Time to consider "Worst Administration Ever"?

[Sardondi]

I keep thinking I've seen the worst; that there's nothing in Obama's Brave New World that can offend me more than I've already been. Then I see some of the questions which the IRS's sonderkommando demanded that a pro-life group seeking tax-exempt status answer before it could get the basic designation which the same apparatchiks handed out like gumdrops to any group whose politics the Administration favored:

"Please detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers."

http://washingtonexaminer.com/congressman-irs-asked-pro-life-group-about-the-content-of-their-prayers/article/2529924

I really hope it's a lie. I really do. I hope these are the kind of insane, frothing at the mouth people who exist in liberals' imaginations, who have concocted something completely false and have gone before Congress to testify to an absolute lie. Because if not, we truly are living in Orwell's nightmare.

But it makes me wonder: is there anyone here who believes this Administration made a pro-choice group seeking tax-exempt status answer anything at all about beliefs, much less the content of their prayers?

[PB the Deplorable]

... But it makes me wonder: is there anyone here who believes this Administration made a pro-choice group seeking tax-exempt status answer anything at all about beliefs, much less the content of their prayers?

I guess they could do what Obama does and claim not to know a thing about what's been going on at that racist Marxist church he attended for 20 years

[PB the Deplorable]

One major difference between the two parties is the R's tend to resign when caught in some scandal, whether it's sex, money, illegal activities, or corruption.  Not the D's, never the Democrats.  Ask the Clintons.  Ask Barney Frank.  Ask any of them.

It's probably some combination of (1) the Media covering for the D's by first burying the story then later acting as if it's no big deal and informing us it's 'old news' anyway, while chasing down every detail of an R scandal to the point of making things up, plus (2) the R's ending their support and telling their person to resign, while the D's rally around theirs, and finally - (3) the notion that somehow the D's should be above having to resign or even be expected to act properly in the first place because the noble work they are doing to grow government, raise taxes, and steal our freedoms transcends whatever sleaze they were involved with.

But, you know, don't watch Fox News - they're biased.


Obama won't leave and won't have to.  If it were a Republican piling up scandal at this rate, he'd be gone in a month - hell, they wouldn't have made it to a 2nd term because the Media would have looked into and focused unrelentingly on much of this before the election

[Sardondi]

So let's assume for the sake of argument that the IRS's punitive policy against conservative groups, which began as early as 2010 or even earlier, was entirely the making of former IRS Commissioner Steven Miller, and that the White House was entirely innocent of any involvement. (I know, I know a virtually ludicrous assumption when the Chief of Staff until mid-2011 was Rahm Emanuel, who gloried in crowing about how dirty he was willing to play.) Even assuming total ignorance of the White House, it was told of the IRS's program of partisan abuse in June, 2012. IRS Commissioner and also http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324767004578488833834357540.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

That's the "June, 2012" that was five months before the 2012 election. That's the "June, 2012" when The First Liar was shamelessly feeding a pet media accusations of all the terribly partisan things the GOP was doing to intentionally tear the country apart.

Has such a man no fear of judgment? What hubris. Arrogance and cynicism worthy of Shakespeare. I am reminded of a scripture from Galatians: "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."

[ItsOver]

I'm still wondering what use all these high-paid doofuses in D.C. are since they don't seem to know anything.

[Jackpine Savage]

I'm still wondering what use all these high-paid doofuses in D.C. are since they don't seem to know anything.

Nobody knows nothin' up in DC. It's all a big accident. Like the Gods shootin' dice. Or so we are supposed to believe...

[Jackpine Savage]

It's like 1950's New York. They sit in an empty storefront, drive a beamer and live in the Hamptons, and we're all supposed to believe they are simply "legitimate businessmen", who "Don't know nothin' 'bout nothin'!"

[PB the Deplorable]

They want bigger and bigger government, more and more power, and less and less accountability

[Yorkshire pud]

They want bigger and bigger government, more and more power, and less and less accountability

Yeah...it's kind of exciting isn't it? One hell of a rush when it's done with real spleen venting.

[Tinfoil Hat]

I think the nut of the problem is regular, every-day working people aren't in positions of power. What we have in this country is a political class akin to the government in some banana republic.

