Ever wonder what a “real scandal” would look like?
Because, despite the president’s feigned outrage about what the IRS did, the White House’s message is that the IRS abuses don’t constitute a “real” scandal.
Excuse me—an “actual real scandal”:
“What would be an actual real scandal in Washington would be if the president had been involved or had interfered in an IRS investigation,” Pfeiffer said on CBS’s ‘Face the Nation.’”
So let’s redefine: an actual real scandal would be if we had a recording of Obama, or emails from Obama, directing the IRS to do this or directing his underlings to cover it up. Without that, no biggee.
What difference does it make what the IRS’s politically-motivated audits tell us about the tyranny of the federal government? What difference does it make that Obama publicly set the tone for the targeting of “enemies”? What difference does it make that this was purposely withheld till after the election? And what difference does it make that Obama has failed even now to fire (for real, not just those on the brink of leaving anyway) anyone involved?
Because Obama is responsible for nothing except the killing of Bin Laden and some vapid but golden oratory. The buck not only doesn’t stop at his desk, it doesn’t even pass that way.
Oh, and still another “actual real scandal” would be anything negative that happened during a Republican administration.
Next question.
[NOTE: Love this. It appeared in, of all places, the New Yorker:
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)””President Obama used his weekly radio address on Saturday to reassure the American people that he has “played no role whatsoever” in the U.S. government over the past four years.
“Right now, many of you are angry at the government, and no one is angrier than I am,” he said. “Quite frankly, I am glad that I have had no involvement in such an organization.”
The President’s outrage only increased, he said, when he “recently became aware of a part of that government called the Department of Justice.”
“The more I learn about the activities of these individuals, the more certain I am that I would not want to be associated with them,” he said. “They sound like bad news.”
Mr. Obama closed his address by indicating that beginning next week he would enforce what he called a “zero tolerance policy on governing.”
“If I find that any members of my Administration have had any intimate knowledge of, or involvement in, the workings of the United States government, they will be dealt with accordingly,” he said.]
This Administration’s dismissive attitude toward the public is scandalous.
Which phase of the Matrix are we in? When a thing is not ‘TRUE,’ despite the documents and evidence, until one group says it is true.
IRS harassment did not happen, don’t you know, until the Democrats admitted it.
Benghazi was just a ‘concoction,’ despite real world happenings, because one side said it was real. Until the other side acknowledged it, it didn’t exist.
And on and on. Issue after issue. Laws are “Irrelevant” merely because a Democrat has deemed it so, from immigration, to this IRS scandal.
It leaves us sputtering in helpless rage, as NOTHING we say or do seems to affect it, as long as the American people allow it to go on.
Obama HAS effectively transformed the nation, into a nation where laws are selectively enforced and applied, and nothing matters. “What Difference, At This Point, Does It Make Anyway?”
Stark:
Scandalous, but apparently well-earned.
Ah, the Left’s fondness for corrupting the language.
“Actual, real scandal” being of the same ilk as “rape, rape,” and both attempts to redefine reality so as to escape responsibility and probably some jail time.
By the way, saw a few clips of this arrogant young tool and if this is the best they’ve got “get ready for a bumpy ride.”
As an economist would say “it’s the velocity of money that counts”. The buck has reached escape velocity and doesn’t stop anywhere.
It’s all about the narrative. If it doesn’t fit the narrative, it will not be reported, or made to seem trivial. “What differance does it make?”
Sadly, Neo, I think your last paragraph is the definition that too many folks use: ” . . . actual real scandal would be anything negative that happened during a Republican administration.”
And, this isn’t just true about Obama. Often times when a state or local official (with a D after their names, of course) gets caught with their hand in the cookie jar, many voters are quick to dimiss it as “well, they all cheat and steal.” But, let a Republican sneeze funny and all hell breaks out.
This IRS thing is the worst scandal there has been in my lifetime. It shows that America is closer to a fascist dictatorship than we have ever been.
The boldness and the arrogance; the bullying; the violence against the financial and emotional well-being of American citizens by their own (so-called) government (it not really being “our” government anymore but our overlord); the singling out of good people by a so-called President and the execution of his will against what he calls “enemies” by his minions…..
This is what a civilizational crisis looks like – and this is just one incident and surely the tip of the iceberg at that.
