so scared, and see what needs to be fixed and fix it, then you would be thoughtful toward solutions and not just react out of knee jerk fear and try to eliminate the good with the bad.

Coming from the side that thought Bush was going to cancel the election and name himself king I have to laugh. Right now Americans don't have much good to see from their government, only the few true believers such as yourself can't see the disaster exploding in front of them on a daily basis.

stop being at war with each otherWell 'clete for the past decade that has been "the american way". I see no end to it frankly.

And the hits just keep on comin'.


State Department memo reveals possible cover-ups, halted investigations (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57588456/state-department-memo-reveals-possible-cover-ups-halted-investigations/)

CBS News has uncovered documents that show the State Department may have covered up allegations of illegal and inappropriate behavior within their ranks.

The Diplomatic Security Service, or the DSS, is the State Department's security force, charged with protecting the secretary of state and U.S. ambassadors overseas and with investigating any cases of misconduct on the part of the 70,000 State Department employees worldwide.

CBS News' John Miller reports that according to an internal State Department Inspector General's memo, several recent investigations were influenced, manipulated, or simply called off. The memo obtained by CBS News cited eight specific examples. Among them: allegations that a State Department security official in Beirut "engaged in sexual assaults" on foreign nationals hired as embassy guards and the charge and that members of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's security detail "engaged prostitutes while on official trips in foreign countries" -- a problem the report says was "endemic."

The memo also reveals details about an "underground drug ring" was operating near the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and supplied State Department security contractors with drugs.

Aurelia Fedenisn, a former investigator with the State Department's internal watchdog agency, the Inspector General, told Miller, "We also uncovered several allegations of criminal wrongdoing in cases, some of which never became cases."

In such cases, DSS agents told the Inspector General's investigators that senior State Department officials told them to back off, a charge that Fedenisn says is "very" upsetting.

"We were very upset. We expect to see influence, but the degree to which that influence existed and how high up it went, was very disturbing," she said.

In one specific and striking cover-up, State Department agents told the Inspector General they were told to stop investigating the case of a U.S. Ambassador who held a sensitive diplomatic post and was suspected of patronizing prostitutes in a public park.

The State Department Inspector General's memo refers to the 2011 investigation into an ambassador who "routinely ditched ... his protective security detail" and inspectors suspect this was in order to "solicit sexual favors from prostitutes."

Sources told CBS News that after the allegations surfaced, the ambassador was called to Washington, D.C. to meet with Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy, but was permitted to return to his post.

Fedenisn says "hostile intelligence services" allow such behavior to continue. "I would be very surprised if some of those entities were not aware of the activities," she said. "So yes, it presents a serious risk to the United States government."

A draft of the Inspector General's report on the performance of the DSS, obtained by CBS News, states, "Hindering such cases calls into question the integrity of the investigative process, can result in counterintelligence vulnerabilities and can allow criminal behavior to continue."

John Miller spoke with Mike Pohelitz, a retired Senior Agent at the DSS who was involved in one of the cases listed in the Inspector General's memo. Pohelitz said he was told to stop investigating one of the cases and that the order likely came from the upper ranks of the DSS.

"I got the information through my DS channel," he told Miller. "But it had to come from somebody higher than DS, I'm sure."

According to Fedenisn, when a high-ranking State Department security officials was shown a draft of their findings that investigations were being interfered with by State Department higher-ups, he said, "This is going to kill us." In the final report however, all references to specific cases had been removed.

"I mean my heart really went out to the agents in that office, because they really want to do the right thing, they want to investigate the cases fully, correctly, accurately ... and they can't," Fedenisn said.

Fedenisn, a DSS agent for 26 years, was a part of the team that prepared the draft report and is now a whistleblower who has taken her concerns to Congress.

Two hours after CBS News made inquiries to the State Department about these charges, investigators from the State Department's Inspector General showed up at her door.

