I know that there are some of my white brothers and sisters out there who think that I only chase racism when I perceive that there is injustice done to a person of color. That is not true. And my post tonight will show that I detest injustice when it is done to people of all races.The case about the old guy coming from getting his NASCAR on, and then getting shot by the po po down in South Carolina just doesn't sit right with me.
"During a recent traffic stop in South Carolina, a 70-year-old man was shot after the responding officer mistook his cane for a shotgun. The officer was put on administrative leave pending an investigation into the incident which occurred in February.
Bobby Canipe, the North Carolina resident and Vietnam veteran who was a victim of the shooting, was returning form attending the Daytona 500 when he was pulled over for an expired license plate. “It’s a walking stick,” Canipe said when the shots ended.
“I promise to God I thought it was a shotgun,” replied York County Deputy Terrance Knox. The officer is later heard crying while explaining to a fellow officer why he shot Canipe.
Fox News Channel reporter Trace Gallagher reported on Thursday that Knox’s commanding officer said, judging from the dash cam tape, that Knox “did the right thing.” [Source]
I am glad that they took this brother off the street. I know that being a police officer is a tough job, but come on now, you can't go blasting an old head who pulls a cane out; you just can't.
The white grievance society will be all over this one (I see you FOX Views) and they will cry a river that the case won't get enough attention because of the race of the shooter and the shootee (I know that's not a word, but I like it), but hey, they can't blame yours truly. That old man didn't deserve to be shot, and the police officer who shot him deserves what he has coming his way.
Finally, this is not a sexy subject or something that folks like to talk about, but we seriously have to start taking a look at our aging infrastructure in this country--- especially in our cities. If we don't there are going to be more situations like we had in East Harlem a few days ago and like we had in North Jersey earlier this month. (BTW, I think we can all agree that fossil fuels and an aging infrastructure is not a good mix.)
This is something my wife likes to talk about, because she works in the environmental field, and quite frankly, she is surprised that we don't have more of these types of tragedies.
Clearly we have been lucky. But judging from the news reports lately, it looks like our luck might be running out.
99 comments:
Don't worry, Field. There won't be a big shitfest over this shooting, the races are wrong.
Just an old cracker. They are on the way out anyway.
There's a difference between "aging infrastructure" and not having the goddamn common sense to call the gas company when you smell gas.
No one took accountability. Imagine that.
Field, bully cowardice cops come in all colors. However, the real test of racial injustice would be the outcome of this black cop vs his white fellowmen who usually get away with unlawful civilian murder. Let's bet he'll end up kissing iron (would serve him right anyway).
For what it's worth, I can't stand most cops regardless of race. (hell, I bet that old billy-bob was spitting the n-word like a machine gun anyway).
Field, "The white grievance society will be all over this one (I see you FOX Views) and they will cry a river that the case won't get enough attention because of the race of the shooter and the shootee (I know that's not a word, but I like it), but hey, they can't blame yours truly. That old man didn't deserve to be shot, and the police officer who shot him deserves what he has coming his way."
I agree that the 'old' man didn't deserve to be shot by a policeman. Neither did Oscar Grant. The BART policeman that shot Oscar was free after 2 years! Anybody want to bet the policeman will get life simply because he is a brother.
It'll be interesting to see what happens.. You see, Whites on the jury with minds like Kinky and Bill will throw the book at his black ass. Also, there will be A NEW LAW: 'Negro' cops cannot carry deadly guns...and if they do, they cannot pull a gun on a white person...let alone shoot one.
Field, why are you posting about this? You know fully well this is going to upset your FN constituents. I didn't hear you say a damn thing about the ridiculous sentencing the policeman got for shooting Grant.
You are so two-faced it's not even funny. You want justice for Whites but say nothing in favor of Blacks.
LOL at Anon 10:07 pm....
Let's see, Black cop will get life in prison or possible death sentence. They'll use his case as one to speak out against police brutality because killing innocence unarmed Black men is not considered police brutality. It's considered justice served.
Nevertheless, I hope that elderly man didn't die. If he did, the Black policeman can hang it up because that all white jury will take 1 second to deliberate and come back with a guilty verdict. Heck they might not even deliberate. Those jurors might reach the verdict as soon as the rebuttals are over and give it before they go back in the jury room. I doubt if they'll get a chance to live a temporary life of Riley on the free of charge like the past jurors did.
I bet the white jurors who get picked are gonna be pissed that they don't go bowling, go to show, eat at fancy restaurants, and get to enjoy all those perks those jurist in the Martin, Dunn, and Grant trial.
Yep, that Black policemen's ass is cooked like a crispy critter.
I just thought about it if you can't trust the police anymore to serve and protect who do you trust now? The firemen? On second thought, even they're a little shaky nowadays.
Never mind I think I've figured it out. It's the animal shelter guy, huh?
I swear people need Jesus!
I'm out. Bye bye!
Well, well, well. Things in the Democratic Party will be changing come 2016. Hillary will not be the Democratic nominee. Once again, she loses....and rightly so.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/index.html#/v/3341201500001
GrannyStandingforTruth said...
Let's see, Black cop will get life in prison or possible death sentence.
---
I'll bet you a fish sandwich from Your Black Muslim Bakery that cop doesn't serve a day.
U.Nohu, how did you know that Granny is from Oakland and a Muslim?
...FROM LAST THREAD...
Anonymous said...
... if you couldn't understand Murray's thesis, which involves well covered ground and indisputable data...
-------------------
Oh but I do understand Murray's thesis: it is that measured as a fuction of IQ score and the achievement of black Americans compared to whites, that black Americans are intellectually inferior to white Americans across income and social classes. What is indisputable about Murray, a-non, is that his instrument, the IQ test, is weighted toward white middle-class cultural norms and that he doesn't control for racism in his achievement indices. Unsurprisingly then, his study, which partially measures for WASP middle class assimilation, and ignores the impact of racism, finds that black Americans are incompletely assimilated and that racism has no impact on their achievement. How could it possibly have found otherwise on such pretexts?
WC, fyi: this is a post-racial era. So your logic is out of date.
Our older cities do have a lot of infrastructure that needs to be replaced.
Here in Chicago, there have been a bunch of instances of old water mains bursting. Each time one of those occurs, you end up with a car-swallowing crater where the street used to be. I'm not exaggerating. The city's going to be ripping out an awful lot of old pipes in the coming years.
And across the nation, our state and federal governments are going to have to pony up some cash to repair or replace a lot of aging bridges, unless we want to see vehicles flying off them as they collapse.