What we need is to take money out of politics and elect people who honestly have the peoples' interest at heart. When office-holders are career politicians, they're no longer in touch with the real world the rest of us inhabit and therefore, could care less about the people they govern.

Sardoni, PaperBoy,  Jackpine, etc. I may not agree with you guys much, but were any of you on a ballot here, I'd probably vote for you given that none of you seem enamored of having power for powers' sake and seem to care deeply about the founding principles of this country.

[Juan]

Noted late Atlanta radio humorist Ludlow Porch advocated a law that required every citizen to serve one term in public office.  And one term was all you got, whether that term was as president or dog catcher.

[Sardondi]

...Sardoni, PaperBoy,  Jackpine, etc. I may not agree with you guys much, but were any of you on a ballot here, I'd probably vote for you given that none of you seem enamored of having power for powers' sake and seem to care deeply about the founding principles of this country.

You could not have paid a greater compliment. Thank you for your grace and dignity. And remember, guys, when I'm whaling on these politicians, my disgust with them doesn't extend to anyone here. I am (usually) not so arrogant as to think I'm imbued with omniscience, and I realize at heart these are matters upon which reasonable persons can differ. But sometimes passion and commitment get the better of us, and then it's like we're trying to make that square peg go in the round hole: "Just listen to me, dammit! Understand! Everyone think like me! Now!"

[NowhereInTime]

I have read, with utter astonishment, the hyperbolic exposition of these last three pages and I'm at a loss to understand exactly what this administration has done that has lowered itself to the levels of authorized & financed break-ins of political opponents and arms sales to embargoed  (enemy) nations to finance guerrilla militias?
"Subjected to extra scrutiny"?  Not one credible source has issued a charge any stronger with any merit.  Was any group capriciously denied their tax free status?  And how did this impact their rights to free speech? Boehner talks about jail.  Bachmann says this is bigger than Watergate.  Poof goes your credibility.
Benghazi's about what?  Susan Rice blaming that attack on people protesting a movie?  What the hell is your excuse for the World Trade Center, then?  Too busy reading children's books?
AP getting their phones tapped and files read?  Be the most attention anyone's paid to the AP in years.  Still doesn't compare to the FBI coming to the local library to see who's taken out books on Malcom X.
You can't beat him in an election, you couldn't stop Obamacare, now you play the impeachment card? "Worst administration ever"? Not even in the last 30 years.

[Sardondi]

I have read, with utter astonishment, the hyperbolic exposition of these last three pages and I'm at a loss to understand exactly what this administration has done that has lowered itself to the levels of authorized & financed break-ins of political opponents and arms sales to embargoed  (enemy) nations to finance guerrilla militias?....

Which is the precise reason why the presence or lack of one's astonishment is not the standard of determining whether a crime has been committed. But to play your game a moment, let's just ignore everything else bubbling away, from Fast and Furious, to the stimulus embezzlement, the Benghazi lies, etc. - but tapping the phones and using the IRS as the party sic 'em dog against those on the enemies list or as retaliation against anyone who displeased the Imperial Presence was always painted as Nixon's most shocking and dangerous crimes - emphasis on "crimes", not simply "impeachable behavior".

Not that it matters a damn whether Obama's systemic crimes will be found to equal or even surpass Nixon's. Thank goodness for the rule of law...if it still exists. But if you truly can't grasp how using the IRS as a private weapon to punish and intimidate one's political opponents is a threat to our very confidence in government, well, I'm sorry, but your 2013 is going to be a Summer of Utter Astonishment.

[MV/Liberace!]

...if you truly can't grasp how using the IRS as a private weapon to punish and intimidate one's political opponents is a threat to our very confidence in government, well, I'm sorry, but your 2013 is going to be a Summer of Utter Astonishment.

this.

[Jackpine Savage]

I think the nut of the problem is regular, every-day working people aren't in positions of power. What we have in this country is a political class akin to the government in some banana republic.

What we need is to take money out of politics and elect people who honestly have the peoples' interest at heart. When office-holders are career politicians, they're no longer in touch with the real world the rest of us inhabit and therefore, could care less about the people they govern.