We are fighting Mordor and the Army of Orcs. We are badly outnumbered and the odds are stacked against us. There is no chance we can win, but the one impossible chance that we will.
Never ever ever did I dream America would get this way. This is Soviet Russia. This is Red China. It’s not a “real actual scandal”. He is right. It is infinitely by powers uncountable worse than any mere scandal.
This attitude cannot exist on its own. It only works with the collision of two other factors- a complicit media and a dumbed down unquestioning base.
It also needs an opposition that refuses to call it by name and impose the appropriate penalties.
Boehner is now talking Jail. All I can say is “good, but it took too long”.
Jail time is merited. Once that process starts, people will start talking even more.
Oh, and still another “actual real scandal” would be anything negative that happened during a Republican administration.
Nails it, sadly.
So well said by Neo and ALL the comments.
I, like many in the Blog world, was blown away with Pfeiffer’s, “the law is irrelevant” comment. While many would have you believe he was trying to make a “larger” moral case of right vs. wrong, I would argue it was a slip of the tongue. In other words he slipped and told the truth.
His admission was simple, we are a nation of men not of laws.
Our current crop of leaders don’t care about the law, they believe they are above it. The Left’s argument which began largely for a society consolidated around the government to dole out ideals to the homeless and needy has morphed into a familiar historical meme.
One in which power is consolidated to friends and interests (members of the tribe), not for the people, but for themselves.
You’re starting to see why the Pink House regards burning down the IRS as a firebreak.
It can’t lead to impeachment.
Benghazi, if pursued far enough, will have even Democrat Senators voting to convict.
Because Benghazi has many more layers before one reaches the bottom of the rabbit hole.
FEST was not available because it was up past its ears while in Croatia — and just as involved in gun running to Syria.
The whole scheme was being run from the Oval Office/ Air Force One/ the Links.
The Wan has reversed the Church Committee, relaunching CIA military field ops.
When the full enormity pulls into view — the Despot in Chief will be found to have engaged in war operations behind the back of Congress — to include ranking Democrats in the Senate.
Worse, in the fullness of time, it will be shown that Barry is right there with Col. Klink.
Moscow has already reached conclusions. Hence, the media events staged in Russia, spanking the CIA and the State Department.
JFK is most likely the only member of the Senate to have a clue about the op, being informed/ consulted before he was elevated to Secretary of State.
Thin Reid, Harry, was left out of the loop; “Need to know,” and all that.
Strassel has a great op-ed up at the WSJ. Obama said publicly that his opponents deserved extra scrutiny from the IRS and they got it.
But now we have the ultimate excuse from the New Yorker: Obama denies role in Goverment. The New Yorker?
**LOVE** the rant, neo.
(There, I’ll bet that feels better now.)
(Actually, it probably doesn’t. [sigh])
Your follower and fellow traveler,
M J R
Pat
But now we have the ultimate excuse from the New Yorker: Obama denies role in Goverment. The New Yorker?
Pat, I suspect that the Borowitz Report in The New Yorker, where Obama denies having played any role in government, is satire.
That has to be satire.
Unfortunately, given the “It wasn’t me..it was Dubya” refrain over the last 4 years, it is satire that has a ring of truth to it.
So sorry, Pfeiffer, you do not get to define what constitutes a real scandal.
We will each define for ourselves what constitutes a scandal, and if enough of us can focus our minds, your Boss will be in trouble. I would really enjoy thinking of the likes of Pfeiffer, Carney, and others of the ilk, swimming with the rats who are just beginning to abandon the ship.
In my opinion, Benghazi more directly touches the very upper levels of this Administration and clearly exposes gross incompetence, exacerbated by untruthfulness at the highest levels.
On the other hand, the IRS corruption is easier to understand as an individual threat to a greater number of citizens. It has the potential to focus them on the dangers of big , intrusive government if the threat can be adequately explained. Unfortunately, Obama will try to hide behind a veil of ignorance–and could be successful in doing so. It will take a concerted effort to persuade the casual observer that he created the climate that fostered this outrage.
Gringo, Pat:
Absolutely and positively satire.
But very funny.
The trouble with satire these days is that it’s too close to the truth, and the truth threatens to outstrip it.