@ GrannyStandingforTruth
Wow, you really have some imagination about what it's like to serve on a jury. If it were as fun as you suggest, people would be trying to get onto juries, instead of trying to avoid jury duty!
and the shootee
Auto-correct?
Dyslexia?
Word-Creator? If so, do you have a license from the government to allow you to make up words?
What about all the white cop white victims and black cop black victims?
Can we only talk police abuse when the race is different?
Never mind, so many police abuse cases we'd never have time to talk about important stuff.
Well Field, we have to give the Ukraine a billion dollars whle our own infrastructure falls apart. Hmmm, we have unemployed people and things that need to be fixed. Seems like an easy solution to me.
Nuho,
Granny--> Aims both of her third fingers at you. DOUBLE PLUCK YOU and your whole FAMILY!
@ Anonymous 11:54,
Nope it's not my imagination of what its like to serve on a jury. At least in Florida it is what really took place.
The jury in the Trayvon Martin case went bowling, went to the movies, ate at fancy restaurants, were allowed computers and Internet privileges,etc.
You mean to tell me you overlooked reading about that? It was in the online and tv news. That jury spent more time enjoying recreation than they did in the jurors' deliberation room.
The Dunn jury spent a lot of time at fancy restaurants too.
I love Granny, she doesn't take s*** from anybody.
Pilot, lets not forget money we have to throw away for useless wars.
Infrastructure isn't sexy. It's one of those out of sight, out of mind things. As long as it keeps working and nothing blows up or falls down no one remembers it's there -- and as long as it's still working, it's just about impossible to find the money to do repairs before it does fall down or blow up. The American Society of Civil Engineers gave this country's infrastructure a grade of D+ for 2013 and estimates that $3.6 Trillion is needed by 2020 to fix stuff. We all know that's not going to happen. Our roads are falling apart, the bridges are falling down, water and gas lines are deteriorating, and the electrical grid is a mess, but, hey, to the average idiot American this is still the greatest country on the planet where nothing needs fixing . . . and they'll keep thinking that way until they're on a bridge that falls down or live in a building that blows up.
Almost forgot, Anon@10:03PM, the gas company had been called and was on its way to the scene when the explosion occurred. Check your facts before typing your snark.
@ Nan: People had smelled gas "for days" prior to the explosion.
Nan said...
The American Society of Civil Engineers gave this country's infrastructure a grade of D+ for 2013 and estimates that $3.6 Trillion is needed by 2020 to fix stuff. We all know that's not going to happen. Our roads are falling apart, the bridges are falling down, water and gas lines are deteriorating, and the electrical grid is a mess, but, hey, to the average idiot American this is still the greatest country on the planet where nothing needs fixing"
----
Well it's hard to fund all those "shovel ready" jobs when you are bailing out your campaign donors in the UAW, SEIU, NEA and Wall Street. Most of that $3.6 trillion got spent on Obamacare and Food Stamps. The rest went to Solyndra and ACORN.
The old America built things. The old America went to the moon. This is Fundamentally Changed America. Now we just make things "fair":
Buried deep in a section of President Obama's budget, released this week, is an eye-opening fact: This year, 70% of all the money the federal government spends will be in the form of direct payments to individuals, an all-time high.
In effect, the government has become primarily a massive money-transfer machine, taking $2.6 trillion from some and handing it back out to others. These government transfers now account for 15% of GDP, another all-time high. In 1991, direct payments accounted for less than half the budget and 10% of GDP.
What's more, the cost of these direct payments is exploding. Even after adjusting for inflation, they've shot up 29% under Obama.
There's no money to fix infrastructure, and it will only get worse when the full costs of Obamacare kick in. What do you think these numbers will look like after "immigration reform" brings in another 50 million third world immigrants?
This path was chosen in the sixties with Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" programs and we have hit the steep downward slope. Now that 70% of people are in the wagon, nothing is stopping this thing until it crashes.
@ GrannyStandingforTruth
Hey, I wasn't saying that the Trayvon Martin jury wasn't treated nicely. Just that you seem to be suggesting that serving on a jury is generally a giant party -- but that's certainly not the norm. Jurors aren't typically even paid enough to cover their parking costs, much less make up for any lost wages. Here in Illinois, jury pay is $17.20 a day. Woo-hoo.
Reporters like to freak the public out over alleged government waste. But honestly, if you're sequestered on a jury, sometimes for months, is it really that scandalous if the state springs for a movie or a bowling outing?
"Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 - June 12, 1972) was an American community organizer, Communist agent and author of, "Rules for
Radicals". From that book here are Saul's thoughts on creating a Communist
state:
There are 8 levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a socialist state. The first is the most important.
1) Healthcare - Control healthcare and you control the people
2) Poverty - Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything
for them to live.
3) Debt - Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control - Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare - Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income)
6) Education - Take control of what people read and listen to-take control of what children learn in school.
7) Religion - Remove the belief in the Yah/G-d from the Government and schools.
8) Class Warfare - Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to (Tax) the wealthy with
the support of the poor."
- See more at: http://henrymakow.com/#sthash.4sdktyHP.dpuf
ringing a bell for anyone else?
folk don't do Scripture/Him/His Word...but it fo sho looks like He is not a man that should lie. it looks like we war not against flesh but with spiritual wickedness in high places...
like it is written.
babylon WILL fall. or should i say...crumble and fall?
_________________
LOL @ Granny getting gangsta with it! but hey...some fools can't hear nice and polite;) i get it.
double blasting visual is pure comedy;)
Shabbath Shalom all!
"This path was chosen in the sixties with Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" programs and we have hit the steep downward slope. Now that 70% of people are in the wagon, nothing is stopping this thing until it crashes."
People with very low marginal product used to be slaves, because otherwise they were vagrant beggars. When they got sick or the weather got too cold or they couldn't find food, they died. Then we outlawed slavery and gave low marginal producers welfare so they wouldn't die. Now, the poor are obese and have children they can't afford.
These debates only take place in that interregnum between the institution of the welfare state and the point at which net consumption outpaces the capacity or the will of net producers to fund it. After that, what's old is new again and these debates don't happen.
