Howard Baker passes

[Kasept]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/us...t-88.html?_r=0

An authentic statesman. The GOP could sure use a few like him these days.

[mclem0822]

Originally Posted by Kasept

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/us...t-88.html?_r=0

An authentic statesman. The GOP could sure use a few like him these days.

That's for damn sure! RIP Mr. Baker

[OldDog]

That makes two Watergate-era heroes who died. Howard Baker, who famously asked "what did the President know and when did he know it," and Johnnie Walters, the IRS Commissioner who refused to go along with Nixon's efforts to target his enemies.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_b...issioner-.html
Two Republicans who stood up for the rule of law.

Where are the Democrats willing to stand up for it under the current Administration?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by OldDog

That makes two Watergate-era heroes who died. Howard Baker, who famously asked "what did the President know and when did he know it," and Johnnie Walters, the IRS Commissioner who refused to go along with Nixon's efforts to target his enemies.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_b...issioner-.html
Two Republicans who stood up for the rule of law.

Where are the Democrats willing to stand up for it under the current Administration?

You're comparing Nixon/Watergate to the Obama administration?? Seriously?? OMG One is a Criminal act, cover up and impeachment..the other is a difference in politics and a hatred of Liberals

[mclem0822]

Originally Posted by GBBob

You're comparing Nixon/Watergate to the Obama administration?? Seriously?? OMG One is a Criminal act, cover up and impeachment..the other is a difference in politics and a hatred of Liberals

[Danzig]

ditto to mclem.

now, i'm not particularly happy with how things have gone since obama took over-but what rules of law are we talking about, old dog?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Danzig

ditto to mclem.

now, i'm not particularly happy with how things have gone since obama took over-but what rules of law are we talking about, old dog?

My opinion is no better or worse than Rudes, Joey's, yours, Jims, Coaches etc...As with most things in life ( I believe) the truth is somewhere in the middle. I get frustrated with the "absolutists" who feel it's their way or the highway. That leads to extremists and that leads to trouble....no matter which way you lean.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by GBBob

My opinion is no better or worse than Rudes, Joey's, yours, Jims, Coaches etc...As with most things in life ( I believe) the truth is somewhere in the middle. I get frustrated with the "absolutists" who feel it's their way or the highway. That leads to extremists and that leads to trouble....no matter which way you lean.

Speaking of extremists

http://www.alternet.org/belief/why-d...you?page=0%2C0

[Pants II]

Oh hell lets just say it...we want the Republicans to be pretty much like the Democrats. We'll let them be pro Military-Industrial complex.

Just have an affinity for spending other people's money.

In a country where those who are fortunate enough to have jobs actually hate their jobs...

well...piss on admiring the idiots who have helped destroy the economy.

The wound is still festering. Keep thinking we're out of the woods.

[GenuineRisk]

There are many things I dislike about the NYTimes, but they do great obits. That was a fascinating read about a very interesting man.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by GBBob

You're comparing Nixon/Watergate to the Obama administration?? Seriously?? OMG One is a Criminal act, cover up and impeachment..the other is a difference in politics and a hatred of Liberals

Obama vs. Nixon: Top Constitutional Experts: Obama Is Worse than Nixon

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...han-nixon.html

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Obama vs. Nixon: Top Constitutional Experts: Obama Is Worse than Nixon

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...han-nixon.html

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1...r-Satan-Really


Can find any support for any position I need on the good ole Internet...

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by jms62

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1...r-Satan-Really


Can find any support for any position I need on the good ole Internet...

The article I linked was an objective article that had the opinions of multiple constitutional scholars, both liberal and conservative.

[OldDog]

Why limit the comparison to Watergate?


It isn’t only members of the right who have drawn comparisons between Obama and Nixon.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3278303.html
and this from a Constitutional law professor who has supported Obama
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...rgate/2019443/
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/law-profe...-wanted-to-be/

The chief differences being that Americans have seemingly accepted the abuse of rights under an Obama Administration, whereas the outcry against abuses under Nixon were (rightly) decried by the public, spurred on by a more free and potent press. Where are the press now? They seem largely to be happy to report whatever is spoon fed them by the Administration, and the evasive responses to their softball questions are accepted and regurgitated to the public. Are they happily complicit to a fellow Democrat, fearful of a vengeful phone tap or email monitoring, or just uninquisitive? None are good. Imagine for a moment that under a Republican Administration the IRS, led by and defended by IRS personnel who aren’t just registered Republicans, but consistent Republican donors, goes to considerable lengths to suppress liberal-oriented nonprofit organizations. Investigations are launched and the chief (Republican) IRS fixture proclaims his innocence and promptly . . . takes the Fifth. Democrats want to know more and subpoena his emails for the relevant period. The IRS (Republicans) responds that the emails must be reviewed prior to their release, but some several months later reports “ooops” THEY’RE NOT HERE AFTER ALL. His hard drive crashed. Backups? No, sorry. We cancelled the contract with the independent backup service. Never mind that we were required by law to notify federal archivists in the event of such a crash. Oops, we forgot to do that, all but eliminating the archivists’ chances of recovering them. Imagine further that then six of his staffers lost all of their emails from that same time period, too. Imagine just for fun that the Republican press secretary said don’t worry, this was just the scheme of two rogue IRS agents in Cincy, and the Republican President said that “not even a smidgen of corruption” occurred. If this had occurred, cries of “Special Presecutor” would abound throughout the Democratic Party, and the “elite” media – the NY Times, WaPo, ABC, CBS, NBC – would all be fixated on it, obsessed with it. I mean, it would be almost as intense as their coverage with a freaking lane closure on a bridge. Instead it’s like this

