I have long wondered why the title of this thread is "Disgusted with Obama Administration."

Aren't we at the point now where this would be better referred to as a "Obama regime."

The level of croynism and corruption emanating from Washington these days should be more properly reflected in how we refer to is as it does not deserve the veneer of respectability anymore it maybe once did.

believer;1444193 wrote:God help us.

God help the world.

fish82;1444209 wrote:Obie sucks at POTUS, but is awesome at the internets.

Liberals have always been good at 'internetting'; heck they invented it.

IggyPride00;1444286 wrote:I have long wondered why the title of this thread is "Disgusted with Obama Administration."

Aren't we at the point now where this would be better referred to as a "Obama regime."

I take full responsibility for the misnomer. Instead of blaming it on Bush, I will take a self-imposed 24 hour OC suspension beginning at 5 pm today.

DISGRACEFUL

Report: IRS Deliberately Chose Not to Fess Up to Scandal Before Election

"f this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different."


http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/report-irs-deliberately-chose-not-fess-scandal-election_724711.html

Had this not been covered up, we would have already gotten rid of obamacare, just for starters.

Imagine the outrage if something like this happened before W's second election.

At the end of the day, all that's really needed is for the fog to clear for people when hearing Obama talk. He's already burned plenty of bridges on both sides of the aisle, and all he has left is browbeating opposition by firing up his base with passionate finger pointing and strong rhetoric. When people stop listening or stop caring, Obama has nothing.

Anyone who thinks Obama just found out about this in the papers last Friday is a fool.

majorspark;1444440 wrote:Anyone who thinks Obama just found out about this in the papers last Friday is a fool.

We already know there are 65 million fools out there; you mean there could be more?

QuakerOats;1444399 wrote:I take full responsibility for the misnomer. Instead of blaming it on Bush, I will take a self-imposed 24 hour OC suspension beginning at 5 pm today.

Didn't even realize you were the thread starter.

Very surprised and disappointed.

gut;1444424 wrote:Imagine the outrage if something like this happened before W's second election.

At the end of the day, all that's really needed is for the fog to clear for people when hearing Obama talk. He's already burned plenty of bridges on both sides of the aisle, and all he has left is browbeating opposition by firing up his base with passionate finger pointing and strong rhetoric. When people stop listening or stop caring, Obama has nothing.

Imagine the outrage? It would be like it is now.
Honestly, Obama=Bush. I have said it since Day 1.
The right treats Obama like the left treated Bush.

And, yeah I agree on your last part. The moderate Obama (we saw rarely, and I am even sad to see that as I voted for him on that) has left the building.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/18/us/politics/irs-scandal-congressional-hearings.html?hp&_r=3&



So, obama lied (again) last Friday when he said he just heard about the IRS matter like the rest of us. WOW .................. he even lies when the truth would serve him better.

IggyPride00;1444585 wrote:Didn't even realize you were the thread starter.

Very surprised and disappointed.

Well, this thread is a take-off of the one started a few years ago, before I knew we were truly under dictatorial regime. If that doesn't suffice, I'll blame Bush.


Now into the penalty box for the next 1,440 minutes. Later .....

QuakerOats;1444630 wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/18/us/politics/irs-scandal-congressional-hearings.html?hp&_r=3&



So, obama lied (again) last Friday when he said he just heard about the IRS matter like the rest of us. WOW .................. he even lies when the truth would serve him better.

Cite where it said the President knew in 2012?
I read the Treasury Department knew.
So, where is the link that they told the President?

Don't assume.

Still on the Treasury, they screwed this up, badly.

ptown_trojans_1;1444635 wrote:Cite where it said the President knew in 2012?

I don't disagree, but the Deputy Treasury Secretary knew and there's really only one reason it would not have gone higher than that: plausible deniability.

Not knowing is as indefensible as knowing. As a matter of running your administration, this is simply unacceptable. Benghazi, AP and the IRS - so you have underhanded, politically expedient dealings and the POTUS is not responsible simply because they don't tell him? How very convenient.

One might posit that all this "not knowing" is by intentional design.

The IRS wanted to know the content of a pro-life organization's prayers: http://washingtonexaminer.com/congressman-irs-asked-pro-life-group-about-the-content-of-their-prayers/article/2529924

Where are the leftists and the ACLU on this clear violation of separation of church & state they hold so dear?

The more details that come out on the IRS, Benghazi, and AP debacles the scarier this all becomes.

Jack Lew getttin' persnickety....