Totally agree Field and Nan. We need to close a few overseas military bases and bring our kids home from Iraq and Afganistan and our cash flow will increase dramatically. We've always had some who have no probem with the vast wealth disparities and watching people starve to death. I agree that social safetynet programs sustain some but the alternatives aren't pretty. The other choices are the very poor dying on our street corners or mass riots because some hungry people with nothing to lose won't have a problem getting food any way they can. A better course would be a massive jobs program like the WPA to fix our crumbling infrastructure. In that way I agree with Paul Ryan, folks can have the dignity of work and we fix our country but for that to happen we have to convince folks that government can actually work and it can if we as citizens demand such. (How's that for a run on) ha!
Democrats are not interested in funding jobs. Working people are independent people. Democrats fund dependency. Dependent people vote democrat.
Let's leave political party ideology out of this anon and work to make it happen.
And BTW, there are many hard working independent Dems. I know lots of them personally.
Of course there are hardworking Democrats, they represent half the country.
Also agreed that neither the Republican nor the Democrat party has done anything to stop our spending problems. However things have amped up considerably in recent years, and the Democrats have controlled the federal government since they took congress in 2006.
The Democrats receive their largest electoral support from the groups most dependent on the federal government. It is therefore in their rational interest to increase these demographics. The more single mothers, poor immigrants, and uneducated, unemployed workers there are, the better they do at the polls.
Entitlement spending now accounts for 70% of the budget, The entire military spending allowance accounts for 17% of the budget. Cutting it in half would pay for a couple of years of increases in entitlement spending, if that.
I agree we should close many of our overseas military bases. We should pull every last soldier out of Iraq and Afghanistan. We should stop all foreign military assistance. But that's not going to stop our eventual bankruptcy.
We are past the tipping point that is the eventual end of all democracies. We were set up as a Republic in order to avoid this, but bit by bit we have subverted the Constitution to get to this point.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy. "
(Alexander Fraser Tytler)
Hope for Change, just more BS talking points. Where were u when Bush was blowing a hole in the.economy?
I would have to check your numbers as I don't know if 70% is an accurate number and also I dont agree that the majority of support for the Democratic Party comes from folks on welfare. That is a good talking point from the gop to shame Dems and to portray Repus as hardworking folks. A lot of Dem support comes from union members including my own union. Let's leave the cheap political shots for the dimwitted. I also don't agree the Dems have been running the government since '06. The gop has controlled the house since 10 and that is a large part of the government as well as a right leaning SC who have final say on our laws.
BTW, I'm sure there are many rural folks on public assistance who vote gop so we can elevate this discussion a bit.
field negro said...
Hope for Change, just more BS talking points. Where were u when Bush was blowing a hole in the.economy?
------
Typical FN comment: Since Bush did wrong, it's acceptable for Obama to do worse.
SMDH.
No, but it's hypocritical to offer criticism of one and sit on your ass when the other one was destroying the country.
But I get it, you are in his gang, so you can't criticize him. Isn't that right, wingnut?
Yes Pilot, but they are not black people, so they deserve what they get from the fed.
PilotX:Freeing Slaves from the republican plantation since the 70's said...
I would have to check your numbers as I don't know if 70% is an accurate number and also I dont agree that the majority of support for the Democratic Party comes from folks on welfare... I also don't agree the Dems have been running the government since '06
-----
Here is the link on the 70% figure:
http://news.investors.com/031014-692704-us-government-payments-to-individuals-70-of-budget.htm
60-80% of welfare recipients are Democrats, while full time Workers are evenly divided between parties:
http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2012/02/do-welfare-recipients-mostly-vote.html
One of the clearest policy differences between the parties is the view on government assistance programs and social safety nets. There is a 35-point difference between Democrats and Republicans, with Democrats far more likely to support government assistance programs.
Republicans tend to give more to charity, while Democrats support publicly funded assistance programs.
As far as control of the federal government goes, there are three electoral entities: The House, the Senate, and the Presidency. Each entity has its own particular powers, but the party that controls two or more of these is in control of the federal government.
The Democrats have controlled at least two of these entities since 2006. After the 2008 election and up until the 2010 election, they controlled all three. The democrats have called the shots in the federal government for the past 8 years.
"But I get it, you are in his gang, so you can't criticize him. Isn't that right, wingnut?"
---
Wrong, moonbat. I believe Bush was a terrible President and criticized him heavily during his Presidency.
The worst thing he ever did however, was to open the door for someone of Barack Obama's malevolent incompetence.
last thread:
"Anon@11:13, are you a preacher? I am not. I don't think I am qualified to talk about god and spirituality.
Maybe you can team up with FP and get a nice sermon together for us."
____________________
folks have been "educated" to be powerless. Yahless. to truly believe that they are UNqualified to give testimony (how His shall Overcome) and be Lights in this dark dying world.
IF folk are not qualified to speak on Yah nor spiritual matters...what's the likelihood they are qualified to "judge" others? any wonder the judicial and all other systems are jam packed with spiritually dead, corrupt, well "educated" + credentialed walking dead men and women that want to be like corrupt/spiritually dead men?
chaos + confusion.
folk get "qualified" for anything by reading, studying and immersing themselves in the topics that are paramount to them. do that long enough and one can stroll into any "church" building and school the corrupt men and women that flock to the buildings to fleece + be fleeced. ask me how i know?
in many "professional" places...Yah/G-d is NOT important. this is why folk have NO CLUE that what is written is unfolding. in fact, one must foolishly attempt to kill Him/His Word in order to have "credibility" among "professionals". look around and see if you can connect with this Truth, yet.
folks' brains have been so bent/kontrolled they feel if they haven't digested somebody else's "state approved lesson plan" they lack qualifications.
His People, TRULY perish for lack of Knowledge. His People as described in the Blessed Blacks true history book aka the Bible:
____________________
UNIVERSAL LAW:
Isaiah 3:12- As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err and destroy the way of thy paths.
____________________
who are those people?
keep reading that whole chapter and much more becomes Real clear.
there is a REASON that the Truth is NOT being taught in churches. folks get "educated" + in biz with the corrupt american gov't to become "preachers". mammon + the Love of it, drives the whole industry...moreso than serving Almighty.
not saying there are no Good churches out there. but i can tell you from 1st hand He showed me plain as day experience...the church buildings have been infiltrated by demons- stronghold style. some of them stand in the pulpit weekly- then do the damndest things as soon as the show is over.
since each and every soul IS the church and where He dwells, according to what is written- not some building- i AM only encouraged;)
this right here, is particularly sad:
"I don't think I am qualified to talk about g-d and spirituality."
particularly when it is spoken by a sleeping, couched low king...created in the image of Yah Almighty Himself + Favored- as it is written. one who has just been "educated" to NOT know who or how powerful he really is. or why things are unfolding as they are.
so, no, i don't have a "sermon" for ya, my friend. we'll leave that to the "preachers", "pastors" and "reverends". for a nominal fee you can get the whole show with a grip of charisma + great music. you might even get a little Scriptures.
i AM Called to give just a word from Him/His Word this beautiful Sabbath day. your comment indicates you might need it;) and though folk that don't Understand think i "turned" on ya...i did not. i AM with Him/His Word and REALLY He did not come to bring Peace but a Sword. i AM a witness.
whoever i need to part ways with in order to stay close to Him/His Word = just what time it is + my pleasure.
it is written those that place others/things above Him aren't worthy of Him. so Trust + Believe folks' little spiritually dead, heavily manipulated thoughts mean nothing to me in the big picture.
