“Pill fight” revisited.

Linking back to Hal’s post on the Obama birth control fiasco and bringing up a new point I think most of us missed when that came out. George Stephanopoulos’ strange and totally unexpected question about birth control during the January 7th republican debate. Most of us ignored it, or saw it as a simple desperate leftist attempt to create the kind of controversy that benefits them, while actually derailing the debate from the topics of importance like the economic disaster the last 3 years have been. Seriously, contraceptives when Obama is running trillion dollar plus annual deficits, adding $5 trillion to the debt in a short 3 years, unemployment is sky-high despite the fudged reported numbers, and the economy is moving slower than a snail? But in hindsight, the Stephanopoulos question seems to point to an even greater controversy than the question itself, the timing of the question, the Obama contraceptives mandate, and the recent efforts to back off of it considering the negative backlash, combined.

Think this through. In January, a month before the WH puts out their controversial mandate, an elite member of the LSM, and a former democrat political player, drops a ludicrous bomb shell question, during a republican debate where everyone is focused on the disastrous economic practices of the last 3 years. We all assume he is just doing this in the hopes of getting the republicans to say dumb things the WH could then use to claim republicans want to keep women barefoot and pregnant slaves. Newt smacks Stephanopoulos down so hard that his mother reeled from that hit, obviously denying the left any of the juicy footage they where hoping to get, we all assume, and most of us just forget the incident.

Fast forward a month, and there comes the controversial Obama contraceptives mandate. BOOM! The leftists think they are about to score a huge win with this mandate, because the right is going to make fools of themselves fighting it. To them, government control of all aspects of life, especially when it flies in the face of them fairy-in-the-sky worshippers, is a big bonus, and a win-win argument. Let the bloodbath begin! And we all start arguing that controversial decision and what it means, just like they expected. Only things they “miscalculated” as whatever battle plan the WH had, goes south, and does so fast. Almost everyone understands what a blatantly unconstitutional pile of garbage this idiotic mandate is, and they all say so. Eventually the WH even finds itself backing down and trying to reach a compromise, albeit unsuccessfully so far.

But there is a bigger issue here that nobody has yet brought up: was Stephanopoulos working for the WH when he asked his question during the republican debate? Feeling the ground or hoping to create some controversy that the WH, which was planning this contraceptive mandate, could use for political gain? Sure, it all could be a coincidence, but considering the track record of how the left works, their past transgressions of this kind, and how they love to coordinate their “message”, I think the odds of Islamic radicals suddenly becoming mother Theresa-like care givers and completely turning on their violent ways, are better. No, I think we can, and with certitude, point out that there has to be a connection here, and that it basically again shows how the LSM is completely in the pocket of the left. Basically it now looks like Stephanopoulos was doing the WH’s dirty work for them. Expect a lot more of that. In fact, we should all be wondering how much more of this is going on that we have not yet caught on to.

Comments are closed.

  1. Seattle Outcast

    Who else read George Stephanopoulos’s book a few years back when he talked about the Clinton years? I came away with one impression of him that has stuck more than even his being a complete tool – he’s a whiny little bitch.

    Can’t stand the little prick.

    Thumb up 0

  2. Kimpost

    Where does paranoia like this come from? “Was he working for the WH?” Indeed… *sigh* Does shit like this actually come from you or do you pick them up from various blogs? For fucks sake, Alex. Get a grip! *sigh*

    Thumb up 0

  3. JimK

    Really? You don’t understand the colloquial use of the phrase “working for” in this context? Hint: It’s not literal, as in “employed and receiving pay for services rendered.”

    For fuck’s sake, get a grip indeed.

    Thumb up 2

  4. AlexInCT *

    Where does paranoia like this come from? “Was he working for the WH?” Indeed… *sigh* Does shit like this actually come from you or do you pick them up from various blogs? For fucks sake, Alex. Get a grip! *sigh*

    Are you seriously trying to pretend this was a coincidence and that anyone pointing out that it was not has got to be a conspiracist, Kimpost? Way not to disappoint. I know someone on the left would portend that the problem is with the people that see the problem and not the problem. You want me to believe that Stephanopoulos asks this ridiculous question at a republican debate of all things, making everyone scratch their head about why this topic comes up, only to have the president push a horrible and unconstitutional bill, mandating of all things contraceptives for everyone, regardless of the fact that this is not constitutional and a direct violation of that wholly grail the left loves to bring up when it is convenient for them, the separation of church & state, and that it just is a coincidence? You have a better chance to convince me that Bush was behind 9-11 or sent our troops to Iraq to steal oil than that Stephanopoulos asked that question and the WH pulled this stunt without either knowing about the other.

    After all, it’s not like we have a proven history of this sort of behavior here in the US either, right? You miss the whole Journolist scandal the LSM just worked so hard to pretend didn’t destroy their credibility and exposed their partisan behavior? I am sure you did. What about the rest of the 2008 campaign, where the LSM spent more time and manpower, in a week, trying to dig up dirt on Sarah Palin, the VP candidate of all things, than they did in the 3 years Obama was running for president up until he won the election? You miss the MSNBC and Media Matters connection recently exposed? Looks like MSNBC takes their matching orders from MM, and guess who gives MM theirs? It is not a coincidence either that republicans are identified as bad guys and immediately presumed guilty while stories about democrats, if they make the news, whitewash these details.

    Here is the thing: I bet others will catch on to this and explore it, and eventually we will find out the WH and Stephanopoulos coordinated the question and for a reason, even if the LSM tries to bury the story. This is not the first time I was accused of being a conspiracist and crazy either. Remember Fast & Furious revelations? Discussing the WH’s role in Solyndra? What about the incestuous relation between people like Buffet and this WH? There where others. I was told I had to be wrong because the LSM was not reporting it. Turns out they where ignoring or downplaying it because it was bad news for the left, but it was true. You would figure by now that you risk ending up with egg on your face, yet again, by accusing me of being a conspiracist with that kind of track record. Don’t worry. I don’t expect you to admit you where wrong here agian, apologize, or even avoid making comments like this that will come back to embarrass you, now or in the future either.

    The fact is that the media here in the US is beholden to one party, and rpetending they are not in cahoots to the point one has to wonder if they are trying to steal yet another election, serves only the people that like the fact the people doing this are in charge and want to keep it so.

    Thumb up 2

  5. Kimpost

    What are you on about? To be clear, I have no doubt what-so-ever that Alex actually believes that the WH has had secret room meetings with Stephanopoulos, where they have been discussing strategies to get Obama re-elected. Not necessarily for pay though. See, to Alex it’s not just about questions chosen because of a possibly liberal bias. Alex actively believes in super-villains. Obama is not a politician with whom he disagrees. Obama is fucking Dr No. I can’t believe that you haven’t seen it yet, because he’s been clear about it since, well forever.

    Just like he truly believes that the WH has discussed how they could have people killed during Fast & Furious to make it easier to grab guns. No, it’s not about incompetence, it’s about Obama and Holder actively discussing how to get people killed! So. That. They. Can. Grab. Guns. He’s stated that shit a hundred times already. And let’s not go to AGW, where scientists all over the world are in the tank for some kind of global governance movement. This is how the tool thinks – seriously.

    EDIT: See the post above mine, JimK…

    Thumb up 2

  6. AlexInCT *

    What are you on about? To be clear, I have no doubt what-so-ever that Alex actually believes that the WH has had secret room meetings with Stephanopoulos, where they have been discussing strategies to get Obama re-elected.

    They don’t need a secret room when a phone call from the WH to people like Stephanopoulos gets them to do their bidding for the WH. Who is gonna rat them out anyway, huh?

    See, to Alex it’s not just about questions chosen because of a possibly liberal bias.

    Even ascribing the question Stephanopoulos made to liberal bias left many wondering why it was brought up. It simply made no sense to ask anything about that topic in that debate.

    Alex actively believes in super-villains.

    You will have to forgive me for taking the millions killed, and billions imprisoned, by the left and those that stick with that ideology, seriously. The evil done by collectivist might be ignored by our credentialed class, but it has stuck with me.

    Obama is not a politician with whom he disagrees. Obama is fucking Dr No.

    Please don’t insult Dr No. He was at least semi-competent. Nobody can be as inept as Obama would have to be, or have such a case of such bad luck as would be needed, to attribute the damage he has done in just the last 3 years, to something accidental, Kimpost. I do know that what Obama wants will destroy this great nation. I see it playing out. I do not want to live in a European nanny state. Maybe I am wrong, he is just a misguided fool, and this isn’t all part of the plan.