Sardoni, PaperBoy,  Jackpine, etc. I may not agree with you guys much, but were any of you on a ballot here, I'd probably vote for you given that none of you seem enamored of having power for powers' sake and seem to care deeply about the founding principles of this country.

I sincerely appreciate the sentiment. See this is the rub, once one side wins an election, it's become a mad rush to invest as much power as possible in the Federal Executive when "their guy" is in charge, never thinking about what might happen to them when the "other guys" take over. It's so amazingly myopic it would be hilarious if it hasn't all been so catastrophic.

[Jackpine Savage]

Which is the precise reason why the presence or lack of one's astonishment is not the standard of determining whether a crime has been committed. But to play your game a moment, let's just ignore everything else bubbling away, from Fast and Furious, to the stimulus embezzlement, the Benghazi lies, etc. - but tapping the phones and using the IRS as the party sic 'em dog against those on the enemies list or as retaliation against anyone who displeased the Imperial Presence was always painted as Nixon's most shocking and dangerous crimes - emphasis on "crimes", not simply "impeachable behavior".

Not that it matters a damn whether Obama's systemic crimes will be found to equal or even surpass Nixon's. Thank goodness for the rule of law...if it still exists. But if you truly can't grasp how using the IRS as a private weapon to punish and intimidate one's political opponents is a threat to our very confidence in government, well, I'm sorry, but your 2013 is going to be a Summer of Utter Astonishment.

Yep, they picked the most hated and feared institution in America, and just validated every single hatred and fear held. And right after entrusting that very same institution to administer healthcare. They just proved right every person they called "paranoid" and "crazy" during the Obamacare debate. Any shred of trust is gone forever. This is big. I wouldn't be surprised if they have to split up the IRS now.

[onan]

It's a good thing I don't run the IRS. Every fucking 503c4 would be automatically audited every year and it would include a red hot poker. It's a bogus not for profit class that specifically promotes lobbyists... fuck them.


Did the IRS go too far? I don't think so.


Did Obama know about it? I don't think so, but none of us know. I do know that it is illegal for the white house to have communications with the IRS in regards to any specific interactions targetting anyone.

[RealCool Daddio]

It's a good thing I don't run the IRS. Every fucking 503c4 would be automatically audited every year and it would include a red hot poker. It's a bogus not for profit class that specifically promotes lobbyists... fuck them.


Did the IRS go too far? I don't think so.

Truth to power, Onan. 

[Jackpine Savage]

It's a good thing I don't run the IRS. Every fucking 503c4 would be automatically audited every year and it would include a red hot poker. It's a bogus not for profit class that specifically promotes lobbyists... fuck them.


Did the IRS go too far? I don't think so.


Did Obama know about it? I don't think so, but none of us know. I do know that it is illegal for the white house to have communications with the IRS in regards to any specific interactions targetting anyone.

Fine. Go get 'em tiger. Except that isn't what happened here. One side was targeted, the other got a pass. You don't see anything wrong with that? And without non-profits, where will people like Michelle Obama get jobs? 

[onan]

Fine. Go get 'em tiger. Except that isn't what happened here. One side was targeted, the other got a pass. You don't see anything wrong with that? And without non-profits, where will people like Michelle Obama get jobs?

never mind it isn't worth it.

[PB the Deplorable]

Serious question - do you think the USA might be too big to govern effectively? If the expectation is that the president must be held to account for everything that happens on his watch - that might be more than can reasonably be expected of one man.  I am hard pressed to think of a president, in my lifetime, who didn't preside over a litany of screw ups, clusterfucks, ill advised military engagements, domestic crises, or hints and allegations of impeachable behavior.

It's a good thing I don't run the IRS. Every fucking 503c4 would be automatically audited every year and it would include a red hot poker. It's a bogus not for profit class that specifically promotes lobbyists... fuck them.


Did the IRS go too far? I don't think so.


Did Obama know about it? I don't think so, but none of us know. I do know that it is illegal for the white house to have communications with the IRS in regards to any specific interactions targetting anyone.

