Go back under your comfortable rock in hell, you stinking communist lawyer!!

I am really impressed by Mr. Morgan's commitment to enabling important discussions such as these.

He embodies the best that America has to offer, except for our slave labor.
Take that away, and this country is screwed.

I read a book recently. It was called, "The Bible".
It was total garbage.
I tossed it in the can.

I read a book, "The End of Poverty".
It was idiotic.
I threw it away.

I turned on the TV to enjoy stories of police torturing a Chechen kid, til them shot him to death.
THAT sounded like a lot of fun.
Americans are more visual than literary.

Thank you Peerce.

I am really impressed by Mr. Morgan's commitment to enabling important discussions such as these.

He embodies the best that America has to offer, except for our slave labor.
Take that away, and this country is screwed.

"How hard it is to admit the truth"

How can one person get so many things so backwards? Do you have contact with reality in America today? Just about everything in your post is 180 degrees from the truth.

Who cares what a racist pig thinks ... and I use the word 'thinks' generously. You represent the worst of America. The hatred you continue to spew will come back to bite you one day and real Americans, like myself, will just sit back and laugh.

(Remember to flag me, robo-bigot).

How hard it is to admit the truth.

Your savior, Lord Obama, is a thug.
Your health care "reform" is a steaming pile of crap.
Your gun control was deemed retarded by the people and failed.
Your foreign policy has enabled religious totalitarianism across the middle east.
Othugo has filled the Federal Government with petty thugs to squash dissent.
Your stimulus has failed, your jobs programs have failed, 20 million people are out of work.

The vision you brought from your dorm rooms was a comic book with no relationship to reality.

Your intellect has failed.

The right wing extremists who post here are paranoid about everything. They are racists, homophobes, and xenophobes. Perhaps the right term would be 'omniphobes'. They don't live in a world of reality, but only in a fantasy world, a long time ago, that never really was the way they like to romanticize it.

These people are not political because they have repeatedly shown they can only reference right wing talking heads. They are just very sick.

Sorry. Meant homophobe.

Aren't you the self confessed homophone?

Not teabag. Scum bag racists who have no place in America.

Those teabag people were right. Obama is a tyrant.

And the racists keep coming out of the woodwork. Nothing to comment on, flagman?

I guess you are really all the same: overt or covert racists. It doesn't matter which. You are all repulsive and don't deserve the freedoms and liberties of America.

Nothing but niggas and ho's in the White House.

There is a cancer on the Presidency.
The cancer is called Odumbo.

Back at ya, Mr. Flagman with too many 'ssss'es.

And you're way behing on your flagging too. But what else should we expect from a racist?

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

LOL it's Darrell Isssa retard!

Where is Douglas Shulman? The man under whom this whole thing happened? Why hasn't Dan Issa supoenaed him yet? Is Issa trying to cover something up? This stuff is too important for politics. If Issa can't do a fair job he should be removed from his chairmanship. If he is serving political purposes above the good of the people, maybe Issa is the one who should be impeached.

Thats right. Put the cart before the horse. All of this occurred under a Republican appointee as Commissioner of the IRS. The right has already shown its hand by repeatedly calling for impeachment for anything and everything they could think of and BEFORE there was a shred of evidence of an impeachable offense.

Contrast this to what Nancy Pelosi did when she became Speaker of the House. Despite all of the controversy about Bush policies and the false claims of WMD and an unnecessary war in Iraq, she made a clear and definitive statement that impeachment was off the table and would not happen, PERIOD. For those who actually remember Watergate, the evidence came first and long before any calls for impeachment. Even the Dean testimony, which, as I recall came in June, 1973 and during a visit to the WH by the Brezhev, there were no real calls for impeachment until later that year and only after the Saturday night massacre.

At present, there isn't a shred of evidence linking the IRS actions to the WH, nor is there much real evidence that the actions of the lower level people were actually political in nature, but rather, it appears that this was a way to try to deal efficiently with the massive increase in applications for tax exempt status following the Citizens United SCOTUS case. In fact, it was only after the Nixon abuses that the laws were changes specifically to make the IRS even more independent from the WH than it had been.

The real scandal here is the concept of tax free status for what are clearly political organizations on both the right and left. These organizations claim to be purely 'educational' but, in reality are completely partisan and subtlely support specific candidates and, as such, should all be taxed. The existence of these super PACs is not in keeping with the American tradition of one man, one vote and is simply a system that allows the rich to have undue influence on elections, again, on both sides.

Anyone who has actually watched all of the Dan Issa committee hearings should immediately note the partisan nature and tone of the Congressmen. All sorts of gotcha questions, stifling witnesses who want to give a complete answer or trying to relate things that the TARPers don't want to hear or which contradicts their thesis that the President is guilty and impeachable until proven innocent. This, too, is completely un-American.