Not true, without the house the Dems cannot call the shots. I know how the government works and you know as well as I that without 60 votes in the senate and consent of the house nothing gets done.
I do agree that Dems view the social safetynet differently. I have personally witnessed the positive effects of such programs. When you have a socially agreed upon program there is consistancy and dependablilty and you can plan but if one has to hope for charitable giving you can't count on that so I disagree with the gop approach. In that sense I guess people on public assistance would tend to support the Dems because in their rhetoric they don't seem to dehumanize folks who have fallen on hard times. My hope is both parties realize we are in this together and need to start helping each other.
folks' feelings do matter to some degree, so i AM praying and working on patience level which affects my tone.
i can't be impatient with folk just because they keep babbling about their "degrees". folks with degrees are just as caught up in the durty game as those without 'em. even moreso in many instances. time over here in the fields = solid proof of this statement.
it is my prayer, in Messiah's Name, that your spirit will awaken enough to receive the Word. don't think i AM fancy enough for you to listen to?
that will be fine.
it is always my suggestion that folk not take others' word for things anyways. question everything. suggestion: grab that Bible some kind soul had enough Love to slip in a pocket for you. if it is KJV- look up the Scriptures i share. then...
think.
no one is going to red mark your thoughts or threaten your "educational career" to keep you in line;) as it goes down daily in man made "education". then if you can humble yourself enough...
pray.
men are NOT Yah. pretending you are = all bad. then the lost women join in the fray;( this is where we are today;(
ask Him to show you what He wants you to know.
i specify KJV because in all this brand newness- the same folk that bring you the satanic "bibles" now ALSO distribute new and improved "chr-stian bibles"...
the true Knowledge is being hidden folk. that's why murdering/suiciding Aaron Schwartz was so crucial. may his courageous soul rest in peace. i respect him. he could have served mammon and chose humanity instead. a LOT of folk over here appear to be on the mammon ride to the end;(
it is a bad joke folk have more degrees than ever and are dumber than ever as well. some of the comments in the last thread are there as solid proof of my assertion.
it seems only i can see how much of a crying, laughing, omgoodness-for Real? shame it truly is...the devil keeps his devil squad/dupes looking d.u.m.b.
as it relates to what appears to be your "educated" belief that one needs to be sanctioned + ordained by corrupt men to "pastor" or "teach" or serve Almighty...get familiar with:
____________________
UNIVERSAL LAW:
1 John 2: 27- But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
____________________
see why your little quips don't mean nathan to me?
is it getting clearer for you, now?
since His People/my people foolishly prefer to worship man rather than Yah. here's a word attributed to one of the favorite forbidden golden bm calf idols.
one hand selected by defeated, pasty, synagogue of satan, devilish to the core, baby oppressors. this forbidden idol that folk just won't let be beautifully human + flawed had "dr. reverend" titles and all. listen at him (like my Grandma used to say;):
"everyone can be great...because anybody can serve. you don't have to have a college degree to serve. you don't have to make your subject and verb agree to serve. you only need a heart full of grace. a soul generated by love."- MLK
__________________
IF folk would follow Him/His Word vs corruptible/compromised men- they would've peeped the BM calling himself a "pastor" suggesting that pharoah should let his people...
integrate.
@Anonymous 2:06,
I'm well aware of what it's like to be on a jury since I've served on one before.
The point is that those jurors in Florida took advantage of perks and prolonged deliberation so that they could do all those things. They already knew before they went back in the jury room what verdict they planned to give. Those jurors spent more time relaxing and enjoying activities than they did in the juror deliberation room. That's when serving on a jury is definitely scandalous, trifling, and scamming the system.
As for my comments on differences in verdicts for blacks and white, that is a true fact throughout our history. If a white person kills a black person they get off or a very light sentence. If a black man kills someone white, that's an automatic life or death sentence.
It is likewise with all sentencing such as possession of drugs to sell. That's where I'm coming from because if it's the SAME CRIME, they should do the SAME TIME regardless of skin color. There shouldn't be any special privileges in sentencing.
The police are too trigger happy nowadays. They've gotten out of control. Many of them joined the force to legally kill,many of them have anger issues, and many of them need an anger management class. It is so obvious when you hear the same old tired line. "I thought they had a gun" of The suspect was resisting arrest. Now, they're trying to be creative and make the claim that the suspect shot themselves while handcuff behind their back, which is so weak until they should be fired for lack of creative ability and brains.
Btw, if any person kills someone they deserve to be locked up. You did not give that person life, so you have no right to take a life.
say what now, rev?
lol.
what part of Exodus + the game is THAT?
but hey...i lack the "credentials" to be perpetually confused, in spiritual + mental darkness/bondage. just plain SHOCKED and AWED when historical Psalm 83 enemies do what they do. the judas types from the house of Yacob, tribe of Yahudah don't really shock either. slaves- physical + spiritual STAY for sale.
i am nothing.
it is ALL His Mercy and Grace. so without a single care as to who might want to label me whatever...i will Stand Strong and give Him/His Word some...
PRAISE!!!
if that makes me "crazy" that will be fine. folk usually know to clear path when the "crazies" come through;) Ancient, regal yet ghetto- every woman- "crazy" = quite peaceful, you know.
when i read that these devils don't care if we know what goes down as long as we are afraid- THAT hit my Stand Strong button. He said His are as Bold as lions. had a straight Granny moment ALL DAY as i let the legion of defeated demons know, He did not redeem + send me to play.
prayer warrior all day.
here's what's so:
there are more like me. there need not be a whole lot btw. the Power of His few...His remnant.
nope.
devils are NOT ready. those of US with Him/His Word on a faith walk, we know. the devils are wilding out because they, too, know what time it is + it's short. it's the dupes that are about to be surprised as they spiritually lollygag truly believing that Almighty Yahweh, King of Kings, will be mocked.
