|

Obama better use his news conference this morning to address IRS scandal in no uncertain terms

obama-AP35780792788_620x350

President Obama is scheduled to hold a news conference at 10:15 (CDT) this morning, and he should use the occasion to roundly condemn recently disclosed practices at the Internal Revenue Service whereby certain right-wing groups were targeted for special scrutiny (see HERE).

The president likely will also be questioned about the so-called Benghazi scandal, but that issue, which has been overblown by Republican Obamaphobes, is of less immediate import than the IRS matter.

Questions about the integrity of the IRS have the potential to greatly undermine public confidence in the government. Hence, it behooves Obama to make it amply clear that he will not settle for any whitewashing of the current scandal. The time to do that is today.

Share:

12 Comments

  1. expdoc

    You can chalk it up to paranoia, but in light of the current (and yet to be fully uncovered) IRS scandal, it is no wonder that people are concerned about their health information vis a vis Obamacare and mandatory registration of gun ownership.

  2. doc: You’re right. And let’s not forget the UFO cover-ups, the vaccination conspiracies, the faked moon landing, the chemtrails scheme and all the other sinister efforts to sap us of our precious bodily fluids.

    I think it’s time for patriotic Americans to take up arms against the Obama regime and replace it with an Ayn Rand-style government.

    Who’s with me on this?

  3. By the way, doc, your reference to the “mandatory registration of gun ownership” is another example of your political gullibility.

    No matter all the lies to the contrary peddled by your Republican heroes in the U.S. Senate, the background-checks bill would explicitly bar public officials from creating a national gun registry, penalizing those who do with a felony charge carrying a prison sentence of up to 15 years.

    But, of course, the bill failed, despite the fact that a huge majority of Americans favored it.

    Your good buddy Sunspots Johnson voted against the measure. I’ll bet you’re proud of him.

  4. expdoc

    But of course YOU would be in favor of gun registration wouldn’t you Pat?

  5. doc: Sure I would — just to annoy the bed-wetter paranoiacs. Y’know, the guys whose guns are compensation for certain other (ahem) shortcomings.

    I love these nutcases who dream of using their little arsenals to overthrow the government, especially now that there’s a colored guy in charge. They’re cartoonish parodies of themselves — like Johnny Carson’s Floyd Turbo character.

    But, of course, you would be opposed to gun registration, wouldn’t you, doc? The politicians you support are on the side of the paranoiacs, so you have to oppose registration, else you’d be breaking ranks.

    You people are so weird and so laughable. Just look at the Republican Party these days: anti-science, theocratic, paranoid, conspiratorial. Wow! Your party will never again win the presidency in my lifetime.

  6. expdoc

    You people? Hilarious.

    I haven’t owned a gun and never will. I am opposed to registration but not for the reasons you state.

    I can always tell when any particular issue has hit home with you because you go straight to the liberal playbook.

    On second thought, it isn’t hilarious, it’s pathetic. Just as pathetic as anyone who think the means to change in this country would be by a violent revolution.

  7. doc: Funny stuff.

    You say I “go straight to the liberal playbook” whenever “any particular issue has hit home.”

    And I suppose you think that’s different from you and others of your ilk going straight to the right-wing playbook when you’re sufficiently provoked.

    Your right-wing playbook has become dog-eared from all your references to it.

    But, hey, keep at it. It’s usually good for a laugh.

  8. Craig Knauss

    What’s wrong with gun registration, doc? Tell us how it’s different than having to be registered to store explosives, dangerous chemicals, or something like that. Tell us how it’s different than having to register your car. Or your boat. Or your airplane. Or your professional license.

    I don’t own a gun either. But my cars, my boat and my professional license are all registered. Doing so protects the public and it protects me. You think that’s pathetic?

  9. wilson

    Finally they are wire tapping those evil reporters
    ” The Justice Department secretly obtained two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press in what the news cooperative’s top executive called a “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into how news organizations gather the news..”

    Pat should we start getting paranoid? Maybe this is just another low level employee acting alone.
    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-records-probe

  10. expdoc

    Craig,

    I am opposed to registration because it is another expense that will not address the problem of gun violence. Backround checks are fine, I just don’t see what registration accomplishes, unless you want to view it as another revenue stream.

    Pathetic was in reference to another failed attempt by Pat to deflect from a serious issue with his idea of humor.

  11. Dangfitz

    Pat – the feds won’t keep a gun registry? Like they didn’t keep those images of naked people from the backscatter scanners at the airports?

  12. Dangfitz

    Craig – I agree. Let’s do away with car registrations, boat registrations, and very definitely professional licenses. We shouldn’t have to ask permission from bureaucrats to drive, boat, or work. Professional licensing, in particular, is all about blocking competition. Do we seriously need to license barbers? Cosmetologists?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>