It is true that additional evidence might come out that would justify accusations, but that hasn't happened yet. Once again, the TARPers are getting way ahead of themselves in their zealous crusade to get rid of that black man in the WH. What would that accomplish politically? Joe Biden would be President and would have the same, if not more liberal policies than Obama. So this really isn't about politics, per se. It is racism pure and simple.

Note that this is the same Dan Issa who wants to supoena the two men who wrote the report on Benghazi and refuses to allow them to testify in open committee, but only wants to hear from them behind closed doors. Maybe we should be asking what Dan Issa is trying to hide and why he doesn't want full disclosure in front of the American people. Kind of suspicious if you ask me.

And please keep up with your flagging. I am beginning to suspect you of incompetance too.

Not just the IRS

Suppose the IRS's abuses were not ordered or explicitly encouraged by the White House. That would mean, as Commentary's Jonathan Tobin puts it, that the agency "has so thoroughly absorbed the views of its political masters that it doesn't even recognize when it has crossed the line into illegal activity."

In other words, if this is the case, the left's hateful and slanderous campaign against its political foes, especially the Tea Party--the demagoguery of Obama, his fellow Democrats and their supporters in the media, led by the New York Times editorial page--was sufficient to prompt the IRS agents to cast aside their professional obligations and embark on a campaign of political abuse whose effect was to ease Obama's re-election.

In his testimony to the Senate Watergate Committee--whose hearings opened 40 years ago today--John Dean famously called that scandal "a cancer on the presidency." If Obama, his campaign or his White House aides are directly implicated in the IRS's abuses, this will be another cancer on the presidency, remediable by resignation or impeachment.

But if the IRS acted without direction from above--if it "went rogue" against the Constitution and in support of the party in power--then we are dealing with a cancer on the federal government. That, it seems to us, is a far direr diagnosis, one whose treatment is likely to be radical and risky.

Has anybody seen my toothpaste?

And speaking of the committee, why hasn't Douglas Shulman testified yet. It sounds like he's the guy you'd want to hear from the most. That is, if you are seeking the real truth independent of politics.

At what point did he know about it based on confirmed testimony obtained without suppression? Have you heard what Commissioner testified to today and not the words the Republicans tried to put into his mouth. The tactics of some of the Republicans on the committee that has been holding hearings has been a throwback to the witch hunts of the McCarthy era. Many questions are of the 'when did you stop beating your wife' nature. Attempts at clarification or adding more information are being squelched. So if you have specific accusations, I'd love to hear them along with supporting testimony and not your usual right wing talking heads notions.

We know your history of lies and distortions and demand real proof. At least during Watergate, the facts came out long before accusations. In this case, the TARP people in Congress are doing just the opposite. Accuse first, then force the facts to show you were right. The TARP concept of what American justice should be. And here I thought that was how the commies used to deal with dissidents.

And please try to stay up to date with the childish flagging. It's a real turn on for me.

What about the guy that headed the Treasury Department?

"I stand with John Boehner. I want some people in jail. Number one on the list should be the guy who headed the IRS when this all started and happened."

I stand with John Boehner. I want some people in jail. Number one on the list should be the guy who headed the IRS when this all started and happened. Not the guy who testified today, Steve Miller. I mean the guy who served from March 24, 2008 (appointed by George Bush) through November 9, 2012 (three days AFTER the last election), Douglas Shulman. Doesn't sound like one of President Obama's cronies to me, but, hey, the facts are the facts.

I see flagman is back to one his other modes that is typical of the right wing. Create hysteria.

Draw a conclusion and then demand others produce facts to support them.
Suppress witnesses when they try to give testamony contrary to the conclusion you've already drawn.
Use the impeachment word any time you can.
Overstep on every issue until it costs you at the polls.
Use the Watergate analogy every chance you get even when the new scandal is completely unrelated to Watergate and how that scandal went down.

And the bottom line is that most of the hostility is motivated by racist bigots and those who tacitly approved of them.

And don't forget to flag me again.

Corruption
Obstruction of Justice

Report: IRS Deliberately Chose Not to Fess Up to Scandal Before Election
"[I]f this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different."
8:36 AM, MAY 17, 2013 • BY DANIEL HALPER Send to Kindle Single PagePrintLarger TextSmaller TextAlerts
NBC's Lisa Myers reported this morning that the IRS deliberately chose not to reveal that it had wrongly targeted conservative groups until after the 2012 presidential election:

The IRS commissioner "has known for at least a year that this was going on," said Myers, "and that this had happened. And did he share any of that information with the White House? But even more importantly, Congress is going to ask him, why did you mislead us for an entire year? Members of Congress were saying conservatives are being targeted. What's going on here? The IRS denied it. Then when -- after these officials are briefed by the IG that this is going on, they don't disclose it. In fact, the commissioner sent a letter to Congress in September on this subject and did not reveal this. Imagine if we -- if you can -- what would have happened if this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different."