    Then again, you have to be a real fucking nasty case to dream up something like Fast & Furious, to sway public opinion and have them allow you to disarm the sheeple. And when you have Bush telling companies like Solyndra “No way”, only to have members of Team Obama fast track billions of tax payer dollars to them, you at a minimum would think consistent leftists would see some evil in that incestuous relationship Obama has with these corporate masters. Instead they defend the relationship and the tax payer being robbed. We could go into the sweetheart deals for his billionaire buddies while killing jobs for the average American. This is Orwellian shit. Nobody made him do any of this.

    And this is not the first time the WH has been caught collaborating with the LSM on the message either. Obama is president because the media conspired to give him positive coverage while dedicating all their efforts to destroy the opposition. Granted, McCain was ditz and easy to defeat, but it took a monumental and concerted effort of over 7 years of constant fabrications, one sided political coverage, and 24/7 bad press to piss enough people off into thinking this empty suit was anything but.

    Can you imagine Bush doing anything like this and people like you not immediately inferring evil motives to him? Fuck, Nixon got in trouble for far less.

    I can’t believe that you haven’t seen it yet, because he’s been clear about it since, well forever.

    I can’t believe you continue to defend the indefensible.

    Just like he truly believes that the WH has discussed how they could have people killed during Fast & Furious to make it easier to grab guns.

    Have you been keeping up with the story? Because that is exactly where it is going to. Day after day we get more information that the DOJ was hoping for exactly this effect and that they took their queues from higher up.

    No, it’s not about incompetence, it’s about Obama and Holder actively discussing how to get people killed!

    It’s both.

    So. That. They. Can. Grab. Guns. He’s stated that shit a hundred times already.

    And the facts are coming out backing exactly this. Leave it to you to still pretend that is not the case.

    And let’s not go to AGW, where scientists all over the world are in the tank for some kind of global governance movement. This is how the tool thinks – seriously.

    CONCENSUS!

    What scientists are you talking about? The crooks from the UN that hope to sell this snake oil and rob the population of the world blind? And what about those that want real science and respect the scientific process that say this is all crap and have been blacklisted by your UN clique? You do realize that most of us here know the deluded ones are people like you, right?

    EDIT: See the post above mine, JimK…

    What about it? I too think Stephanopoulos is a whiny bitch.

    Thumb up 2

  7. Poosh

    It’s basic leftist false-narrative building. which they are very good at doing. They hold all the major sources of culture-forming, and information.

    They are hoping to scare sensible people away and tarnish the Right by portraying them as the sum total of anti-abortion nutjobs. There’s nothing more repulsive then a cretin who literally thinks life starts at conception, it’s an expression of pure anti-science and detachment from reality. Believing the earth was created in 6 days is more plausible. This works into their narrative that all Republicans are mad Christian fanatics (which some are, sadly) – look at what they did to Palin. They had to missquote or lie about her on every “christian” issue, to create the impression that she was an unhinged Christian, (recall what that cunt Mat Damon said, for example) but it worked. They also pulled this on Bush btw. I am certainly afraid of any religious or non-religous fanatic imposing his own bullshit moral code by violence (ballot), and the left know that if you paint the entire republican party as christian loonies, people will flock away from them. If you’re a libertarian or a normal conservative, you’ll certainly feel concerned about people telling women you can’t use contraception or have an abortion in the first month – it’s repulsive, yet the Left manage to paint the entire Right with this brush. It’s a VERY effective tool and a very clever narrative (which a minority of conservatives, so-called conservatives, help to strengthen).

    Yet Obama goes to a pro-black, racist church for X years and no one bats an eyelid, go figure.

    Any Republican candidate who is religiously or socially a conservative can be and has been EASILY destroyed by the left’s propganda tools. They’ve basically created a sort of dog-whistle where the general public are to an extent programed to despise whoever the left (the media) say is a Christian-fanatic (which is fair enough on the surface, but the problem is NONE of these people are really fanatical).

    The problem with this election is that both Romeny and Newt have an immunity against this. Everyone knows neither of them are fantastical social/religious conservatives. When they aren’t posturing, they don’t give much of a shit. Democrats, everyone, knows that they are real moderates, normal centre-right conservatives.

    That problem is a SERIOUS threat to Obama. So a prudent tactic would simply be to forget who the candidate is (sure try to get him to say a few sentences that we can missquote and throw into a pro-Dem ad, but anyhow…) and go after the Republicans, and the right/conservatives in general > using this contraceptive issue. It seems like the perfect tool to remind everyone how insane conservatives are, and how twisted their morality is. But it’s backfired, big time.

    The problem for the sinister parts of the left is It’s very easy to make a standard conservative argument that if you want to use contraception then that means you want to have sex, and, whether you believe in God or not, sex is an important activity, and so you should, you know, be willing to fork out what probably costs less than your I-Phone monthly subscription for treatment of contraceptives etc. When the male pill comes out, and it will, you’ll start to see many men pulling their weight.

    I can only assume Obama etc calculated that “if it blows up, the media will cover it up for us, like they always do” because this has been a truly bad tactic. Hopefully Chrisitans, and Jews, will wake up and realise Obama is NOT watching their backs.

    And as for those Christians, the majority, who believe that government should be a tool to enforce their religious beliefs /morality from on high, be it feeding the poor from stealing from the rich (welfare) or any forced christian moral principle that non-christians are forced – by law – to abide by, well I hope they all realise that a government that has the power to do all these things can just as easily be the tool of your destruction.

    The less power a government has the better for ALL parties concerned, in this context.

    Thumb up 2

  8. Poosh

    It’s well know that the Obama whitehouse has time and time again (“well-known” let it be said) made it clear to the press that if they don’t play ball, they’ll be denied access and space that has been given to them as-a-matter-of-fact by past whitehouses.

    Thumb up 2

  9. Hal_10000

    That’s true, Poosh, but all administrations do that. Seating aboard Air Force One is a particularly sweet plum they dangle. That’s the reason the press is so reluctant to report anything: loss of access to White House water gun fights.

    Thumb up 1

  10. Hal_10000

    I do think Obama and the MSM have boxed the GOP on this. They first got Santorum to go out on opposing birth control (although Romney strongly disagreed). Then they provoke this pill fight and keep making the claim that Republicans “oppose birth control”. We don’t oppose birth control at all. Hell, Republicans don’t want to get their mistresses pregnant! What we oppose are insurance mandates that drive up the costs for everyone. This, apparently, is too subtle a point to get through liberal skulls.

    The ever-idiotic Amanda Marcotte had a piece at Slate about how Obama “punked” the GOP on this. Funny. She doesn’t have such a positive attitude when anyone else plays political games with women’s issues. Turd.

    It’s not just impossible to buy cheap insurance in this country. Its illegal. And mandates like this are why.

    Thumb up 3

  11. Kimpost

    Are you seriously trying to pretend this was a coincidence and that anyone pointing out that it was not has got to be a conspiracist, Kimpost?

    Yes and yes.

    You want me to believe that Stephanopoulos asks this ridiculous question at a republican debate of all things, making everyone scratch their head about why this topic comes up, only to have the president push a horrible and unconstitutional bill, mandating of all things contraceptives for everyone, regardless of the fact that this is not constitutional and a direct violation of that wholly grail the left loves to bring up when it is convenient for them, the separation of church & state, and that it just is a coincidence?

    Yes again. A coincidence is a million times more likely than your theory of a concerted effort between Stephanopolous and the administration, which is nothing short of ridiculous. You should probably be institutionalized for even thinking it. Since that’s not a real option, you at least deserve to be ridiculed every time you voice your insane theories.

    You have a better chance to convince me that Bush was behind 9-11 or sent our troops to Iraq to steal oil than that Stephanopoulos asked that question and the WH pulled this stunt without either knowing about the other.

    Yeah, like I ever believed anything similar.

    Here is the thing: I bet others will catch on to this and explore it, and eventually we will find out the WH and Stephanopoulos coordinated the question and for a reason, even if the LSM tries to bury the story.

    You betting on it doesn’t make it any more likely. The “reason” your are talking about would be be what exactly? Look, you obviously have zero evidence backing your conspiracy up, and that aside, you can’t even offer a plausible motive. Far fetched idiocy anyone?

