Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Obama shills really are reaching new lows with each passing day.
On the one hand, they whine and complain about the media source that reports on these e-mails. In that context, "bias" is oh-so-terrible in their eyes.
On the other hand, they don't have a single peep to utter about the criminally corrupt bias exhibited by GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS in the IRS, who because of their bias used the institutions of government to attack innocent American citizens who happened to have political beliefs that they didn't share.
Ironic, to say the least. Obama's lapdogs disgust me more and more with each post and day.
Does anyone have faith that Eric Holder will approve an outside investigator for the case?
Oh, please, this one is in good hands. Holder has approved as a special investigator none other than.......
Barack Obama.
Obama's not biased, because he has to find out about stories like this in the media, just like the rest of us. And he's REALLY good at gettting to the bottom of things. I have no doubt this investigation will be carried out quickly, and with the efficiency and accuracy we have come to expect from the US Government, a 2014 JD Power Quality award winner.
Oh, please, this one is in good hands. Holder has approved as a special investigator none other than.......
Barack Obama.
Obama's not biased, because he has to find out about stories like this in the media, just like the rest of us. And he's REALLY good at gettting to the bottom of things. I have no doubt this investigation will be carried out quickly, and with the efficiency and accuracy we have come to expect from the US Government, a 2014 JD Power Quality award winner.
Too bad the rest of us aren't given the privilege of investigating ourselves. I would find myself innocent every time too.
I find it embarrassing as a country that this investigation hinges on a corrupt Eric Holder. If this is our hope of getting to the bottom, we are doomed.
Well, I read the e-mails. I think when a friend is talking about "whackos" it's okay to refer to those "whackos" as "crazies". Do these e-mails show a bias toward conservatives, or a bias toward "whackos"?
The Obama shills really are reaching new lows with each passing day.
On the one hand, they whine and complain about the media source that reports on these e-mails. In that context, "bias" is oh-so-terrible in their eyes.
On the other hand, they don't have a single peep to utter about the criminally corrupt bias exhibited by GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS in the IRS, who because of their bias used the institutions of government to attack innocent American citizens who happened to have political beliefs that they didn't share.
Ironic, to say the least. Obama's lapdogs disgust me more and more with each post and day.
The Democrats absolutely hated Nixon for using the IRS to target enemies. They spent three years investigating him, and Watergate was uncovered.
Now we have a blatant misuse of the IRS and because it's "their guy" doing it, it's all good.
If it's bad for one side to do it, it has to be bad for both sides. For those defending Lerner, just wait until the other side is in power. You've basically given all politicians a green light to be even more corrupt than they already are.
Too bad the rest of us aren't given the privilege of investigating ourselves. I would find myself innocent every time too.
I find it embarrassing as a country that this investigation hinges on a corrupt Eric Holder. If this is our hope of getting to the bottom, we are doomed.
Haha.....no doubt. Holder is about as ethical as some of the mods I know.
Unfortunately, Holder won't be gone before Obama is gone -- of that, I have no doubt. These two need each other in a bad, bad way.
Well, I read the e-mails. I think when a friend is talking about "whackos" it's okay to refer to those "whackos" as "crazies". Do these e-mails show a bias toward conservatives, or a bias toward "whackos"?
The question was if the source was legit. All I did was show it to be true, and nothing more.
The IRS is supposed to be completely non-partisan, and she and her counterparts were targeting political groups. No matter what "you think is okay" because you agree that 100M conservatives are "wackos" THAT is still illegal.
The question was if the source was legit. All I did was show it to be true, and nothing more.
The IRS is supposed to be completely non-partisan, and she and her counterparts were targeting political groups. No matter what "you think is okay" because you agree that 100M conservatives are "wackos" THAT is still illegal.
What are you on about?
Lerner's friend remarked about "whackos", and Lerner responded. Lerner's friend didn't remark about conservatives. No one in that email exchange said that conservatives are wackos.
Lerner's friend remarked about "whackos", and Lerner responded. Lerner's friend didn't remark about conservatives. No one in that email exchange said that conservatives are wackos.
So do you believe Lerner didn't target conservative groups?
Just a simple question.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
