Skip to main content

View Diary: The IRS "scandal" — all smoke, no fire (183 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No, Thugs filibustered it irrc and Dumbya was pres (0+ / 0-)

    Unless u got a link, f-- off and get ur damn facts straight before you make accusations.

    •  um wow. (0+ / 0-)
      Q    Democrats were in charge.  This is 2009.  Who cares about 2007?  We know what he said on the campaign trail in 2008 in front of the Associated Press when it came to this issue. He had a chance to support this and make this bill happen.  Why did he change his position?

      MR. CARNEY:  The President's position on this has not changed.

      Q    Yes, it has.

      MR. CARNEY:  No, it hasn't, Chuck.

      Q    The administration said that they -- essentially, the President changed his position because of certain things on national security.  Can you explain why he changed his position?

      source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/...

      No need to apologize, I'm used to this kind of attack the messenger attitude here.

      •  Yeah, apologize for snaping. But he didn't veto it (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Larsstephens, Creosote

        - the poart you cut off right before shows that:

        "Q    Jay, you keep talking about that then-senator Obama supported a certain piece of legislation -- that is a fact.  As President, he killed that piece of legislation in October of 2009 that made it so that the protections that he supported -- having judicial review on this issue --

        MR. CARNEY:  The President supported --

        Q    -- about supporting, and then he -- there was an opportunity for this bill to be passed, Chuck Schumer was supportive of it, and he said it was the White House that had problems with it and killed it.

        MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think, first of all, you're talking about separate pieces of legislation and a legislative history that bears a little more looking into.  The President's position on this is what it was as a senator.  But the fact is I cannot then appropriately apply his support for that measure --

        Q    If he supported this piece of legislation, we wouldn't be having this conversation today, because there would be -- he supported a judicial review when it came to some of this protecting of sources --

        MR. CARNEY:  And what happened to it in 2007?

        Q    I'm asking you what happened to it in 2009, when he was President of the United States.

        MR. CARNEY:  It was killed by Republicans.  Well, the legislative history here is a little more complicated than you present."

        And Schumer is full of it.  Thugs filibustered it before, said they would filibuster it again and there were not 60 votes for it in 2009.

        Now, you could say 'it might have passed if BO..." but given MCTurtle's & co. 'don't give Obama nuthin'' 'strategy' forgive me for thinking your's is just wishful thinking.

        In an event, it is hardly the indictment of BO you started with.

      •  BTW, Rachel did a bit on this 2night. (0+ / 0-)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site