    This is not the first time I was accused of being a conspiracist and crazy either. Remember Fast & Furious revelations?

    Oh, I remember your speculations regarding the revelations well.

    Discussing the WH’s role in Solyndra? What about the incestuous relation between people like Buffet and this WH?

    Lot’s of people have the ability to be critical of many of the things you are listing. Solyndra, AGW, Wall Street connections, Fast & Furious. But few choose to take your route of conspiracy nuttery. Few sane people believes that Obama actively seeks to have people murdered just to grab some guns through legislation. Or that the LSM holds secret back alley meetings with the WH. Or that Buffet/Soros conspires with the WH to fundamentally transform America. Insane…

    You would figure by now that you risk ending up with egg on your face, yet again, by accusing me of being a conspiracist with that kind of track record. Don’t worry. I don’t expect you to admit you where wrong here agian, apologize, or even avoid making comments like this that will come back to embarrass you, now or in the future either.

    “Egg on my face”? “Wrong […] again”? “Track record”? This doesn’t make sense. What is this track record of mine?

    […] stealing elections […]

    It just never ends, does it?

    Thumb up 0

  12. Kimpost

    It’s well know that the Obama whitehouse has time and time again (“well-known” let it be said) made it clear to the press that if they don’t play ball, they’ll be denied access and space that has been given to them as-a-matter-of-fact by past whitehouses.

    Yes, and that’s something every administration does. If you suck dick while having a large audience, you’ll receive VIP-treatment. No conspiracy needed for it to work.

    Thumb up 1

  13. JimK

    kimpost, you being a complete asshole and getting so personal is no more accepted than it is when say, oh, I dunno, ALEX DOES IT.

    Calm the fuck down. Your argument doesn’t need dressing up, you have a coherent and reasonable position. Acting like a dick is only going to serve to piss *me* off.

    Or that Buffet/Soros conspires with the WH to fundamentally transform America

    Wow, really? You really don’t think these conversations have happened? I mean…really? That wasn’t you getting carried away going after Alex? You genuinely do not believe that Buffet and/or Soros have had specific conversations with any and every politician who will listen about fundamentally changing this country?

    That *is* insane. They’ve (Buffet and Soros) had the conversations in the public media. Of course they’ve had more extensive and detailed conversations behind closed doors.

    Thumb up 2

  14. AlexInCT *

    Yes and yes.

    I am sure when the proof comes out you will recant and apologize. Not holding my breath though.

    Yes again. A coincidence is a million times more likely than your theory of a concerted effort between Stephanopolous and the administration, which is nothing short of ridiculous. You should probably be institutionalized for even thinking it. Since that’s not a real option, you at least deserve to be ridiculed every time you voice your insane theories.

    See the difference between me and you is that despite the evidence to prove these things are not coincidences, you continue to give them a pass and ascribe make excuses for them. We are just finding out about the incestuous relationship between Media matters, the WH, and MSNBC. I am sure you will find a convenient excuse to dismiss this too. This WH has made it a habit of bullying the LSM. Check out this YouTube video about how they treated a reporter that dared to investigate the Fast & Furious lies instead of carrying water for the WH.

    Oh, I remember your speculations regarding the revelations well.

    Well, listen to that clip I link above, what this reporter found out. She, a democrat, basically investigated and found the same issues you accuse me of speculating about. She is not alone. This kind of run around by the WH, with so many obvious lies from the WH and the DOJ, should make you at a minimum wonder. Instead you are still pretending nothing wrong happened, or if it did, that it was just incompetence.

    Lot’s of people have the ability to be critical of many of the things you are listing.

    Being critical doesn’t change the fact that I called it right in every case.

    Solyndra, AGW, Wall Street connections, Fast & Furious. But few choose to take your route of conspiracy nuttery.

    So you now accuse me of being a conspiracy nut despite what I said bearing out? Priceless.

    Few sane people believes that Obama actively seeks to have people murdered just to grab some guns through legislation.

    Only people with their heads so far up Obama’s ass like you would make this dumb a statement. You do understand the concept of Occam’s razor right?

    It is an established fact that the Fast & Furious operation was never reported to the Mexicans, whom basically where the victims of a covert operation. It is also an undisputed fact – the BATF and the DOJ have admitted to this – that the agents running this operation knew that they would not be able to track these weapons once they crossed the border. It is also indisputable that these weapons would be used by the cartels to kill people. In fact they now attribute over 3000 deaths in Mexico to these weapons. People died. This operation coincided with a well coordinated and well orchestrated media attempt to blame the deaths in Mexico on weapons from the US. This link to US was proven to be a lie, BTW, but here we have the BATF and DOJ gifting the Mexican cartels with countless weapons they would then be able to link to the US.

    Now ask yourself what could the DOJ and WH gain from an operation that lost track of weapons, weapons that then ended in the hands of brutal killers, the killers used these weapons to kill people, and in the US you have the LSM telling us how weapons from the US are killing innocents and we need more control on US citizens getting weapons?

    Ineptness or bad luck would be to accidentally lose weapons you where tracking. When you have no plans to do any of that it is something else. Just like the LSM actively hoisting false stories about how the Mexican drug gangs are armed with weapons they bought here in the US from legal dealers at the same time our government purposefully loses track of weapons that kill people should make you wonder if something is off. Sane people that are smart make these connections.

    They don’t continue to shove their heads up their asses and pretend this could never happen simply because they do not want to believe we have people that would send their mothers down the river to increase their power.

    Or that the LSM holds secret back alley meetings with the WH.

    WTF? Did you follow the link to the Media Matters story/ What about the Journolist debacle? This WH has made it a habit of feeding the media what they want them to say and to punish those that do not keep the line they want going, far in excess of anything anyone else ever could have dreamed of doing and getting away with. But you can pretend otherwise.

    Or that Buffet/Soros conspires with the WH to fundamentally transform America. Insane…

    Buffet conspired with this administration to make himself a ton of money from sweetheart deals like the cancelation of the oil pipeline from Canada so his rail company could make a killing, the whole people should pay more taxes nonsense that he expects will provide a bon for his insurance companies, and that ludicrous statement his secretary that makes 6 figures pays more taxes than he does. Soros is the guy funding things like Media Matters. And Obama has been hard at work to destroying the things that made this country great by pretending his attempt to turn us into some two-bit European shithole is about justice or whatever other nonsense class warriors like him spout. Not my fault tat you are either a misinformed tool or just another one of the assholes that thinks this stuff is good.

    “Egg on my face”? “Wrong […] again”? “Track record”? This doesn’t make sense. What is this track record of mine?

    Ignoring the things you don’t like to hear so you can pretned you havea foot to stand on when you make excuses for the inexcusable.

    It just never ends, does it?

    Not with people like you pretending it isn’t happening.

    Thumb up 0

  15. AlexInCT *

    Yes, and that’s something every administration does. If you suck dick while having a large audience, you’ll receive VIP-treatment. No conspiracy needed for it to work.

    Must be why they treated the Bush administration with such kid gloves, huh?

    Wow, really? You really don’t think these conversations have happened? I mean…really? That wasn’t you getting carried away going after Alex? You genuinely do not believe that Buffet and/or Soros have had specific conversations with any and every politician who will listen about fundamentally changing this country?

    Whatever he thinks, he isn’t going to do anything but defend Obama and the left, Jim. I would not be surprised he is rooting for Obama to end America. Too many of these elite Europeans love the idea of the US being brought down to their level of stupid. They somehow figure if we end up making the same mistakes they did, then those mistakes aren’t so bad.

    Thumb up 1

  16. CM

    kimpost, you being a complete asshole and getting so personal is no more accepted than it is when say, oh, I dunno, ALEX DOES IT.

    You’ve got to be fucking kidding me. LMFAO. Is that really how insular and incestuous things have become here? Alex does very little else (he makes everything personal, from the get-go) and is ENABLED in doing so.

    What a fucking joke.

    Jim, I remember you posting a while back about how you’d like this blog to advance the cause of conservative/libertarian thought. Honestly dude, it’s doing the exact opposite. I think you can give up on that pretence.

    Hot! Thumb up 3

  17. Kimpost

    Must be why they treated the Bush administration with such kid gloves, huh?

