Tea Partiers harassed by IRS?

[11B4V]

The IRS did not respond to requests for comment Monday.

IRS stonewall. 

[Iormlund]

... officials also zeroed in on groups ... that were interested in... improving America...

The IRS is against improving America? The bastards!

[derspiess]

Ouch-- 4 Pinocchios

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-claim-he-called-benghazi-an-act-of-terrorism/2013/05/13/7b65b83e-bc14-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_blog.html?wprss=rss_politics

[merithyn]

Ouch-- 4 Pinocchios

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-claim-he-called-benghazi-an-act-of-terrorism/2013/05/13/7b65b83e-bc14-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_blog.html?wprss=rss_politics

So he says repeatedly in interviews that it's too early to say what happened, that they don't know, that it's still being worked out... and you're focusing on whether or not he put "-ism" at the end of terror?

Again, I ask. How does this directly change anything?

[derspiess]

Ouch-- 4 Pinocchios

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-claim-he-called-benghazi-an-act-of-terrorism/2013/05/13/7b65b83e-bc14-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_blog.html?wprss=rss_politics

So he says repeatedly in interviews that it's too early to say what happened, that they don't know, that it's still being worked out... and you're focusing on whether or not he put "-ism" at the end of terror?

Again, I ask. How does this directly change anything?

Ask the person who wrote the article.  I just relayed it, so don't shoot the messenger.

[Valmy]

Ask the person who wrote the article.  Don't shoot the messenger.

Unless you decided to post this article under his orders you are not his messenger.

[Admiral Yi]

So he says repeatedly in interviews that it's too early to say what happened, that they don't know, that it's still being worked out... and you're focusing on whether or not he put "-ism" at the end of terror?

Again, I ask. How does this directly change anything?

That's only one line in the article.  The meat of the indictment is that his claim during the debate doesn't hold up, not so much because of the distinction between act of terror and terrorist act, but he never made an affirmative statement that the Benghazi attack was either.

[merithyn]

So he says repeatedly in interviews that it's too early to say what happened, that they don't know, that it's still being worked out... and you're focusing on whether or not he put "-ism" at the end of terror?

Again, I ask. How does this directly change anything?

That's only one line in the article.  The meat of the indictment is that his claim during the debate doesn't hold up, not so much because of the distinction between act of terror and terrorist act, but he never made an affirmative statement that the Benghazi attack was either.

[Admiral Yi]

Again, I ask. How does this directly change anything?

[/quote]

Well, I suppose you could argue that this doesn't directly change anything.  I suppose you, Meri, could hold the principled position that a lie that doesn't result in loss of life, property, or injury doesn't really matter.  Or I suppose you, Meri, could hold the partisan position that it doesn't ever matter when my guy lies.

[garbon]

Well, I suppose you could argue that this doesn't directly change anything.  I suppose you, Meri, could hold the principled position that a lie that doesn't result in loss of life, property, or injury doesn't really matter.  Or I suppose you, Meri, could hold the partisan position that it doesn't ever matter when my guy lies.

I'd wonder why we are beating this horse to death if it doesn't change anything.

[merithyn]

Well, I suppose you could argue that this doesn't directly change anything.  I suppose you, Meri, could hold the principled position that a lie that doesn't result in loss of life, property, or injury doesn't really matter.  Or I suppose you, Meri, could hold the partisan position that it doesn't ever matter when my guy lies.

It's the "lie" part that I don't get. If it's a lie - as in he's deliberately trying to mislead people - it's an awfully small one. I mean, he's not saying that no one died. He's not saying that additional support wasn't requested. He's not saying that those requests were denied. Those would be big lies - important lies - to me. But this? Really? He's a politician. They all do everything they can to put every situation in the best possible light for themselves.

As for the partisan thing, do you really think that no one noticed when Bush pulled this stuff? Was it trotted out with words like "impeachment!" when he did? Again I say, it's not a partisan thing, it's a politician thing. To keep harping on it as if it's news is just... worthless.

[derspiess]

Ask the person who wrote the article.  Don't shoot the messenger.

Unless you decided to post this article under his orders you are not his messenger.

I volunteered 

[garbon]

As for the partisan thing, do you really think that no one noticed when Bush pulled this stuff? Was it trotted out with words like "impeachment!" when he did? Again I say, it's not a partisan thing, it's a politician thing. To keep harping on it as if it's news is just... worthless.

Well yes there was a resolution put forth to impeach him. Also per wiki, fun Nancy made a series of odd statements.

[Valmy]

Well, I suppose you could argue that this doesn't directly change anything.  I suppose you, Meri, could hold the principled position that a lie that doesn't result in loss of life, property, or injury doesn't really matter.  Or I suppose you, Meri, could hold the partisan position that it doesn't ever matter when my guy lies.

You have got to be shitting me.  I mean politicians lie so much they even lie when they are telling the truth.

[Valmy]

Ask the person who wrote the article.  Don't shoot the messenger.

Unless you decided to post this article under his orders you are not his messenger.

I volunteered 

I am just saying, do not be a Tim here.  You shouldn't refuse to provide commentary on an article you introduced to the conversation