;( jokers stay wild.
He is not a respecter of persons. my sincere prayer is that ALL will turn their hearts, lives, behavior over to Him/His Word. line it up then go to work wherever they are...repping hard for Him/His Word aka the winning team.
Good News indeed;)
Shabbath Shalom all!
PilotX:Freeing Slaves from the republican plantation since the 70's said...
Not true, without the house the Dems cannot call the shots. I know how the government works and you know as well as I that without 60 votes in the senate and consent of the house nothing gets done
-----
So you are saying that without a super majority in the Senate and control of the House and Presidency, no one can call the shots?
This has happened only once in recent decades, during Obama's first term when the democrats controlled the House and had 60 senators.
By your logic, the Republicans have never called the shots, so they should be blameless. I'm sure that is not what you meant.
Owning only one entity means you are purely reactive. The GOP runs the House, but Harry Reid simply refuses to allow the senate on any republican bills that pass the house. If anything did get last the senate, Obama could just veto it.
Obama subverts the constitution daily by issuing law form the executive branch, but the House is powerless to do anything about because the democrats control the senate.
The democrats own this mess.
PilotX:Freeing Slaves from the republican plantation since the 70's said...
I do agree that Dems view the social safetynet differently. I have personally witnessed the positive effects of such programs.
---
But are you blind to the negative effects?
Helping someone through "hard times" is one thing, but what about when the hard times last four generations? When does help become enabling?
In any event, in the long run the point will be moot because the runaway expansion of entitlements is unsustainable. And illegal.
Where in the constitution does it say the federal government has the right to take property from one person and give it to another? This has become the primary function of the government, and it is illegal under the constitution. Our government is illegal.
If the State of Illinois wants to affect wealth transfer payments between its citizens, it has the right to do so. The Federal government has no right to do so.
Any social welfare programs are the responsibility of state governments.
Are you saying executive orders are unconstitutional? If so the current President has issued fewer than those who came before him so if they are unconstitutional they should have been dealt with decades before now. Sure Dems own this mess now but the current WH occupant inhereted a few gop messes. Messy government is nothing new, I remember a bunch of mess going back to the Carter and Reagan days so this is nothing new to me.
The American people do not realize that anyone who has GAS in their house and the property is older than 12 years, any such people are living with a TIME BOMB! People think gas leaks are mainly caused by some contractor digging into an underground gas pipe. This is only partially true.
The real pending disaster lies in the fact that the couplings between the gas pipe to the house from the gas main in the street that were installed years ago have the property of their seals disintegrating over a timeframe of less than 20 years. The coupling seals start to leak, and the escaping gas flows along the outside of the underground connecting pipe into the basement of the receiving house. Undetected the gas continues to accumulate in the closed basement space, flowing up inside the walls of the upper stories of the house until something generates a spark which detonates the gas causing the house to explode.
There are thousands of these defective couplings installed all over the U.S., hence the ticking bomb. Lastly American Gas Companies are well aware of the coupling leakage problem, but spokesmen for the companies stated that it would be impossible to replace all of the couplings as such a project would bankrupt the Gas Companies. Also the original manufacturer of the couplings has been out of business for decades, so good luck America.
Also anon we are seeing an historic level of obstructionism on the part of the gop. Elected officials used to seem to be interested in legislating but now with this tea party crowd they are only interested in making the current occupant of the WH look bad. Check the record number of filibusters and we all know the house gop members are all afraid of primary challenges so they can't pass anything to help the country because that might give the POTUS a small win. So here we are.
PilotX:Freeing Slaves from the republican plantation since the 70's said...
Are you saying executive orders are unconstitutional? If so the current President has issued fewer than those who came before him
---
No, executive orders are not unconstitutional. And it's not the number, but the affect that matters.
The Obama White House has acted unconstitutionally by not enforcing laws it doesn't agree with (e.g. the Defense of Marriage Act), by creating laws not passed by congress (e.g. the Dream Act) and by amending laws passed by congress (e.g. Obamacare). Obama has also made recess appointments when congress was not in recess and used the IRS and other agencies to target political opponents.
No President has acted like this, not even Nixon. And we ran him out of town.
PilotX:Freeing Slaves from the republican plantation since the 70's said...
Also anon we are seeing an historic level of obstructionism on the part of the gop
------
Obviously, you were in a coma in the 80's when Tip O'Neil and Tom Foley ran congress. And Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid never engaged in any obstructionism with Bush.
Come on, man.
Obstructionism today means not giving Obama whatever he wants.
17-year-old Trayvon Martin, I mean Byron White murdered a white male in Seattle... then complained the phone he stole from him "was not a nicer model"
After fatally shooting a Seattle man for his cellphone last month, police say the 17-year-old high-school student fled to a friend’s home where he complained the phone “was not a nicer model,” according to charging documents filed Wednesday.
The suspect, Ballard High senior Byron White, was charged as an adult in connection with the fatal shooting Feb. 23 of David L. Peterson in Seattle’s Greenwood neighborhood.
Police said Peterson, 54, was approached by White in the parking lot of the Mud Bay pet store in the 8500 block of First Avenue Northwest, according to the documents. White attempted to steal Peterson’s cellphone, but Peterson resisted and after a struggle, prevailed, according to the charging documents.
White began to walk away without the phone when Peterson called 911 to report the incident, the documents say.
White turned back when he overheard the call; Peterson told the 911 operator that the man was “coming back,” according to the charging documents.
“A few seconds later, Peterson can be heard on the 911 recording telling someone that he will not give up his phone and saying he was on the phone with police,” the charges say.
“It appears that the person to whom Peterson was speaking was quite close to him at the time; Peterson did not raise his voice. Peterson continued to talk to the 911 operator for a few seconds until, suddenly, the call went dead,” the documents say.
Prosecutors say that White pulled a 9-mm semi-automatic pistol from his waistband and shot Peterson once in the chest, the bullet striking Peterson’s heart and perforating his spinal column.
Peterson was pronounced dead at the scene.
White then ran to a friend’s house a few blocks away and told three people about what had happened, charges say.
Charging documents claim White said Peterson had seen his face so “he had to shoot him.”
The documents say White was disappointed that the cellphone he had taken from Peterson “was not a nicer model.”
Black man getting denied the best again! Fuck whitey!
David L. Peterson wsas probably a good white liberal his entire life, which ended with one shot to the chest via one of Obama's Sons.