In a statement provided to CBS News, the State Department said they will "not comment about specific allegations of misconduct, internal investigations or personnel matters. Not all allegations are substantiated. It goes without saying that the Department does not condone interference with investigations by any of its employees."

OK lefties, got your talking points handy? Let the spin begin.

What timing, on the day that I'm discussing the left's war on minor girls it turns out this ambassador pervert that apparently liked putting himself and our country in compromising situations by ditching his security detail to get sexed up - allegedly preyed on minors as well (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/11/18900725-ambassador-responds-to-allegations-of-misconduct-from-state-department-memo?lite).


The ambassador who came under investigation “routinely ditched his protective security detail in order to solicit sexual favors from both prostitutes and minor children,” according to documents obtained by NBC News.

Of course he denies the charges and State denies any wrongdoing as well. We'll see.

If nothing else ,Evita showed how ill equipt she is at being in a position of authority .

Hello again, tom:


if nothing else ,Evita showed how ill equipt she is at being in a position of authority .If you don't fix your "Latino" problem, your entire party will prove its ineptness. But, it's in your nature to want to send the "illegals" back, and I think your nature will prevail...

Therefore, no matter HOW inept Hillary is, YOU'RE going to PUT her in the White House...

Excon

I don't have a Latino problem... I welcome all legal immigrants.

It's getting close to half of Texas being Hispanic and Democrats aren't having too much luck here. And we just sent Ted Cruz to the Senate. Of course none of that has anything to do with yet another scandal, although the scandals have something to do with Hillary's approvals dropping.

Hello again,


And the hits just keep on comin'. To me, I see an unruly federal government. That ain't new. The right wing, on the other hand, sees their WORST Obama nightmare coming true, and it's consuming them. They're not just sitting at home grumbling about either. They're looking for trouble. Yes - I mean ARMED trouble.

Tell me I'm dreaming.. Tell me this is just normal politics at work.

Excon

Nothing is normal in that system Ex, it is dysfunctional and the right have proven to be the most dysfunctional of all

Hello again,

To me, I see an unruly federal government. That ain't new. The right wing, on the other hand, sees their WORST Obama nightmare coming true, and it's consuming them. They're not just sitting at home grumbling about either. They're looking for trouble. Yes - I mean ARMED trouble.

Tell me I'm dreaming.. Tell me this is just normal politics at work.

excon

It's really breathtaking to see clear, intentional abuses of government power and watch you nonchalantly call it an "unruly" government after 8 years of Bush fear-mongering.

So your Obama fear mongering is in retaliation to Bush fear mongering?

So your Obama fear mongering is in retaliation to Bush fear mongering?

Did the IRS abuse its power or not?

Hello again, Steve:


Did the IRS abuse its power or not?Look. This is simple sh1t. The IRS SUCK the big one. Of COURSE they abused their power. Government is abusing its power ACROSS the BOARD. What's NEW about that??

But, a SCANDAL, it's NOT. CORRUPTION, it's NOT. It's BAD management. It's STUPID people. It's MEAN people. It's government OUT of control. What's NEW about that?

Excon

NO, and there is no evidence that says they did, just an apology for screwing up the procedure. A procedure that needs serious clarifications and updating, and promises to catch groups on both sides with enhanced scrutiny.

Now the abuse was sending private tax payer info to the newspapers, a clear violation of the law.

Hello again, Steve:

Look. This is simple sh1t. The IRS SUCK the big one. Of COURSE they abused their power. Government is abusing its power ACROSS the BOARD. What's NEW about that?????

But, a SCANDAL, it's NOT. CORRUPTION, it's NOT. It's BAD management. It's STUPID people. It's MEAN people. It's government OUT of control. What's NEW about that?

excon

What's new about it is the left's sudden approval of government abuse.

Hello again, Steve:


What's new about it is the left's sudden approval of government abuse. I'm the left. Does it sound like I approve?

Excon

I question the term abuse. I question any term the right uses when they use it. You blew it with voter "fraud". And YOUR "rights".