    Look, this is how it works, Alex. Had I been a journalist while holding the beliefs that I hold, then I too would have been biased to some degree. Liberally biased. With any luck I would have been a hard working honest journalist, who was trying to report the stories as truthfully as possible. But since I’m only human, I would likely show some kind of measurable bias. If not in the actual style of reporting, then in story selection. However, I would still have loved to get my hands on a story that brought the WH down, my liberal bias wouldn’t stop me from pursuing major scoops.

    That force is strong enough in itself, Alex. You don’t need actual LSM – WH phone strategy meetings for a bias to work. No doubt the administration plays the media. They know perfectly well who their “allies” are, and how to play them to get their message out. This is true for any administration btw (remember the media drumbeat leading up to the Iraq war), but since a majority of journalists are liberal, it’s likely easier for a liberal administration to get their particular messages out.

    Now, the media landscape is no longer as liberally dominated as it used to be. Fox News has a big impact, as does talk radio and the blogosphere. They in return have a return impact on the LSM, who often can’t avoid picking up stories from other sources. Even so, I have no trouble recognizing that a majority of US journalists still are liberals, and that it should have an impact.

    Whatever he thinks, he isn’t going to do anything but defend Obama and the left, Jim. I would not be surprised he is rooting for Obama to end America. Too many of these elite Europeans love the idea of the US being brought down to their level of stupid. They somehow figure if we end up making the same mistakes they did, then those mistakes aren’t so bad.

    How does anyone counter rants like that?

    Thumb up 1

  18. Kimpost

    kimpost, you being a complete asshole and getting so personal is no more accepted than it is when say, oh, I dunno, ALEX DOES IT.

    Calm the fuck down. Your argument doesn’t need dressing up, you have a coherent and reasonable position. Acting like a dick is only going to serve to piss *me* off.

    I’m not trying to piss you off. I’m not even trying to piss Alex off. I just want him to join the adult world, and to tone down the conspiracy theories. I also think that Alex generally gets away with way too much. Had he been a liberal he would have been laughed off your blog ages ago. Not necessarily banned, but laughed off.

    It’s not my style attacking people just for the hell of it. I’m not generally attacking other authors even when I don’t agree with them. Why you ask? Because they usually don’t dump unproven conspiracy theories all over the place while building their arguments, that’s why. It’s often impossible to engage Alex in normal discourse. The alternative is to just ignore him, which I generally do, but occasionally I remember that the comment section has a purpose, so I engage the guy.

    Wow, really? You really don’t think these conversations have happened? I mean…really? That wasn’t you getting carried away going after Alex? You genuinely do not believe that Buffet and/or Soros have had specific conversations with any and every politician who will listen about fundamentally changing this country?

    That *is* insane. They’ve (Buffet and Soros) had the conversations in the public media. Of course they’ve had more extensive and detailed conversations behind closed doors.

    I guess this comes down to definitions. I do think that Buffet has spoken to the administration on a number of issues. Soros probably has too. But that’s not the same as them plotting for the destruction of America. Depending on the definition of fundamental change, I don’t think that’s ever been on the table either. Do I for instance believe that Obama has been discussing on how to end your form of democracy (perhaps suggesting replacing it with totalitarian socialism)? No, I do not. I find that highly unlikely.

    Thumb up 1

  19. Section8

    We don’t oppose birth control at all. Hell, Republicans don’t want to get their mistresses pregnant! What we oppose are insurance mandates that drive up the costs for everyone. This, apparently, is too subtle a point to get through liberal skulls.

    Exactly, birth control is a life style option, not a health issue. Perhaps next we should have insurance companies foot people’s grocery bill provided the items bought meet government standards, whatever that would be. Why not, I make a healthy choice life style, it has an effect on my health, therefore it should be covered. How about running shoes? Why not? I don’t think someone should be expected to exercise in high heals or a pair of loafers. If we start heading down this path, all kinds of ridiculous shit can get tacked on over time without anyone even knowing until a WTF? moment comes months after. It would be much the same way they sneak absolutely ridiculous crap in to bills that have nothing to do with the bill. Personally, I think they can bring the cost of birth control down simply by allowing some of it to be more over the counter.

    As far as this plan, it was probably a PR ploy by Obama, all politicians pull this crap at one time or another, and it gets real bad around election time. As far as Stephawhatever being involved who knows. Equal chances Obama saw the debate, saw a controversy and came up with this plan after. The fact that he seems to backing down right away is an indicator to me this wasn’t well though out if his intention was to have it actually get somewhere. Everything from here on out is going to be extra PR driven anyhow. Happens every election season. It will happen again in 4 years no matter who is in charge.

    Thumb up 2

  20. Kimpost

    See the difference between me and you is that despite the evidence to prove these things are not coincidences, you continue to give them a pass and ascribe make excuses for them.

    What evidence? We were discussing Stephanopolous, remember?

    We are just finding out about the incestuous relationship between Media matters, the WH, and MSNBC. I am sure you will find a convenient excuse to dismiss this too. This WH has made it a habit of bullying the LSM. Check out this YouTube video about how they treated a reporter that dared to investigate the Fast & Furious lies instead of carrying water for the WH.

    You forgot to add the URL to your link.

    This kind of run around by the WH, with so many obvious lies from the WH and the DOJ, should make you at a minimum wonder. Instead you are still pretending nothing wrong happened, or if it did, that it was just incompetence.

    I do wonder. I wonder how an organisation could possibly be so fucked up. I also wonder why no one stopped the idiocy. But I also recognize that Operation Gunrunner has been going on for a long time. Well before Obama took office, suggesting that there are major structural problems within the ATF.

    Now ask yourself what could the DOJ and WH gain from an operation that lost track of weapons, weapons that then ended in the hands of brutal killers, the killers used these weapons to kill people, and in the US you have the LSM telling us how weapons from the US are killing innocents and we need more control on US citizens getting weapons?

    Virtually nothing to gain, but everything to lose. The DOJ and the WH would be devastated over innocent people being killed. Not only because they themselves are human beings, but also because it would be politically problematic, to say the least. Murdering innocent people is not a smart political move, generally speaking.

    WTF? Did you follow the link to the Media Matters story/ What about the Journolist debacle? This WH has made it a habit of feeding the media what they want them to say and to punish those that do not keep the line they want going, far in excess of anything anyone else ever could have dreamed of doing and getting away with. But you can pretend otherwise.

    I have been following the Media Matters controversy, but I still don’t see the conspiracy. Liberal and Conservative think tanks have always supplied journalists with slanted material. Good journalists use multiple sources. Lazy journalists do not. And columnists often write what the fuck they want to write.

    Ignoring the things you don’t like to hear so you can pretned you havea foot to stand on when you make excuses for the inexcusable.

    Eh ok, and all this is connected to some kind of track record of mine? Know what? Instead of answering that, let’s just forget about it and stick to the issues, if there are any…

    Thumb up 1

  21. Miguelito

    The OSS comparision would make sense… if everyone were required to contribute some specific amount of their time to helping code/troubleshoot/QA/whatever software against their will. As it is, it’s strictly voluntary.

    Communism works too when it’s a smaller group of people who are all there by choice (see communes).

    Expand most such things that look great on paper to include everyone, whether they want to or not, and pretty much every idea fails.

    Thumb up 0

  22. balthazar

    Jesus Christ Kim, you have been pointed MULTIPLE TIMES to links that reference an internal ATF memo that tries to used sales of PURPOSEFULLY WALKED GUNS, as a reason to restrict other sales.

    Are you dumb, or just acting dumb?

    Thumb up 1

  23. Kimpost

    Jesus Christ Kim, you have been pointed MULTIPLE TIMES to links that reference an internal ATF memo that tries to used sales of PURPOSEFULLY WALKED GUNS, as a reason to restrict other sales.

    And…? Since we’ve discussed it already you know that it doesn’t matter much. Show me transcripts, or audio, or witness reports from meetings with Obama/Holder and ATF leadership where they actively discuss how to have people killed. I promise you that I will listen. Meanwhile, let’s listen in on the proposed WH meeting…

    Obama: – Let’s grab us some guns! Any ideas folks?
    Holder: – Sure. Let’s dump thousands of guns into the hands of criminals so that they will start killing each other as well as bystanders. Such a spike in crime would help us gain popular support for stricter gun control.
    Obama: – Genius! Let’s do it. Unless anyone sees any flaws in Holder’s plan?
    Everybody: – No, it’s pure genius.
    Obama: – Ok, execute! Hopefully we’ll get away with it!