Peterson's wife immediately forgave White and felt remorse for his family. But her dead husband's phone wasn't good enough for Obama's Son. She has failed BRA.
field negro said...
Where were u when Bush was blowing a hole in the.economy?
We know where you were when Obama was finishing the job.
Running cover for the democrat party.
Just another day the B.R.A.,
Why do you avoid giving links to the articles you post? Is it because they come from the Conservative Citizens Council or White Nationalist Party or some other racist organization with Jared Taylor's views.
The chicago way...
Taxi Publication Threatens To Expose ‘Secretly Gay’ Aldermen If City Doesn’t Ban Ride-Sharing
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/03/11/taxi-publication-threatens-to-expose-secretly-gay-aldermen-if-city-doesnt-ban-ride-sharing/
No doubt those democrat voting taxi drivers are expecting something back for their political donations.
I can imagine the outrage if those taxi drivers were NRA right-wingers.
field negro said...
No, but it's hypocritical to offer criticism of one and sit on your ass when the other one was destroying the country.
I've been saying this exact thing about the democrat party and their supporters here for months.
That's politics.
It's good to see I'm having a positive influence on you.
Anonymous GrannyStandingforTruth said...
Just another day the B.R.A.,
Why do you avoid giving links to the articles you post? Is it because they come from the Conservative Citizens Council or White Nationalist Party or some other racist organization with Jared Taylor's views.
-------
The link was with the name I used.
Here it is again:
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2023057556_greenwoodchargesxml.html
It's the Seattle Times.
Anonymous Bill said...
field negro said...
Where were u when Bush was blowing a hole in the.economy?
We know where you were when Obama was finishing the job.
Running cover for the democrat party.
-----
Bingo.
Field's job these days is to Speak Power to Truth.
Anonymous said...
And Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid never engaged in any obstructionism with Bush.
Didn't both reid and pelosi vote to authorize force in Iraq?
Would the country have been better off if they didn't blindly agree with bush?
Thanks you for the link.
Well, I'm out. I should have been gone an hour ago. My kinfolks are probably wondering what is taking me so long.
And is this how we roll in WRA?
http://www.kptv.com/story/24945788/woman-in-deadly-white-supremacist-crime-spree-pleads-guilty
Pilot X has CNN called you yet?
Not yet. Ha!
Anon, first off I know you're not serious when you bring up the IRS "scanal". Secondly as I recall there was an immigration bill passed by Tip O'Neil. I see you agree about the filibusters but I guess we can just overlook that. I also see you only hold this President's executive orders as unconstitutional. I recall many executive orders by Bush and Cheney's push for executive privilege. Sorry brah but we can't change the game in the ninth inning and act like the new guy is any different fron past guys. Nice try though.
PilotX:Freeing Slaves from the republican plantation since the 70's said...
Anon, first off I know you're not serious when you bring up the IRS "scanal".
----
Right. Nothing serious about using the power of your government to harass and intimidate political opponents. Not a "smidgeon of corruption", even though the director of the IRS resigned and pleaded the fifth before congress. Twice.
And your "but Bush" act is more than disingenuous, as you cannot name one non-constitutional executive order issued by W.
This "guy" is very different than past guys, and it's not just his tan.
Have you even been watching the IRS hearings? Ms. Lerner's attorney has offered a proffer and if Issa really wanted answers he would have offered her immunity but be that as it may there is no evidence the WH used that agency for intimidation but we all know you guys need a scandal so stay onit and keep looking foolish. Ok, fair enough but you can't offer a real unconstitutional act by the current prez. I mean other than what Fox says.
I gave you many examples.
The executive branch can make executive orders that implement already existing laws. It cannot cannot make new laws or amend existing laws.
When Obama enacted the Dream Act, he passed a law by executive order that the Congress had rejected. That is blatantly unconstitutional.
When Obama amended the ACA by delaying the employer mandate, the out-of-pocket caps, the minimum insurance coverage requirements, and by exempting Congress from Obamacare, he exceeded his Constitutional authority.
Last year, President Obama appointed three members of the National Labor Relations Board, as well as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, during what he considered to be a Senate recess. But the Senate was still holding “pro forma” sessions every three days—a technique developed by Sen. Harry Reid to thwart Bush recess appointments. In January, the D.C. Circuit held the NLRB appointments to be unconstitutional.
If a Republican had acted in this manner you and the lapdog media would be calling for impeachment.
PilotX:Freeing Slaves from the republican plantation since the 70's said...
there is no evidence the WH used that agency for intimidation
-----
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/02/06/true_the_vote_founder_to_congress_i_will_not_retreat_i_will_not_surrender_i_refuse_to_be_intimidated.html
The examples you gave were your opinion of being extra constitutional not factual. There were so many signing statements by Bush which in essence does what you call unconstitutional.
As far as Ms. True the Vote all 501c4 organizations are scrutinized because they are to be either exclusively or primarily a social wlfare organization and have no political dealings. Almost 80% of the organizations that applied were conservative leaning so it only makes sense that most organizations scrutinized would be conservative. And here's where it gets more interesting, the IRS is SUPPOSED to investigate the groups so they were just doing their jobs. There is no scandal. This is a pattern with the right, create a fake scandal, acorn or Shirly Sherrod, use their media to place guilt and ignore the facts. You sir are ignoring facts.
PilotX:Freeing Slaves from the republican plantation since the 70's said...
create a fake scandal, acorn or Shirly Sherrod
brietbart proved his point and nothing the left said disputed it.
I find it odd that you didn't realize that.
I guess that's the point of blind obedience.
"There were so many signing statements by Bush which in essence does what you call unconstitutional."
Name one. Just one.
No Bill Breitbart edited the tapes and told half the stroy, should have know you would have fallen for it.
Anon, use your favorite search engine and type in "Bush signing statement" and see what you get. I'm on a mobile device and can't upload but I'm sure you can find it.
Also Bill, I notice you guys on the right love to take part of a story and then ignore the rest of the facts. Fox does it all the time you can see this with Darryl Issa when he released only certain parts of the IRS report. I get it, you need to mislead to prove your false narratives. Carry on.
Anon, I just searched the terms "Bush signing statements" and got a lot of good results. You must be very young because I remember the fight over this vividly. Do you only consume conservative news because this was common knowledge. Geez, I think our debate must come to an end because you and Bill seem to lack basic knowledge of facts. It was kinda fun but now I really know neither of you are serious.
I have given you a dozen unconstitutional executive orders issued by Obama.