Wayh to go, flagman. You've been used again. And to quote or paraphrase from a movie starring your favorite bigot, Mel Gibson "So who is the dickhead now?" And if I thought like you I would assume that your are either an Afrikaner or Dutch.

And you are falling behind on your flagging activities. Do I have to report you to the flaggers union so they will take away your union card? Get with it, bigot !!

Oh? So you're one of THOSE too (your kind of joke/response)? Or is this just another indication of your intellectual capabilities? Still can't handle real issues, can you? Every time this happens you got back to your childish junior high school tactics. If you weren't such a disgusting person, I might even have some sympathy, but you seem to be beyond help and I am beyond caring.

I'd like to put something in your mouth but it's not words.

No responses are given to racist bigots. Feel free to continue your lying ways and to put any words into my mouth that you choose. We all now know where you are coming from and what your agenda is. Anything else you write is purely irrelevant whether true (and it rarely is) or just another lie, partial truth, distortion, or overall rewrite of history. Racist bigots like you are simply not worth our time. And as the George W. Bush doctrine so eloquently states: If you walk with our enemies (or in your case, racists) then you are our enemy (a racist yourself). You have repeatedly treated me based on the company you think I keep (which I don't, but that seems to be irrelevant to you); and now I'm doing it to you with clearly stated justification.

Que obfuscation from the lefty nut job telling us this is all for our own good.

New thread:

Piers Morgan wises up.

Piers comes around, finally!

From National Review Online:

"In light of the IRS targeting conservative groups and the Department of Justice’s seizure of reporters’ phone records, Piers Morgan reversed course and sided with gun advocates who have expressed concerns about an expanding government.

“I’ve had some of the pro-gun lobbyists on here, saying to me, ‘Well, the reason we need to be armed is because of tyranny from our own government,’ and I’ve always laughed at them,” Morgan said last night. “But, actually, this is vaguely tyrannical behavior by the American government.”

Guest Penn Jillette agreed with his assessment: “I think that it shows you that how much we can trust the government and just sit back, which is not very much at all.”

"I treat people as equal irregardless of the color of his/her skin. A black man is just as capable of presenting a voter ID as a white man."

There is no such word as irregardless. There's my elitism showing again.

Technically you may be correct in your statement about blacks and whites, but I think data would support that old people, poor people, people without cars or without credit cards, or passports or other forms of 'acceptable' identification do have problems with some of these new restrictions. And since a greater percentage of blacks in this country are poor compared to white people, it winds up being the same thing. Furthermore, this is all about writing laws for something that MIGHT happen. The number of documented voter cases is miniscule. Other restrictions include shortening the number of available voting days, in particular the Sunday before election day when, by tradition, many black people in America vote. I think you can understand why it all looks suspiciously an organized effort to keep 'certain people' from voting.

So you are either very naïve if you can't see the pattern, or a faker when you give us that 'who me' attitude (especially when you still haven't disassociated yourself from the offensive slur). And I've seen this so many times before. You may be an exception but I find a lot of people who share your views that ultimately realize that they are being motivated by some racism, even though they never realized how much of a factor it was in their hatred. And I find this particularly common among those who just parrot the ultra right wing talking heads. And, once again, to paraphrase George W. Bush, you are either for democracy and liberty and equality, or you are against it. There is no middle ground and there are no explanations or excuses. When I see something wrong, I say it's wrong long before I look around to see which side of the political fence it puts me. On some issues I'm sure I agree with you a lot more than I would with most liberals and some of my liberal friends hate me for it. But they do accept my individuality to disagree on a few issues while coming together on the many where we do agree. It's called flexibility and respect for others.

You got any of that?

The same data would suggest that those that concentrate on their brains to survive manage to survive and probably survive just as well. I'd bet that most wars can be traced to those who wanted to settle difference with physical activity and violence, and to be fair, the poor negotiators like Chamberlain who encouraged and empowered them. It's not one side is all wrong and one, all right. Sometimes violence is the only way; the sides just disagree on where the bar should be set. I would also guess that many of the advances in the life of mankind came from those liberal cerebral types like Thomas Edison, Pasteur, Dr. Barnard (the heart transplant guy), Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and I could go on and on. Some probably came from the more physically focused men. So what's your point? Are you once again implying that some people are better than others because they are more physically than mentally oriented?

I treat people as equal irregardless of the color of his/her skin. A black man is just as capable of presenting a voter ID as a white man.

"They simply cannot accept a black President because, somewhere deep inside themselves, they believe that blacks are basically inferior and not capable of being President and they are inferior to the extent that they don't deserve the full rights and respect of white men. "

Interesting study.
Thanks for posting.