    You do realize that above is what Alex (and you?) is suggesting?

    Are you dumb, or just acting dumb?

    I’m just your average Joe, with little patience for bullshit. :)

    Thumb up 0

  24. davidst

    I’ve been thinking about getting my first gun (or two) soon and there are so many rules and regulations I can’t even consider it without doing a fuckton of research first. Gun control is one tenet of modern liberalism that I can hate on without reserve.

    Thumb up 0

  25. AlexInCT *

    Look, this is how it works, Alex. Had I been a journalist while holding the beliefs that I hold, then I too would have been biased to some degree. Liberally biased. With any luck I would have been a hard working honest journalist, who was trying to report the stories as truthfully as possible. But since I’m only human, I would likely show some kind of measurable bias. If not in the actual style of reporting, then in story selection. However, I would still have loved to get my hands on a story that brought the WH down, my liberal bias wouldn’t stop me from pursuing major scoops.

    This rant of yours is an example of that liberal bias you speak off. Only here, what you are doing, is forcing yourself to come up with a horribly weak excuse, to cover for the fact that the liberal biased press here in the US is quite content to take their marching orders from the WH, because admitting the alternative is damaging to your constant pretense that the current crop of people running my country are downright scary.

    Statistically, what are the odds for your scenario versus mine? Stephanopoulos, whom had hundreds of thousands of other topics, topics that all are near & dear to the progressive belief, he could come up with – gay rights to marriage, not agreeing with Obama is racist, thousands of other medical options in Obamacare as well as the fact so many are getting exceptions, juts to name a few – to ask, during a republican debate of all things, just happens to pick the one the WH has been working to do in the background? A one in a million shot? Yet, the fact that we know how closely the WH and the media work on pushing the WH agenda, making it a near even 50-50 shot that Stephanopoulos got direction from the WH to ask this, that’s an insane conspiracy! I am the nut for connecting the dots, but your insane statistically improbable scenario is logical? Sure, Kimpost.

    Edit: Oh, oh! Other conspiracists speak up.

    That force is strong enough in itself, Alex.

    If this was the first such case I would grant you the point. The problem is that this incestuous relationship between democrats and the media, and especially this president and the media, has been happening all along. Yet you still continue to ignore it in this equation.

    You don’t need actual LSM – WH phone strategy meetings for a bias to work.

    Again, if there wasn’t a history of this already, you would have a point.

    EDIT: And here you have more of it.

    No doubt the administration plays the media. They know perfectly well who their “allies” are, and how to play them to get their message out. This is true for any administration btw (remember the media drumbeat leading up to the Iraq war), but since a majority of journalists are liberal, it’s likely easier for a liberal administration to get their particular messages out.

    So you now admit they could have given Stephanopoulos a call and suggested he ask this, but then this doesn’t amount to willful cooperation, because Stephanopoulos was willfully played? Is there really a difference?

    Now, the media landscape is no longer as liberally dominated as it used to be.

    Are you kidding?

    Fox News has a big impact, as does talk radio and the blogosphere.

    On who? The apathetic masses that are more concerned with American Idol and Jersey Shore and get their news spoon fed by the LSM don’t know better. It’s people like me that know better that get it. And since you bring it up let me point out that people like me that watch Fox News, get their news from the web and blogs, are all starting to point out that the Stephanopoulos question after the Obama edict, now makes sense. Other bloggers are carrying this very story, saying exactly what I have. I just saw some of that on Instapundit.

    They in return have a return impact on the LSM, who often can’t avoid picking up stories from other sources.

    Seriously? I wish I had your optimism about how effective this mechanism is in getting the LSM to report the truth, never mind doing so in a timely manner.

    Did you know we where discussing Fast & Furious, for months, on blogs, before even Fox News picked it up and it was many months after that that the LSM even gave it token coverage? They had to be dragged into doing it! And when they did, they did it with a favorable spin in the WH’s favor. Even now they continue to stall for the WH. The facts do not go away or change simply because the LSM whitewashes and drags its feet. I linked you how the WH treated the one reporter that didn’t take their talking points at face value and started actually investigating this story. This pattern repeats about anything and everything that hurts the left.

    The fact remains that they way too often still get away with avoiding stories they don’t like and when they report it they never tell the full story or bury the bad things to protect their fellow leftists.

    Even so, I have no trouble recognizing that a majority of US journalists still are liberals, and that it should have an impact.

    That’s not the point. I do not care if a journalist is liberal if he admits it. I care about the many that pretend they are not liberal while taking their marching orders from the political left. Like Stephanopoulos.

    Thumb up 0

  26. AlexInCT *

    And…? Since we’ve discussed it already you know that it doesn’t matter much. Show me transcripts, or audio, or witness reports from meetings with Obama/Holder and ATF leadership where they actively discuss how to have people killed. I promise you that I will listen. Meanwhile, let’s listen in on the proposed WH meeting…

    So until we have a trial and that trial ends in a conviction, you will pretend this didn’t happen? Check.

    Let me ask Obama or Holder if they will just come clean and admit this is what they where doing. And I am sure when they do the LSM will report it just like that. See, this is the problem with you and CM, you are ready to believe the things the left says by virtue of the fact they say it, but you demand an insurmountable level of proof from the other side before you even consider the argument might have merit. But keep pretending that is not the case.

    Thumb up 0

  27. AlexInCT *

    Jim, I remember you posting a while back about how you’d like this blog to advance the cause of conservative/libertarian thought. Honestly dude, it’s doing the exact opposite. I think you can give up on that pretence.

    Did anyone else get a good chuckle from CM pretending he cares about honest debate, like I did? BTW CM, if we have not been able to debate conservative or libertarian thoughts here, it is because our threads keep getting hijacked by certain liberals with an agenda of derailing the discussion and pushing the liberal agenda.

    Thumb up 0

  28. AlexInCT *

    I’ve been thinking about getting my first gun (or two) soon and there are so many rules and regulations I can’t even consider it without doing a fuckton of research first. Gun control is one tenet of modern liberalism that I can hate on without reserve.

    Do this its due diligence David. The last thing you need is a federal criminal rap sheet because you didn’t jump through all the hoops the government circus demands.

    Thumb up 1

  29. davidst

    I was under the impression that there are certain guns you can own without registering (some shotguns and rifles), and that definitely interests me. Having to register guns is really an affront to liberty. It defeats half the purpose of it being a check on government power when they can come straight to your door with their much bigger guns and confiscate ours. Anyway, I’ll definitely be doing my homework before I do anything. I’ll probably ask around here for advice. Plus I have some friends who live between cities and they can definitely offer some suggestions (not to mention a place to practice shooting).

    Thumb up 0

  30. AlexInCT *

    I was under the impression that there are certain guns you can own without registering (some shotguns and rifles), and that definitely interests me.

    Depends on your municipality really, David. Shotguns do not require a permit unless you live in places like Chicago or Washington D.C, where they want the law abiding population disarmed. Handguns will require licencing, which will also involve safty courses in most blue states.

    Thumb up 0

  31. JimK

    CM, one more like that and you and RTFTLC are done. Period. If you dislike the blog, leave. I will no longer tolerate your bullshit. You don’t get to come to this blog to complain about it.

    End of discussion.

    Thumb up 0

  32. Poosh

    Dudes come on now, it’s a wonderful, truly beautiful week, why ruin it with all this arguing and hate?

    This week is one for the history books, an amazing week where Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace was re-released in possibly awesome 3D. REJOICE!

    I personally will be seeing this movie three times, one for each dimension.

    Why argue when you can be enjoying the gentle comedy of Jar Jar Binks!

    Thumb up 0

  33. Seattle Outcast

    The trick to being a gun owner is to make sure that none of your guns were “registered” to you when you purchased them. I own a small arsenal of pistols, rifles and shotguns, yet none of them can be traced to me via a purchase through a gun store.

    When the gun-grabbing libtards come looking door to door, I don’t actually have a record of owning any guns at all.

    Thumb up 4

  34. Kimpost

    So until we have a trial and that trial ends in a conviction, you will pretend this didn’t happen? Check.

    No, this is a blog, not a court of law. We speculate all the time. It’s just that when someone’s making outrageous claims, then it would be nice to see it backed up with evidence. The more outrageous the claim, the harder the evidence. It’s not like you are suggesting that someone’s trying to cover up embarrassing incompetence. You are suggesting a super villain like plot involving the POTUS (or is it just Holder?). Excuse me for not regarding it as particularly plausible.