The impeachable behavior has come from extra-curricular political choices the Presidents have made that they knew were wrong and illegal while they were doing them (or at least during the following coverups), not bunglng somewhere down the chain on normal day-to-day activity in some faraway office (although that's always the initial claim). 


Obviously many of the lobbyists are greedy sleasy money-grubbers - many are ex-Congresspeople, but many others are just playing defense.  They need to buy access to get their side out there so as to not be steam-rollered on the next bill that comes out of Congress.  The Federal government just has too much power - if that power was trimmed back to an appropriate level, the greedy lobbyists would have little to fight over and the ones playing defense wouldn't be as threatened.

Whatever the rules are, they need to be applied evenly.



My answer is that the Federal government has grown much too big.  It's too big to manage what they have on their plate well, too big to prevent huge amounts of duplication, fraud, waste, self dealing, cronyism, etc, too big to be flexable or responsive to the actual needs of the people they are supposed to be serving.  It's just too big and tries to do too much.  And all that power and money has drawn the worst, most greedy people in the country to the top slots.

During the campaign we learned that 50% of households have someone getting Federal money - and I don't think that includes Federal employees, just social programs.  We can't afford that.  All that tax money we send to DC, and it's still not enough - they still need to borrow $1.5 Trillion more every year to cover the rest.  As a country we can't afford that.  Giving handouts to people that could be supporting themselves and don't truly need it hurts the person getting the loot by making them lazy and dependent, and it hurts the person who is being taxed.

 

Whenever someone says something like this, the next question is 'well what would you cut?'  The Cabinet Departments are -

State
Treasury
Justice
Interior
Agriculture
Commerce
Labor
Defence
HHS
HUD
Transportation
Energy
Education
Veterans Affairs
Homeland Security


If it were me, I'd eliminate Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, HHS, HUD, Energy, Education, and Veterans Affairs.  There are probably many activities these departments do that still need to be done at the Federal level, but not so many they need their own separate bureaucracy.  We need meat inspectors, a patent office, the CDC, and a zillion other things, but we don't need everything that is being done. 


How much food does the Dept of Agriculture produce?  Why does the Federal government need to be involved at all with Labor, Commerce, Housing, Health, Urban Development, other than regulating what little needs to be regulated at the Federal level?  How many kids does the Dept of Education educate?  How much energy  does the Dept of Energy produce?  We should take care of our wounded veterans and families of troops that were killed, but can't Defense oversee that?

The remaining Departments could also have any number of programs they are currently involved with eliminated.


That's what would make the whole thing more managable.  A big fat tax cut would be in order.  Whatever is eliminated, any state would be welcome to continue it and raise the approprite tax (partially offsetting Federal tax cuts) - a smaller program in a given state would be much more easily managed.

[Sardondi]

...If it were me, I'd eliminate Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, HHS, HUD, Energy, Education, and Veterans Affairs.  There are probably many activities these departments do that still need to be done at the Federal level, but not so many they need their own separate bureaucracy.  We need meat inspectors, a patent office, the CDC, and a zillion other things, but we don't need everything that is being done....

Yup. Well, except for the VA, although it is horrendously run. But the states have no one but themselves to blame for the federal government's usurpation of their powers: in most cases the states simply abdicated their responsibility.

[PB the Deplorable]

Yup. Well, except for the VA, although it is horrendously run. But the states have no one but themselves to blame for the federal government's usurpation of their powers: in most cases the states simply abdicated their responsibility.

The 17th Amendment to the Constitution was a disaster.  Instead of US Senators being appointed by the State Legislatures and representing the interests of the States that sent them to DC, the Senators are now elected directly.  Suddenly there was no restriction to Federal power vs that of the States.  There isn't really much the States can do, regardless of what the 10th Amendment says.

This happened under President Woodrow Wilson and the so-called 'Progressives'.  They found a small limited government whose power was shackled due to that power being allocated among many competing interests - they thought it slow and cumbersome with too many obstacles to all the good that could be done.  Sound familiar?   Wilson's vision of an activist government 'doing good' was very different from Jefferson's view of government as a necessary evil.