(especially the TV box in the lower right corner)

This Administration constantly displays indifference, if not contempt for the rule of law. Look at the selective enforcement/implementation of laws regarding immigration, drugs, and its own signature Obamacare. Do rank and file Democrat voters care? It’s tough to tell, if they do. Democrats in the House and Senate appear not to. Indeed, they are happy to be complicit. Remember all those Democrats telling reporters that they were eager to "fix" Obamacare? I wonder when their proposals will come forth.

Jay Carney said, of the Obama-Nixon comparison, check your history. Okay, let's.
http://rare.us/story/check-your-hist...nt-than-obama/

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by OldDog

Why limit the comparison to Watergate?


It isn’t only members of the right who have drawn comparisons between Obama and Nixon.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3278303.html
and this from a Constitutional law professor who has supported Obama
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...rgate/2019443/
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/law-profe...-wanted-to-be/

The chief differences being that Americans have seemingly accepted the abuse of rights under an Obama Administration, whereas the outcry against abuses under Nixon were (rightly) decried by the public, spurred on by a more free and potent press. Where are the press now? They seem largely to be happy to report whatever is spoon fed them by the Administration, and the evasive responses to their softball questions are accepted and regurgitated to the public. Are they happily complicit to a fellow Democrat, fearful of a vengeful phone tap or email monitoring, or just uninquisitive? None are good. Imagine for a moment that under a Republican Administration the IRS, led by and defended by IRS personnel who aren’t just registered Republicans, but consistent Republican donors, goes to considerable lengths to suppress liberal-oriented nonprofit organizations. Investigations are launched and the chief (Republican) IRS fixture proclaims his innocence and promptly . . . takes the Fifth. Democrats want to know more and subpoena his emails for the relevant period. The IRS (Republicans) responds that the emails must be reviewed prior to their release, but some several months later reports “ooops” THEY’RE NOT HERE AFTER ALL. His hard drive crashed. Backups? No, sorry. We cancelled the contract with the independent backup service. Never mind that we were required by law to notify federal archivists in the event of such a crash. Oops, we forgot to do that, all but eliminating the archivists’ chances of recovering them. Imagine further that then six of his staffers lost all of their emails from that same time period, too. Imagine just for fun that the Republican press secretary said don’t worry, this was just the scheme of two rogue IRS agents in Cincy, and the Republican President said that “not even a smidgen of corruption” occurred. If this had occurred, cries of “Special Presecutor” would abound throughout the Democratic Party, and the “elite” media – the NY Times, WaPo, ABC, CBS, NBC – would all be fixated on it, obsessed with it. I mean, it would be almost as intense as their coverage with a freaking lane closure on a bridge. Instead it’s like this

(especially the TV box in the lower right corner)

This Administration constantly displays indifference, if not contempt for the rule of law. Look at the selective enforcement/implementation of laws regarding immigration, drugs, and its own signature Obamacare. Do rank and file Democrat voters care? It’s tough to tell, if they do. Democrats in the House and Senate appear not to. Indeed, they are happy to be complicit. Remember all those Democrats telling reporters that they were eager to "fix" Obamacare? I wonder when their proposals will come forth.

Jay Carney said, of the Obama-Nixon comparison, check your history. Okay, let's.
http://rare.us/story/check-your-hist...nt-than-obama/

Did you really write that? Edit...I mean..is any of this drivel yours or just quotes?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Did you really write that? Edit...I mean..is any of this drivel yours or just quotes?

I think you need to read this part of it again. As the author says, you would be going crazy if this happened the other way around. This isn't half-truths, like most stuff in politics. Everything he says in this quote is 100% true.

"Imagine for a moment that under a Republican Administration the IRS, led by and defended by IRS personnel who aren’t just registered Republicans, but consistent Republican donors, goes to considerable lengths to suppress liberal-oriented nonprofit organizations. Investigations are launched and the chief (Republican) IRS fixture proclaims his innocence and promptly . . . takes the Fifth. Democrats want to know more and subpoena his emails for the relevant period. The IRS (Republicans) responds that the emails must be reviewed prior to their release, but some several months later reports “ooops” THEY’RE NOT HERE AFTER ALL. His hard drive crashed. Backups? No, sorry. We cancelled the contract with the independent backup service. Never mind that we were required by law to notify federal archivists in the event of such a crash."