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/300463-treasury-asks-congress-for-debt-increase-says-its-not-open-to-debate

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew on Friday urged congressional leaders to raise the debt limit and insisted that the White House is not going to negotiate over the increase because lawmakers have "no choice."
"We will not negotiate over the debt limit," Lew wrote. "The creditworthiness of the United States is non-negotiable. The question of whether the country must pay obligations it has already incurred is not open to debate."

GFY, Jack.

Technically, Lew is right. However, he's trampling all over the purpose of a debt ceiling - to PREVENT this country from committing to obligations it cannot afford.

But they struggle to wield this power effectively. They need to agree on a practical and responsible path to deficit reduction, and link debt ceiling increases to that.

The debt ceiling should not just be arbitrarily increased so Washington can keep kicking the can down the road. It's bass ackwards that the irresponsible spenders are using the threat of default to bully opposition into acquiescence.

gut;1444877 wrote:It's bass ackwards that the irresponsible spenders are using the threat of default to bully opposition into acquiescence.

spot on

gut;1444658 wrote:I don't disagree, but the Deputy Treasury Secretary knew and there's really only one reason it would not have gone higher than that: plausible deniability.

Not knowing is as indefensible as knowing. As a matter of running your administration, this is simply unacceptable. Benghazi, AP and the IRS - so you have underhanded, politically expedient dealings and the POTUS is not responsible simply because they don't tell him? How very convenient.

One might posit that all this "not knowing" is by intentional design.

This.
.
This is another situation where we have outright deceit....or incompetence. The "buck" always seems to stop just short.

For many of us, this is yesterday's news. For many of the Obamabots, this might be a revelation. In either case, he's no capitalist - http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/obama_admits_he_socialist_pW7TL907rIGq7SyJCYLBoN

BGFalcons82;1445174 wrote:For many of us, this is yesterday's news. For many of the Obamabots, this might be a revelation. In either case, he's no capitalist - http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/obama_admits_he_socialist_pW7TL907rIGq7SyJCYLBoN

Go figure right? We are being led by idiots who were elected by idiots. This country has lost its mind.

Unsurprising, but still interesting. It might lend some credence to those who believe Obama is being obstructionist and perpetually campaigning for 2014 so he can ramrod more of his socialist agenda. But ultimately I think that's giving the empty suit to much credit. My opinion is that Obama doesn't know how to lead, and isn't interested in it any way. When he's not being obtuse or hands-off ("I didn't know"), he appears to seek to disqualify himself from the debate by taking an uncompromising position.

Increasingly I think he's trying to carve for himself a Slick Willy-type path where remaining popular is priority #1, maybe the only priority, so he can remain relevant and popular and influential after leaving office. Taking responsibility for tough choices and taking tough actions is a big gamble for that, and apparently not something Obama is willing to risk.

Yet Fifty-three percent of Americans said they approve of the job the president is doing, while 45 percent said they disapprove. That’s virtually unchanged from an early April survey in which Obama’s approval/disapproval split was 51 percent to 47 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/05/19/cnn-poll-obama-approval-rating-unharmed-by-controversies/

And According to a new Gallup poll, interest in the IRS scandal and the controversy over Benghazi remains below average when it comes to major news stories. While 60 percent of Americans are generally following a story at least “somewhat closely,” just 53 percent are following the Benghazi news and 54 percent are following the IRS scandal.

Watching heads exploding on here is fun.

Abe Vigoda;1445337 wrote:Yet Fifty-three percent of Americans said they approve of the job the president is doing, while 45 percent said they disapprove. That’s virtually unchanged from an early April survey in which Obama’s approval/disapproval split was 51 percent to 47 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/05/19/cnn-poll-obama-approval-rating-unharmed-by-controversies/

And According to a new Gallup poll, interest in the IRS scandal and the controversy over Benghazi remains below average when it comes to major news stories. While 60 percent of Americans are generally following a story at least “somewhat closely,” just 53 percent are following the Benghazi news and 54 percent are following the IRS scandal.

Watching heads exploding on here is fun.

Cool story. At the time the Watergate burglars were convicted, Nixon's approval rating was 66%.

Hope this helps.

While 60 percent of Americans are generally following a story at least “somewhat closely,” just 53 percent are following the Benghazi news and 54 percent are following the IRS scandal.

just 53%?....you mean 100 million+ Americans?...obviously an insignificant number.

Also lost in the poll is the context....If this is a below average story...what is more riveting???? Princess Kate's baby bump? ....the latest Kardashian story?...the kidnapping down the street?

Good spin though....probably works on the mentally challenged.