    See, this is the problem with you and CM, you are ready to believe the things the left says by virtue of the fact they say it, but you demand an insurmountable level of proof from the other side before you even consider the argument might have merit. But keep pretending that is not the case.

    I’ll keep pretending then, because I don’t agree. Witness reports might me good enough. While the ATF memo’s I’ve seen so far just isn’t.

    And just to be clear. Operation Gunrunner (and Fast & Furious) seem to have enough legitimate flaws in them, to warrant close investigations. It’s bad enough as it is. Adding Dr. No into the mix just ruins your argument.

    Thumb up 0

  35. Seattle Outcast

    David,

    Just go to a gun show and buy what you want, or scour the classified ads for a private sale.

    Screw the regulations – unless you are buying a machine gun or live in Chicago or NYC, you can pretty much own whatever the hell you want, when you want.

    You might want to consider moving to someplace that is a bit more gun-friendly while you are at it. Generally, they are better places to live anyway.

    Thumb up 0

  36. Kimpost

    So you now admit they could have given Stephanopoulos a call and suggested he ask this, but then this doesn’t amount to willful cooperation, because Stephanopoulos was willfully played? Is there really a difference?

    That was not what I meant by playing the media. Actually calling a journalist suggesting a strategy would be an extremely risky move. Chances are that even a liberal journalist would just take the ball and run with it. No, playing the media is much more subtle than that. Perhaps you can help them with facts, or with helpful interpretations of them. Some journalists are lazy and often swallow what they are being fed.

    Thumb up 0

  37. blameme

    Mr. Snuffleupagus was on Clinton’s staff. He was Mr. C’s senior political adviser during his campaign and then became his White House Communication’s Director. He is not just another “liberal media” useful idiot.

    So, I am pretty sure (MY OPINION – I DO NOT HAVE VIDEO, AUDIO OF ANY CALL OR INTERACTION. I DO NOT HAVE EMAILS THAT ARE PROTECTED BY PRIVACY – ALL I CAN DO IS LOOK AT THE PLAYERS INVOLVED, THEIR HISTORIES AND USE DEDUCTIVE LOGIC. IF THIS IS NOT SATISFACTORY, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BELIEVE MY OPINION) that Obama’s staff would be pretty comfortable talking strategy with him even though he is in the media today.

    Whew. Thanks.

    Thumb up 0

  38. blameme

    While there was some snark in the above, asking for video all types of communication trails etc while an investigation into Fast and Furious is being held up is ridiculous. It is good to think out of the box – maybe if we had seen the signs of the terrorists learning how to fly planes, but not land them we could have avoided 9/11. Maybe if Europe would have read the sings a little harder about Hitler instead of just signing documents (See there was a paper trail that he was just a peaceful dude!) would have halted that travesty.

    Don’t go nuts and try to say that I am equating these horrors with F&F. I am just pointing out that many times you don’t have all of the evidence you need to connect dots. Does that mean that behind every corner is the boogy man? No. But we are fools to not be vigilant and question our government. When you have Holder lying on the stand to Congress, when you have officials taking the 5th…something illegal happened and we DEMAND OT KNOW WHY. Just incompetence does not explain withholding evidence or taking the 5th. Otherwise, just say, we were stupid and wrong. But instead, they hide behind the 5th. PLEASE.

    And yes F&F started during Bush – but NONE OF THE THE THINGS THAT ARE ILLEGAL happened under Bush.

    So while some may try to deflect by pointing at the programs origin, that does not disprove that Obama and his team took it much further than was originally planned.

    That happens often enough that I would think I wouldn’t have to explain it -but yes, many programs started by previous presidential administration are often stretched and bastardized far beyond their original intent. So please drop the F&F started with Bush.

    All of this applies to the media (especially this stepha…stepho…twerp dude). Asking for levels of data that are rare, even AFTER in-depth investigations, is absurd.

    Thumb up 0

  39. AlexInCT *

    Screw the regulations – unless you are buying a machine gun or live in Chicago or NYC, you can pretty much own whatever the hell you want, when you want.

    Not advised in blue states like Connecticut, Massachussetts, or as you mentioned NY. Most of my stuff is registered except for the stuff that is illegal today, and that is there for when the shit hits the fan.

    Thumb up 0

  40. davidst

    SO: I’ll look into gun shows. It’s one thing to be able to buy a gun without registering, but if possessing it without registration is illegal, then I’ll have to take a deeper look. I live in Louisiana, so if I had to guess we’re gun friendly, but maybe not in the BR city limits.

    Thumb up 0

  41. JimK

    Sidebar: I saw Ep. 1 in a theater, first run, with Lee (and a larger group of our friends) in San Francisco. Fairly obviously, Lee and I grew up on this shit and were/are huge Star Wars nerds. We grabbed the two choicest seats in the theater, smack in the middle of the back third, for optimum sound/screen distance. We were fucking GIDDY with anticipation. The opening sequence rolled. The giddy nature of our goofballness increased.

    Somewhere around halfway we stopped trading chatter. We stayed for every credit, and Lee tried his best to raise my spirits. I fucking HATED it. He kind of liked it, but I accused him of liking ILM and the effects. That was the only thing we could agree on that night, which was to say “Well the effects were goddamned spectacular.” I just couldn’t get past my Jar Jar hate nor my hate of the story, racist caricatures, etc.

    To his credit, the last thing he said as the credits rolled off was “Dude, I don’t give a fuck, I am gonna have my name at the end of a Star Wars movie one day.” And he did. And I went to see it, and stayed for the credits and cheered his name. Then I called him to tell him that Ep. 2 sucked just as hard. :)

    Thumb up 1

  42. Seattle Outcast

    People that think you have to “register” your firearms are pretty much just ignorant of how it works. Outside of NY or a very few other places there is no legal requirement to register your firearms with the police or any other entity. If you carry a concealed weapon you may be required to get a permit, but that’s another matter.

    What many people are resistant to is the police keeping a record of firearm purchases made through dealers. Supposedly these records are deleted after a period of time in order to make sure that the government isn’t just keeping tabs on everybody’s guns, but it’s been proven repeatedly that they are doing just that.

    Don’t worry about Sean Penn – his brain is as dead as his career, and pretty much everyone knows it.

    Thumb up 0

  43. Seattle Outcast

    Not advised in blue states like Connecticut, Massachussetts, or as you mentioned NY. Most of my stuff is registered except for the stuff that is illegal today, and that is there for when the shit hits the fan.

    You could not make me live in those locations. Been there, some are nice to visit (NYC is not), quite glad to leave and get back to someplace that seems almost sane in comparison.

    Thumb up 0

  44. AlexInCT *

    No, this is a blog, not a court of law. We speculate all the time. It’s just that when someone’s making outrageous claims, then it would be nice to see it backed up with evidence.

    How will I provide you with evidence, which on blog stories basically would equate to links to news stories the LSM refuses to acknowledge, let alone write about? Especially when links to other blogs discussing these topics have been dismissed as unreliable or speculation too. When the LSM avoids the story and the things you hear come from informants that do not want to go public for fear of retaliation, it is hard to provide the level of evidence being demanded, Kimpost.

    As you yourself pointed out, the things that interest us here and we discuss start on other blogs or by word of mouth. Depending on the source I can tell if what I hear is credible or not. How many posts have you seen here about Obama being some planted foreign spy a la Manchurian candidate? About Obama not being a citizen? About Michelle Obama being a dude? These are all stories I have heard about, but dismissed as bullshit, BTW. But I got credible evidence that Fast & Furious was exactly what it was, long before the media was dragged kicking and screaming into writing a plethora of piss-poor fluff pieces. Pieces that attempted to let the WH and DOJ off the hook, claiming Holder never heard of the operation and the WH had never said they had plans in the work to deal with the reversal in gun policy the SCOTUS decision affirming the individual right to bear arms implied in the 2nd Amendment caused their movement, so transparently bullshit the people actually investigating this story where prodded to push harder. We now know Holder lied to congress about what he knew and that he was in charge of this operation, and that the WH very likely was calling the shots. More will come out despite the fact the DOJ is stalling the investigation. I am 100% confident that I will be vindicated and that the Obama Admin did exactly what I said they did with Fast & Furious. You can keep hoping that doesn’t happen but you are going to be disappointed.