Pat, I read Strassel’s op-ed in the WSJ and it is absolutely devastating. I wish every American would read it. In fact, I believe I saw another cite in the past day or two of a column by her a year ago concerning the administration’s targeting of Romney donor Vandersloot. This is probably why she could so fluidly weave together all the threads into such an indictment of Obama, because she has been following this closely for a long time.
Her crushing final words: “After all, he expects the IRS to ‘operate with absolute integrity’. Even when he does not”.
Obama and his supporters are going all Claude Rains claiming they are “shocked, shocked” by the IRS machinations but my guess is that most of us here are, shall we say, slightly less shocked. This points up what was really the Original Sin in the fawning MSM coverage of Obama – their stubborn and willful refusal during the 2008 campaign to report anything about BO’s Chicago machine politics background. Even some superficial coverage of this would have gone a long way towards deflating the exalted aura they were so determined to bestow on him. Which of course was exactly why they didn’t do it.
}}} <i.The buck not only doesn’t stop at his desk, it doesn’t even pass that way.
And it’s a mystery why not. It’s hunting season, and we all know there’s no way in hell it’s ever going to get shot around there… :-9
}}} “Actual, real scandal” being of the same ilk as “rape, rape,”
Truer than you possibly grasp. The case in question, Polanski was not merely engaging in sex with a minor just a short while before her official legal age — we’re not talking about a case of a 16 or 17yo who, let’s face it, has at least SOME idea what she’s looking for, even if it’s still illegal — we are talking about a barely 13yo girl… and, yes, it was pure RAPE, not even “potentially consensual” by any standard. The official court transcripts of her testimony show that
a) it was not sex, she was sodomized in her ass.
b) she was begging him to stop and he continued in spite of that.
So it’s correct, it wasn’t “rape rape”, it was “fucking damned inexcusable RAPE, period.”
And that prick SOB has NEVER gotten the idea that he did anything wrong. Years after the event he’s on record as saying he likes (and thinks every man likes) to “fuck young girls in the ass”.
It’s a good thing she wasn’t my daughter, or that bastard SOB would not still be around to make films.
I’m sure that Pat knows its satire, but was pointing out that the New Yorker was critical of the One.
“If I find that any members of my Administration have had any intimate knowledge of, or involvement in, the workings of the United States government, they will be dealt with accordingly,” he said”
Removing the Govermentspeak-
AKA I will promote them and give them bonuses and a higher position. 🙁 (That is all I better say lest I receive a welcome letter from the IRS.)
I was surprised at the bald faced arrogance of the IRS director. (But then I heard that before an IRS employee can be fired, they have to go before a committee. And like the State Department, the number of people fired in any given year is less than 100. Don’t hold your breath that we will get any answers.)
I’m just not sure why all the “principled” democrats on the other side of the aisle are not outraged. They are outraged that 3 ROP followers had water poured over their faces (which we do to our people in the military for training.) but this is just “old made-up news.” Keep drinking that Kool-Aid.
@ Mike (from a different Mike): By “principled” do you mean good? Then there are no principled democrats. None. Zee-roh.
If by principled you mean that they are men and women of principle (a fundamental idea or rationale), the it is true that they follow their principles. They are all “principled”.
Their principles are evil They want to control, destroy, amass power, squash any dissenters, break the back of America and Americans.
They run on the principles of Morder and they are outstanding at sticking closely to their principles.
Andy Borowitz, author of the Borowitz Report, is a career satirist. Can find the Borowitz Report online, as I did some time ago; stopped, because things were too serious to joke about. Still are, and getting worse.
We have references to Mordor and Claude Rains in the above posts. Is this where we find our truths, in mpvies? In fictions? I know these are cited as useful examples, but still, people…
The Left’s morphing of our language is a classic Alinsky tactic, as in Comprehensive Growth Planning, which they term ‘Smart Growth’. If one opposes ‘Smart Growth’, one must by implication favor the alternative, “Stupid Growth’, though the Smarties never call it that. You are opposed to their -their- Smart Growth? What does that make you? an opponent or a stupid?
@Mike,
The Democrats aren’t unprincipled. I know Democrats have a principle called expediency. It may be the only one.
Hey, those federal taxes aren’t really actual taxes, are they? But what difference does it make since the law is irrelevant.