Strong men more likely to have right-wing views, study reveals
From:
news.com.au
May 17, 2013 8:37AM
Bigger biceps mean you're more right wing
Study of men in three countries
Just look at Tony Abbott and Arnie

Opposition leader Tony Abbott is known for his love of exercise and keeping fit - and for his conservative views. Picture: Colin Murty
MEN with strong upper body strength are more likely to vote conservatively while physically weaker males have a greater tendency towards left-leaning views.
And stronger men are more likely to protect their resources while weaker males favour more socialist views such as wealth distribution, researchers claim.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health-fitness/strong-men-more-likely-t...

Oh? And your definition of 'schooling' puts a major emphasis on childish insults, irrational rants about Obama, and 'information' that is nothing more than a regurgitation of the talking points of Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones, many at FOX News, etc. I support my own position with publically available data. You present your side by taking from the talking heads and even the most cursory check of their information reveals a constant pattern of things taken out of context, reporting only half of the story, or outright lies.

I'm sorry, but I don't need teachers like you and you have shown you are not worthy of one like me who presents data and asks you to think about it and comment. You never respond other than changing the subject, ranting on our President, or insults.

And I'm still awaiting your indignation about the 'other teacher's' post and an indication that you do not consider him to be a colleague.

It's a major theme in the Republican and/or Tea Party. Most people keep it hidden but I've been quite surprised at the number who, sooner or later, reveal their true feelings. They simply cannot accept a black President because, somewhere deep inside themselves, they believe that blacks are basically inferior and not capable of being President and they are inferior to the extent that they don't deserve the full rights and respect of white men. This same theme extends to how the Republican and/or Tea Party when it comes to their attitude towards women. I saw your outrage at me by calling me a retard again, but notice you had no room for any negative comment whatsoever about the use of the 'N' words. The silence was deafening.

The Republican and/or Tea Party show anger, hatred and bias all the time and it is little wonder that they are becoming a party of old white men. I think it's that the two forces show the reality of conservative politics and join forces as a single entity. How about the Tea And Republican Party, or TARP for short? I know that acronym is already a big part of their vocabulary.

Kind of catchy, isn't it?

Hey reatrd, that wasn't me.
There are several people schooling you on the depths of your ignorance.

Could take a long time.

You are none of those things. You are a piece of excrement racist. There ya go, blunt and simple. And as Henry Kissinger used to say, it has the added benefit of being true!!

WAH! I want free health care! WAH! I don't want to earn my way! WAH! Thw Bill of Rights isn't about individual rights! WAH! I'm a big baby!

There is no place in America for bigots and people who use the 'N' word. Flagman, you are a disgusting troll. You have lost any credibility when it comes to values or morals.

You have been a better role model for the right wing nut jobs. We liberals thank you for showing your true bigoted, racist, colors. It's not about politics is it? It's pure racism and has been from the beginning now matter how much YOU racists try to hide it. You're still fighting battles from the 60s: The 1960s AND the 1860's. And you're nothing but a loser.

Obama has been a bad roll model for all the little niggas out there. Now they know you can be OG and STILL be da Perez!

Support for ACA itself was never that high. Some of the opposition came from those who wanted the law to go alot farther including a government option.

However, when asked about the actual parts of tne new law, mnost Americans do support it. Just another case of right wing distortion like their stupid death panel nonsense. The real death panels already exist at private insurance companies who decide what will and will not be covered based primarily on profit motives.

I guess you have to post partial information from various right wing groups since you can't express yourself directly. From what you've been posting that's no surprise since it is clear you really don't have a mind of your own. All you ever do is parrot other peoples' talking points.

How about joining reality. ACA is here, it's legal, it's constitutional, and it's going to stay. Republicans and Tea Party people in Congress are just wasting the taxpayers money by holding one vote after another to repeal it when that just isn't about to happen and they are not taking care of the business the American people want them to do. Seems to me that if anyone should be impeached it should be the do-nothing, block everything Republicans in Congress who violate the tasks assigned to them by the Constitution.

Republicans have been throwing the impeachment word around since early in the Obama adminstration. They assume he should be impeached and have spent countless hours trying to create a basis for their desire. And yet, despite all of their efforts, they have yet to find a single thing that would constitute an imnpeachable offense. Once again, Republicans, the party of the past, is living in the past and seeking revenge for the legitimate impeachment proceedings against Richard Nixon. They did the exact same thing with Bill Clinton by starting in on him within a month of him having taken office. Just a bunch of sore loser babies, if you ask me. Can't get elected by the people so the strategy is to make the peoples' choices fail, gerrymander districts to gain seats in Congress (more people actually voted for Democrats in 2012 than Republicans, but Republicans gained more seats through gerrymandering), and doing all they can to take progressive voters off of the voting rolls. And still the babies scream the loudest about how much they support liberty and democracy on the one hand, while trying to cheat their way to election victories. A bunch of unprincipled hypocrits if you ask me.