    The more outrageous the claim, the harder the evidence.

    Would it also not be a lot harder to produce concrete evidence of the caliber you request when the media refuses to do its job because the revelation, when proven, would be damaging to their cause and friends? And yet, unless people push and demand an investigation, like is happening with this Fast & Furious stuff, we would never have gotten anything if we had basically been forced to conform to your demand. A demand BTW, I feel very compelled to point out the left never feels obligated to hold itself to when the accusation, no matter how stupid and insane, hurts conservatives. Of course the LSM is front & center dropping those bombs, front page, and if they ever recant, it is done on the back page, when they get it wrong.

    It’s not like you are suggesting that someone’s trying to cover up embarrassing incompetence. You are suggesting a super villain like plot involving the POTUS (or is it just Holder?). Excuse me for not regarding it as particularly plausible.

    I know exactly what I am suggesting Kimpost. And I expect the investigations to eventually prove that. I am however not going to sit on this until I can get definite proof, because the people involved are doing their best to hide what they have done.

    Without getting pressure from people that speculated and did not wait for the LSM to investigate stories this, let alone report on it, we would never have even gotten the details we have now on unbelievable abuse of power stories like Fast & Furious, Solyndra, and many more. If others that became aware of the whole Fast & Furious fiasco or other sordid things done by the Obama administration had decided to sit on these stories until they had gotten definite proof like you demanded, these stories would have NEVER gotten tractions.

    When I am told I should say nothing, because this stuff is just too incredible to be true, or should keep quiet for whatever other reason/excuse, when what I have to say obviously hurts your guy, based on a threshold set so high it is impossible to meet, I wonder if this is not just an attempt to kill an unfavorable story. Especially when I am told that proof requires the LSM to confirm the story, but then the LSM, which has never had a problem bandying the most outrageous stories and dirty gossip about the other side as factual, uses the same excuse as you do to dismiss a story outright. This all smacks of a circle jerk intended to allow the LSM and their task masters to control the flow of information.

    Like I said: I have no doubt Fast & Furious will turn out to be exactly what I have said it was. Too many people in the chain of command have admitted that this went beyond incompetence and that there was purpose to the madness. Many of them have been punished. Now that attempts to blame it on incompetence or \ Bush both have come up short , the media, the DOJ, and the WH are desperate to kill the story and are stalling for a reason. Next we will be told they can not give us more information because of national security, and the same people in the LSM that went howling mad when Bush did this for legitimate reasons will be the first in line to do the damage control for the WH.

    Thumb up 0

  45. AlexInCT *

    You could not make me live in those locations. Been there, some are nice to visit (NYC is not), quite glad to leave and get back to someplace that seems almost sane in comparison.

    Sadly I am here because of my wife and her relatives. There are some nice people in this state, but the majority of them are so stupid and incapble it is baffling. I take consolation in the fact that JimK also has to live here and suffer my same fate. :)

    Thumb up 1

  46. Seattle Outcast

    Sadly I am here because of my wife and her relatives.

    Sounds like my uncle John – he stopped by Chicago to meet the pen pal who’d been writing him while he was in the Korean war and never made it back to the farm. His wife Patty couldn’t go without talking to her mother at least twice a day (even though they only lived a mile or so apart), and when they visited us in Montana she literally expected to see us all riding horses, fighting Indians, and robbing trains.

    John wanted nothing more than to put Chicago in his rear view mirror forever – toward the end they started to snowbird quite a bit. Chicago winters are pretty rough on arthritis.

    Thumb up 0

  47. Miguelito

    Sidebar: I saw Ep. 1 in a theater, first run, with Lee (and a larger group of our friends) in San Francisco.

    I saw Ep 1 in the theater too, on a whim. I had jury duty, got out early, and sure as hell wasn’t going into work. Since that’s the only time I use the trolley here (easier then dealing with downtown parking/traffic) I got off at Fashion Valley Mall here in SD and watched the movie. Barely anyone in the theater but there was one dad with his kids.

    I LOLed when, after the long underwater sequence, where they were in that sub thing and lost power, then escaped the huge fish. When they surfaced and turned the forcefield/windshield off.. even the little 5 year old with the dad was like, “What?!? How did that stay on when they lost power?!” Even a little kid could see the problems in that movie. That kid made all kinds of comments and noticed a lot of things too.. he was nearly more entertaining than the movie.

    Thumb up 0

  48. Kimpost

    I find it difficult discussing this with you. It’s very repetitive, to say the least. Perhaps we’re done for a while. Anyway, I felt like leaving you with a few comments.

    But I got credible evidence that Fast & Furious was exactly what it was, long before the media was dragged kicking and screaming into writing a plethora of piss-poor fluff pieces.

    Are you Philip Marlowe?

    How many posts have you seen here […] About Obama not being a citizen?

    Well, how about a post suggesting that Obama’s birth certificate was a definite forgery? Not your post, but it was on this blog.

    I am 100% confident that I will be vindicated and that the Obama Admin did exactly what I said they did with Fast & Furious. You can keep hoping that doesn’t happen but you are going to be disappointed.

    You’ve got me wrong. Only half jokingly I actually hope that your conspiracy theory is right. Super villains make for good stories.

    We now know […] that the WH very likely was calling the shots.

    We certainly don’t know that…

    Without getting pressure from people that speculated and did not wait for the LSM to investigate stories this, let alone report on it, we would never have even gotten the details we have now on unbelievable abuse of power stories like Fast & Furious, Solyndra, and many more.

    Fast & Furious is bad enough on its own merits. It’s a huge scandal even if the main reason would turn out to be mismanagement and/or incompetence. Investigate it as it is and leave the grand conspiracy speculations out of it, unless you actually want to look stupid. That’s just my honest opinion…

    The plot you are talking about is unlikely on so many levels. Not only would the administration have to be monsters, but they would have to be high risk idiots as well. I find the entire premise of the supposed plot to be ridiculous.

    1. Release a a couple of thousand guns to criminals.
    In spite of the risk of it back firing. In spite of that the gangs have access to plenty of guns anyway (virtually unlimited supply of AR’s). In spite of the risk of the plan getting out to the media.

    2. Hoping that the extra weapons would cause a measurable spike in crime.
    Would that really be a certainty?

    3. Hoping that the American public (especially in border states) would accept gun control measures as a viable response.
    Would that be likely? Perhaps in California, but…

    4. Hoping to get such legislation passed.
    Even less likely, no?

    In short, a plan designed do release guns, hoping for a spike in violent crime to gain popular and political support for anti 2nd amendment legislation. Someone should be shot for the stupidity of coming up with such crap.

    Thumb up 0

  49. Kimpost

    And yes F&F started during Bush – but NONE OF THE THE THINGS THAT ARE ILLEGAL happened under Bush.

    I don’t think that above necessarily is true, perhaps depending on the definition of illegal? This from Wikipedia. Emphasis and italics are mine.

    Wikipedia

    The first known ATF “gunwalking” operation to Mexican drug cartels, named Operation Wide Receiver, began in early 2006 and ran into late 2007. Licensed dealer Mike Detty informed the ATF of a suspicious gun purchase that took place in February 2006 in Tucson, Arizona. In March he was hired as a confidential informant working with the ATF’s Tucson office, part of their Phoenix, Arizona field division. With the use of surveillance equipment, ATF agents monitored additional sales by Detty to straw purchasers. With assurance from ATF “that Mexican officials would be conducting surveillance or interdictions when guns got to the other side of the border”, Detty would sell a total of about 450 guns during the operation. These included AR-15s, AK-47s and Colt .38s. The vast majority of the guns were eventually lost as they moved into Mexico.

    Thumb up 0

  50. blameme

    The massive amount was started under Obama and my understanding was at that point was when we KNEW that tracing the guns was not happening.

    Then, with the notes of “see all the killings in Mexico with US guns? There oughta be a law!!” is when dots can start to be connected how ramping up the number of guns, knowing they cannot be traced starts to make sense when that very same data is used to persecute the sales of guns.

    But thanks for overlooking my snark. :)

    Thumb up 0

  51. blameme

    BTW, Kim, any thoughts on my post about George Stephanalosuajsoihodis?

    Does the fact that he campaigned for Bill Clinton and became the Director of White House Communications for a Democrat president change your mind about how maybe the current administration would have no reservations in calling him for a “solid?”

