They're not strawmen. Your analogies are What exactly do you want to see happen because the morons in the IRS botched doing their job 100% correctly? I think people will be fired for their incompetence. There's no smoking gun of any kind that suggests there was anything sinister that went on. Nothing linking Obama, his campaign, etc., to this. There's no high crime or misdemeanor here. Not even close. If Obama ordered the IRS to scrutinize organizations with the name "tea party" in them, it wouldn't be a high crime or misdemeanor. I'm really looking for what your complaint is. You seem to be making a similar complaint to your last wait at the DMV being a little long.
Yes, you've made it clear several times you don't get it. You keep making up strawman after strawman. I never said it was Obama. Nice strawman. I never said it was a "high crime". Nice strawman. I never said this was somebody "botching their job". Nice strawman. You're just rambling about some random topics you happen to want to type about at the time. If you want to discuss the actual topic and thread, let us know.
I'm really looking for what your complaint is. You seem to be making a similar complaint to your last wait at the DMV being a little long. Again, as far as the evidence shows right now, the IRS went after people trying to cheat on taxes. Gosh, what a concept!
That is just patently false. The IRS is even apologizing for this issue, calling it inappropriate. The whitehouse called it inappropriate. Keep playing dumb.
lol I have to ask....why let Denny troll you? If even some Dems are hopping on the band wagon and obama has made a statement with the inclusion that the IRS was a seperate entinty....dude...
This has nothing to do with increased page views. I've stated the case numerous times and ways. Other posters have understood my position. The IRS is apologizing for the issue, as they went about doing the right thing the wrong way. I pointed out that people are likely to be fired over it. So what the fuck more do you want?
Reading comprehension issues, Denny. Direct those Watergate references to papag as they have nothing to do with me. You're being purposefully intellectually irresponsible.
It's not Bush's fault. But it's hard to believe a Bush appointee would be partisan in favor of Democrats, no?
which isn't what I said, but thanks for bringing back the catch phrase. I just think it's weird that a appointee by a conservative (well, republican, he wasn't a conservative in the sense of what conservatism is now) was the one who was behind the targeting of political groups.