Name one unconstitutional executive order issued by Bush.
See buddy that's not how this game is played. Things are not unconstitutional because you say they are, they have to be ruled such by a judicial body such as the SC. So now I have two simple questions for you 1. Has a judicial body ruled any of Baracks's actions unconstitutional? 2. Did you search the term "Bush signing statements". If not why? That follow up applies to both questions.
Bush's Tactic of Refusing Laws Is Probed
Network News
X Profile
View More Activity
TOOLBOX
Resize
Print
E-mail
Reprints
By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 24, 2006
A panel of legal scholars and lawyers assembled by the American Bar Association is sharply criticizing the use of "signing statements" by President Bush that assert his right to ignore or not enforce laws passed by Congress.
In a report to be issued today, the ABA task force said that Bush has lodged more challenges to provisions of laws than all previous presidents combined.
The panel members described the development as a serious threat to the Constitution's system of checks and balances, and they urged Congress to pass legislation permitting court review of such statements.
"The president is indicating that he will not either enforce part or the entirety of congressional bills," said ABA president Michael S. Greco, a Massachusetts attorney. "We will be close to a constitutional crisis if this issue, the president's use of signing statements, is left unchecked."
So Bush indicating that he might not enforce part of a bill is a "constitutional crisis", but Obama actually not enforcing entire laws, creating new laws, and amending existing laws is "whatever". I see how your mind works. Do you?
Consider the fact that Obamacare is now simply untethered from law or policy. Last week the administration announced that you can get a hardship waiver from Obamacare if your hardship is . . .wait for it . . . Obamacare. This is like getting out of doing push-ups during basic training if you can prove that doing push-ups would be difficult for you, defeating the point of doing push-ups in the first place. The White House is quite simply making it all up as they go along.
Sure, the defenders will admit, more people have lost their insurance than gained insurance because of Obamacare. Yes, yes, the website is the screen-doored submarine of websites. Sure, the president is simply disregarding countless laws and regulations he and his supporters once considered so sacred only racists, psychopaths, and Koch brothers could oppose. But good God, “DON’T YOU WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE INSURANCE, YOU HEARTLESS BASTARD!?!?!
Obamacare has ceased being a thing for its defenders and has instead become an idea, a vision. To question the greatness of Obamacare is to miss the point of the greatness of Obamacare.
Anyone who defines sin as “being out of alignment with my values” is up to something sketchy.
I'm not playing Bush vs. Barack but simply pointing out the fact all Presidents use executive orders and selectively enforce laws. I notice you didn't answer my questions. Once more I ask, has any judicial body actually ruled any action by the current President unconstitutional? Other than hyperbole by talking heads on the right I have seen no evidence of any unconstitutional acts by the prez. Show me an official ruling and not your opinion. ONE as you would say.
Also notice you quickly backtracked from your contention that Bush didn't use any signing statements. You have been proven wrong over and over but you still want to argue and then bring up push up analogies? Really? You're not serious so let's end this. Nice try but some of us rely on facts.
"Once more I ask, has any judicial body actually ruled any action by the current President unconstitutional?"
And once more (as @9:45 PM) I tell you, In January, the D.C. Circuit held the NLRB appointments to be unconstitutional.
And I never once contended that Bush didn't use any signing statements, I said he never exceeded his constiyutional authority in doing so.
What is your purpose in arguing that all presidents make executive orders? Of course they do, it's part of the job.
But there is a difference between legal executive orders issued in the course of the executive branch executing laws, and the unconstitutional use of executive orders to make new laws or amend existing laws.
If you can't see the difference it is because you don't want to.
"And once more (as @9:45 PM) I tell you, In January, the D.C. Circuit held the NLRB appointments to be unconstitutional."
All Presidents use recess appointments and it was always unclear if the senate was in recess or not and the exact definition of "recess" which was seemingly finally answered by the D.C. Circuit court. BTW that was but one example while you stated there were several. I'll link a few posts because I know you won't search for recess appointment constitutionality yourself.
BTW, the case is being appealed and heard by the Supreme Court so it very well could be ruled constitutional so let's put a conditional mark on that one anon.
"I have given you a dozen unconstitutional executive orders issued by Obama."
Turns into just one
And once more (as @9:45 PM) I tell you, In January, the D.C. Circuit held the NLRB appointments to be unconstitutional."
Interesting.
"The executive branch can make executive orders that implement already existing laws. It cannot cannot make new laws or amend existing laws."
Uh, that's what signing statements do, amend laws.
Making four appointments without the advice or consent of the U.S. Senate, even while the Senate was in session and available, is not an "unclear" violation of the Constitution, but a blatant and obvious crime.
"I have given you a dozen unconstitutional executive orders issued by Obama."
Here are 10 more from 2013 alone, courtesy of Forbes magazine:
1. Delay of Obamacare’s out-of-pocket caps. The Labor Department announced in February that it was delaying for a year the part of the healthcare law that limits how much people have to spend on their own insurance. Changing the law requires actual legislation.
2. Delay of Obamacare’s employer mandate. The administration announced that it was delaying the requirement that employers of at least 50 people provide complying insurance or pay a fine. This time it did cite statutory authority, but the cited provisions allow the delay of certain reporting requirements, not of the mandate itself.
3. Delay of Obamacare’s insurance requirements. President Obama proclaimed that people could continue buying non-complying plans in 2014—despite Obamacare’s explicit language to the contrary. He then refused to consider a House-passed bill that would’ve made this action legal.
4. Exemption of Congress from Obamacare. In the quiet of August, President Obama directed the Office of Personnel Management to interpret the law to maintain the generous congressional benefits.
5. Expansion of the employer mandate penalty through IRS regulation. Obamacare grants tax credits to people whose employers don’t provide coverage if they buy a plan “through an Exchange established by the State”—and then fines employers for each employee receiving such a subsidy. No tax credits are authorized for residents of states where the exchanges are established by the federal government, as an incentive for states to create exchanges themselves.
6. Political profiling by the IRS. After seeing a rise in the number of applications for tax-exempt status, the IRS in 2010 compiled a “be on the lookout” (“BOLO”) list to identify organizations engaged in political activities. The list included words such as “Tea Party,” “Patriots,” and “Israel”; subjects such as government spending, debt, or taxes; and activities such as criticizing the government, educating about the Constitution, or challenging Obamacare. The targeting continued through May of 2013.