I'm sure you would think this was drivel if this happened to liberal groups under Bush.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by jms62

Speaking of extremists

http://www.alternet.org/belief/why-d...you?page=0%2C0

That article is complete nonsense. What a joke! The author thinks that every time a Christian claims that their religious freedom is being suppressed that it is a lie. I will quote him. Here is how he categorizes each case when the victim is Christian. Notice how he starts each sentence by simply claiming that each thing is a lie:

"Tell a lie about how a sergeant was persecuted for simply holding that religious belief to paint yourself as the “real” victim".

"Tell lies about how kids are being punished for having private prayers all to themselves."

"Spread a false tale claiming that people aren’t allowed private ownership of religious cards."

Now if a non-Christian is discriminated against in any way, it is almost definitely true. But if a Christian is discriminated against, it is definitely a lie, and just a ploy on the part of the Christian to impose his views on others. That sounds like a credible argument. LOL. Does this guy have any idea how ridiculous he sounds? Why would any publication even print something so absurd?

These liberal clowns have no shame. Any time something happens that hurts their narrative, they will just claim that the event never happened, that it was a lie. Many in the liberal media claimed that "The Knockout Game" doesn't exist. Now that it's all over the news and several police departments are talking about it, it's getting pretty hard for these clowns to keep denying that the game exists. These same clowns claim there is no voter fraud. Anyone with a brain knows that in any type of competition where money is involved, whether it's horseracing, cycling, baseball, politics, etc. that people will try to cheat. It's just a fact of life.

The shocking thing about it is that many people (mainly democrats) believe Obama and Holder when they say that the purpose of having voters show ID is to disenfranchise people. How could anybody believe this? How could anybody be against having to show ID when you vote? It's the only way to ensure legitimate elections. But Obama and Holder will tell you that there is no reason to show your ID when you vote.

I have a friend who is a liberal democrat and he is in his 60s and he believes what Obama and Holder say about voter fraud. He thinks it doesn't exist and any efforts to ask people for ID is simply a way to disenfranchise people. This friend of mine has listened to these liberal talking points for so long that he believes them. And this guy is a smart guy. It's incredible. Showing ID is about as likely to disenfranchise a legitimate voter as showing ID will stop a legitimate American traveler from getting on a plane. Nobody has a problem showing ID.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

That article is complete nonsense. What a joke! The author thinks that every time a Christian claims that their religious freedom is being suppressed that it is a lie. I will quote him. Here is how he categorizes each case when the victim is Christian. Notice how he starts each sentence by simply claiming that each thing is a lie:

"Tell a lie about how a sergeant was persecuted for simply holding that religious belief to paint yourself as the “real” victim".

"Tell lies about how kids are being punished for having private prayers all to themselves."

"Spread a false tale claiming that people aren’t allowed private ownership of religious cards."

Now if a non-Christian is discriminated against in any way, it is almost definitely true. But if a Christian is discriminated against, it is definitely a lie, and just a ploy on the part of the Christian to impose his views on others. That sounds like a credible argument. LOL. Does this guy have any idea how ridiculous he sounds? Why would any publication even print something so absurd?

These liberal clowns have no shame. Any time something happens that hurts their narrative, they will just claim that the event never happened, that it was a lie. Many in the liberal media claimed that "The Knockout Game" doesn't exist. Now that it's all over the news and several police departments are talking about it, it's getting pretty hard for these clowns to keep denying that the game exists. These same clowns claim there is no voter fraud. Anyone with a brain knows that in any type of competition where money is involved, whether it's horseracing, cycling, baseball, politics, etc. that people will try to cheat. It's just a fact of life.

The shocking thing about it is that many people (mainly democrats) believe Obama and Holder when they say that the purpose of having voters show ID is to disenfranchise people. How could anybody believe this? How could anybody be against having to show ID when you vote? It's the only way to ensure legitimate elections. But Obama and Holder will tell you that there is no reason to show your ID when you vote.

I have a friend who is a liberal democrat and he is in his 60s and he believes what Obama and Holder say about voter fraud. He thinks it doesn't exist and any efforts to ask people for ID is simply a way to disenfranchise people. This friend of mine has listened to these liberal talking points for so long that he believes them. And this guy is a smart guy. It's incredible. Showing ID is about as likely to disenfranchise a legitimate voter as showing ID will stop a legitimate American traveler from getting on a plane. Nobody has a problem showing ID.

[Rudeboyelvis]

I stand corrected - Byk had it 100% right the first time. The responses to the OP's initial post in this abortion of a thread are precisely why this room should have stayed extinguished. It's microcosmic example of why we can't have nice things

[Danzig]

what christian has been discriminated against due to his religion?

and what's a religious card?