Wilsons 2 terms went from 1913-1921, and in those years we also got the Federal Reserve Bank, the Income Tax (the 16th Amendment), Prohibition (18th Amendment), and entry into WWI. 

[PB the Deplorable]

Kicking off Nixon Week Two, the White House is informing us it is irrelevant where Obama was and what he was doing while staff was watching live feed of our ambassador in Benghazi pleading for military re-enforcements during the seige.  Also 'irrelevant' is who edited and massaged the talking points multiple times.  And, oh yeah, the IRS scandal 'is not a real scandal'.

For those claiming from the start that what we have is our very own Third World wannabe dictator, this is certainly in line with the idea El Presidente For Life gets to decide what is relevant, and not We The Peasantry.

[Sardondi]

Kicking off Nixon Week Two, the White House is informing us it is irrelevant where Obama was and what he was doing while staff was watching live feed of our ambassador in Benghazi pleading for military re-enforcements during the seige.  Also 'irrelevant' is who edited and massaged the talking points multiple times.  And, oh yeah, the IRS scandal 'is not a real scandal'.

For those claiming from the start that what we have is our very own Third World wannabe dictator, this is certainly in line with the idea El Presidente For Life gets to decide what is relevant, and not We The Peasantry.

When Obama advisor Dan Pfeiffer appeared on face The Nation, Bob Schieffer, ordinarily a great admirer of Obama and a friend to his Administration, demanded to know why the White House Chief of Staff had not appeared to, answer questions, since the scandals are serious matters. Schiffer went on to say,

“I have to tell you that is exactly the approach that the Nixon administration took. They said, ‘These are all second-rate things. We don’t have time for this. We have to devote our time to the people’s business.’ You’re taking exactly the same line they did.”

That comment should chill the bones of Barack Obama. But they won't. Because 5-to-1 he's out making those 6's, 7's and snowmen out on the links, because it's a beautiful goddam day.

[West of the Rockies]

I think that the idea of reducing the size of government is a good thing.  It is a bloated, often-wasteful institution.  However, determining actual cuts is extraordinarily difficult.  On the one hand, you say (Paperboy) that we need meat inspectors.  I agree.  This comes under the purview of the FDA, which is evidently understaffed.  Just as with people who inspect mines and fertilizer plants, there are far more food production companies than inspectors.  So the idea of trim, trim, trim sounds interesting, but exactly how do we make that happen?  The devil is in the details....

Oh, and in answer to the original question.... No.  Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman!

[Juan]

I'm seeing some of the older news hands (Schieffer - Woodward) smelling blood in the water.  Some of the more intelligent younger reporters may soon catch on.  Then Obama's in trouble.

As for cutting government, the trouble, as we've seen with the sequester, is that the agencies cut the areas that most affect the people - not waste.  In the Navy, it's called the Admiral's yacht syndrome - everything gets cut except the Admiral's yacht.

[NowhereInTime]

this.

"This" what?  Leaving aside the fact that the only political appointees in the IRS were both holdovers from the Bush administration I still don't understand to what length any group was "punished" nor under any circumstance how anyone from the White House was involved?  As has often been spelled out by members here the Government is a massive organization filled with all types of people.  Some ambitious, some not.  Some partisan, others less so.  So far all anyone, from Congress, to the media, to the Inspector General's office can determine is that one person took an awful long time (asking an awful lot of questions) to process the tax free status of talking point groups for billionaires!  What crime?  Who's to be indicted?  Again, who's rights were abrogated by these actions?  Were the Koch brothers prohibited from spending thier fortune in losing effort after losing effort? No.  Were there break-ins in tea party local offices and files removed or destroyed? No.  "Imperial Presence"?  No.  More likely officious clerk.

[PB the Deplorable]

I'm seeing some of the older news hands (Schieffer - Woodward) smelling blood in the water.  Some of the more intelligent younger reporters may soon catch on.  Then Obama's in trouble.

As for cutting government, the trouble, as we've seen with the sequester, is that the agencies cut the areas that most affect the people - not waste.  In the Navy, it's called the Admiral's yacht syndrome - everything gets cut except the Admiral's yacht.

Speaking of Admirals, apparently he Navy now has more Admirals than boats