7. Outlandish Supreme Court arguments. Between January 2012 and June 2013, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Justice Department’s extreme positions 9 times. The cases ranged from criminal procedure to property rights, religious liberty to immigration, securities regulation to tax law. They had nothing in common other than the government’s view that federal power is virtually unlimited. As a comparison, in the entire eight years each of the Bush and Clinton presidencies, the government suffered 15 and 23 unanimous rulings, respectively.
8. Recess appointments. Last year, President Obama appointed three members of the National Labor Relations Board, as well as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, during what he considered to be a Senate recess. But the Senate was still holding “pro forma” sessions every three days—a technique developed by Sen. Harry Reid to thwart Bush recess appointments. (Meanwhile, the Dodd-Frank Act, which created the CFPB, provides that authority remains with the Treasury Secretary until a director is “confirmed by the Senate.”) In January, the D.C. Circuit held the NLRB appointments to be unconstitutional.
9. Assault on free speech and due process on college campuses. Responding to complaints about the University of Montana’s handling of sexual assault claims, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, in conjunction with the Justice Department, sent the university a letter intended as a national “blueprint” for tackling sexual harassment. The letter urges a crackdown on “unwelcome” speech and requires complaints to be heard in quasi-judicial procedures that deny legal representation, encourage punishment before trial, and convict based on a mere “more likely than not” standard.
10. Mini-DREAM Act. President Obama, contradicting his own previous statements claiming to lack authority, directed the Department of Homeland Security to issue work and residence permits to the so-called Dreamers. The executive branch undoubtedly has discretion regarding enforcement priorities, but granting de facto green cards goes beyond a decision to defer deportation in certain cases.
Other than #8 what ruling by a judicial body states these are unconstitutional? Thanks, I'll wait.
"6. Political profiling by the IRS."
And there is no proof of this. Nice try.
1-5 are unconstitutional changes to the ACA, a law passed by Congress.
9 is clearly unconstitutional in its violation of enumerated rights.
10 is clearly unconstitutional in it is the executive branch usurping the powers of the legislative branch.
6 is the absolute worst of the bunch, it that it is the worst abuse of power of an American President in living memory. The proof is in the emails of the fired, fifth-pleading IRS director:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/12/emails-ois-lerner-specifically-targeted-tea-party/?page=all
You are obviously a completely unserious buffoon if you refuse to acknowledge that serious wrongdoing was perpetrated by Obama's IRS.
Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley says a “massive gravitational shift” of power to the presidency has created a “constitutional crisis” for the U.S.:
http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2014/02/27/power-presidency-turley
But hey, Heil Obama.
"Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley says a “massive gravitational shift” of power to the presidency has created a “constitutional crisis” for the U.S."
I'm so glad Johnathan Turley is an official branch of the government. Try again.
"You are obviously a completely unserious buffoon if you refuse to acknowledge that serious wrongdoing was perpetrated by Obama's IRS."
The alleged wrongdoing by the IRS. Where is the evidence? What has Issa found? There is no evidence of A. an attempt by the IRS to target conservative groups and B. the WH is involved. I may be a buffoon but I don't lend myself to speculation without facts. I'm not conservative. maybe if conservative groups that are clearly political stop pretending to be social welfare organizations i.e. 501c4 they wouldn't be investigated.
Rep. Sander M. Levin of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the committee, said there is still no evidence that the IRS was driven by a political motive to stifle conservative views.
“Lois Lerner was incompetent in her management of the IRS tax-exempt division and unprofessional in her conduct — reasons why I immediately called for her to be relieved of her duties,” Mr. Levin said.
He said, though, that Republicans are overselling what the investigation uncovered.
“Selective leaking by Republicans does not change the fact that tens of thousands of documents and dozens of interviews with IRS employees have revealed absolutely no evidence of political motivation, no evidence of outside influence and no evidence of White House involvement,” Mr. Levin said.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/12/emails-ois-lerner-specifically-targeted-tea-party/#ixzz2wJpCv0ZJ
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
This from your WashTimes article. I tend to agree with Sen. Levin.
"He said, though, that Republicans are overselling what the investigation uncovered."
Understatement of the year.
“Selective leaking by Republicans does not change the fact that tens of thousands of documents and dozens of interviews with IRS employees have revealed absolutely no evidence of political motivation, no evidence of outside influence and no evidence of White House involvement,” Mr. Levin said.
But hey, why not be selective when you're trying to create a scandal?
He's the ranking democrat, of course you agree with his obfuscation; it's your job.
"He's the ranking democrat, of course you agree with his obfuscation; it's your job."
He's correct. The thing is the IRS was simply doing their job. The law states that any group applying for 501c4 tax exempt status must be exclusively involved in social welfare activities. Political activity is prohibited. 80% of groups applying for 501c4 status were conservative organizations. So you tell me, if your job is to investigate whether or not a bunch of organizations applying for tax exempt status are political how would you go about doing it? If 80% were conservative wouldn't you spend the majority of your time investigating such? Wouldn't you key on titles such as "tea party" because they are usually politically active? Lastly, if you don't want your organization investigated by the IRS don't apply for tax exempt status. I for one am glad they are letting tax money get wasted by political organizations falsely applying for tax exempt status.
"of course you agree with his obfuscation; it's your job."
And of course you agree with Issa's grandstanding.
"Wouldn't you key on titles such as "tea party" because they are usually politically active"
Why yes, if I were tasked with harassing and intimidating the President's political opponents, that's exactly what I'd do.
Thanks for playing.
"Getting food anyway they can"
You do realize there are places like soup kitchens and such right?
No need to riot because you supposedly cant feed yourself.
"Why yes, if I were tasked with harassing and intimidating the President's political opponents, that's exactly what I'd do."
Well what if you were tasked with the simple job of figuring out if a group applying for tax exempt status was political or not? How would you go about doing that? It's Darrl Issa's job to politicize simple government duties and make them look nefarious.
"Thanks for playing."
No problem, I enjoy showing conservatives common sense.
https://emc-mee.com/transfer-furniture-mecca.html شركة نقل عفش بمكة
https://emc-mee.com/transfer-furniture-yanbu.html شركة نقل عفش بينبع
https://emc-mee.com/transfer-furniture-alkharj.html شركة نقل عفش بالخرج
https://emc-mee.com/transfer-furniture-buraydah.html شركة نقل عفش ببريدة
https://emc-mee.com/transfer-furniture-khamis-mushait.html شركة نقل عفش بخميس مشيط
https://emc-mee.com/transfer-furniture-qassim.html شركة نقل عفش بالقصيم
Post a Comment