    Thumb up 1

  52. Kimpost

    The massive amount was started under Obama and my understanding was at that point was when we KNEW that tracing the guns was not happening.

    Sure, but regardless of differences in magnitude this seems to have been a cross administration problem (at least initially), sometimes even with the same people involved. This suggests to me that the problem might be structural rather than linked to any particular administration. I’m pretty sure that Bush wouldn’t have liked what happened during his watch either.

    But thanks for overlooking my snark. :)

    No problem. ;)

    BTW, Kim, any thoughts on my post about George Stephanalosuajsoihodis?

    Does the fact that he campaigned for Bill Clinton and became the Director of White House Communications for a Democrat president change your mind about how maybe the current administration would have no reservations in calling him for a “solid?”

    I didn’t know all that about Stephanopolous (get a real name already), so perhaps he actually could be one of the truly “solid” ones. IMO it would still be a big risk using a journalist in such a blatant way. And for what purpose, really? The premise here was that the debate question was some kind of effort of paving the way for making contraception an issue.

    Wouldn’t it be easier to just make that happen through “legitimate” channels? Should be easy enough, given the reach and powers of the administration (any administration). I totally understand how the administration would want to bring social issues to the table, though. The economy isn’t doing all that well, and social issues is normally where conservatives lose the independents.

    In a possible defence of Stephanopopous I also understand a journalistic interest in bringing social issues to the table (assuming here that he wasn’t working on orders from the WH). Those questions are often controversial. He basically hoped that a candidate would swallow the bait by suggesting that states would have the right to ban contraceptives. I think that Romney did a good job of dismissing the question as a pointless hypothetical, and Ron Paul effectively nailed it by stating that a state couldn’t do that according to his interpretation of the Constitution (the commerce clause if I remember it correctly).

    Thumb up 0

  53. AlexInCT *

    Are you Philip Marlowe?

    Not I, but the people I was discussing this with where better than Marlow and had details and contacts that where impeccable.

    Well, how about a post suggesting that Obama’s birth certificate was a definite forgery? Not your post, but it was on this blog.

    Got it. Guilt by association. Can I also say that since Dan Rather was a top ranking member of the LSM they are all conniving shitbags that make up falsehoods to help democrats win elections, now?

    You’ve got me wrong. Only half jokingly I actually hope that your conspiracy theory is right. Super villains make for good stories.

    I on the other hand wish I was wrong and not joking at all about this, Kimpost. A president willing to do something like this, in a sovereign neighboring country to boot, with several governmental organizations responsible to protect Americans ready to go along, frightens me to no end. It makes me wonder what else we have not been fortunate to find out they are doing.

    We certainly don’t know that…

    Actually the last late Friday night dump of DOJ documents, one that the LSM ignored, all but proves Holder not only knew about this operation from the start, but also was getting directions from someone higher. The only thing higher than the DOJ is the WH in that chain of command. Don’t worry I am sure a month or so from now when they drag him into congress and make him testify under oath, someone in the LSM will admit this, albeit with a positive spin.

    Fast & Furious is bad enough on its own merits. It’s a huge scandal even if the main reason would turn out to be mismanagement and/or incompetence. Investigate it as it is and leave the grand conspiracy speculations out of it, unless you actually want to look stupid. That’s just my honest opinion…

    Nobody is this inept or incompetent. Everyone involved KNEW that with the Mexican authorities out of the loop, that once these weapons crossed the border they where lost. Two agents refused to go along with this and pointed this fact out. Both where punished for doing that and dismissed from their jobs. So the only reasonable explanation left was that the people running this operation, under direction from the DOJ, KNEW the weapons once lost where going to be used to kill people, but either did not care or actually wanted exactly that outcome. If it is the first – they did not care – then WTF was the reason for the operation? What did they think they would gain? That leaves the other option: they knew people would be killed and the guns traced to the US. Conveniently, this had been a major thrust of the LSM which was carrying water for the WH right after the SCOTUS shot them down on the whole 2nd Amendment challenge. This was one of those “crisis” instances the WH was hoping to take advantage of.

    Here is my challenge for you Kimpost: explain to me why the ATF/FBI/DOJ would choose to let the guns across the border, knowing they would lose track of them and they end up in the hands of cartel hit men that would use them to kill people, not once but several times. Once I would grant you could be an accident. But numerous times goes beyond ineptness or incompetence. It shows a purpose. You still don’t want to

    I don’t think that above necessarily is true, perhaps depending on the definition of illegal? This from Wikipedia. Emphasis and italics are mine.

    The Bush era operations where conducted WITH the Mexican authorities. They did so to make sure guns would NOT end up in the hands of these cartels that would use them to kill people. Life, even of Mexicans, would never be risked. The Fast & Furious operation was run without notifying the Mexican authorities, with the full understanding some 3000 lethal guns would end up in the hands of the cartels, and then be used to kill people. There is no way anyone makes the case they thought these weapons would not be used to kill people. Anyone saying so should immediately be branded a lying moron.

    So, the only similarity between these two operations is the one the desperate defenders of this WH tried to create in order to confound the issue. It did not last long because people immediately pointed out the glaring omission of these details by the LSM when they first tried to use that to throw people off the scent. The left and the LSM also desperately wanted people to latch on the ineptitude angle you keep coming to Kimpost. They could then again cirlce back and accuse anyone getting to tough on the naked emperor of being motivated by racism, while avoiding the fall out that the real reason the operation was run for, would cause. Also remember that these are the people that think the end justifies the means, so killing a few Mexicans so they culd convince Americans that we needed strciter gun laws falls squarely into their way of thinking. Remember Johnson and the Tonkin incident? What party did he belong to again?

    Thumb up 0

  54. Kimpost

    The Bush era operations where conducted WITH the Mexican authorities. They did so to make sure guns would NOT end up in the hands of these cartels that would use them to kill people. Life, even of Mexicans, would never be risked.

    Yet guns did end up in the hands of cartels, and Mexican lives were risked.

    I’m not trying to be an ass, but guns were walked (no trace) and did end up in the hands of cartels during Operation Wide Receiver. Operation Fast & Furious was larger in scale, but the problems were the same in principal, even if Operation Wide Receiver indeed seemed to have some (but failed) cooperation with Mexican law enforcement.

    People from the same failed operations later became involved in Fast & Furious. I don’t think it’s unlikely that that was part of the later problems. And even Issa has used the experiences from the failed Operation Wide Receiver for hammering the Obama administration. Link. He’s basically stated that the Obama administration should have known about gun walking during Fast & Furious, specifically because of the bad experiences learned from Operation Wide Receiver.

    Investigators working for Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, view the emails as strong evidence that Justice Department officials knew about “gun walking” tactics in Fast and Furious.

    Here’s a story about both Wide Receiver and Fast & Furious. I don’t think it looks too biased or forgiving. It lends Mike Detty (the arms dealer involved during Wide Receiver, who’s NO fan of Obama) sufficient space to describe what he felt went wrong.

    Thumb up 0

  55. Poosh

    As you could have seen a mile off, the liars and Obama-water carriers are starting to spin the facts, in order to make sure this true scandal is never thought of as a scandal, and to blame it on Bush. Which you could see a mile off. The right, correctly, have predicted this and have the facts readily available to counter the left’s lies and misinformation.

    Here is one of many articles.

    Astounded on how quickly the drug-gangers managed to work out how to avoid the tracking. I constantly wonder if it’s time to just legalise everything.

    Thumb up 1

  56. Kimpost

    I’m not blaming Bush, though. I don’t think he knew dick about Operation Wide Receiver. But I also think that it’s likely that Obama and Holder knew nothing significant about Fast & Furious. If either of them were briefed they were likely served bullshit. The fact that there were problems (similar at that) during Bush, suggests to me that the problems were administration-independent. Especially since some of the persons involved were the same (Newell is mentioned in Poosh’s link above as well).

    Now you could make the argument that Holder and/or Obama should have known, and that would be a legitimate point. Issa has made this point. But going from there to the kind of conspiracy Alex is suggesting, is quite a leap.

    Thumb up 0

  57. hist_ed

    Hey guys, my read is that davidst is being a bit sarcastic with his gun bits. Maybe not, but . . .

    Kimpost, I am not impressed by your Wikipedia quote. I think it was written by someone who doesn’t know much about guns.

    These included AR-15s, AK-47s and Colt .38s

    Ummm wow, they smuggled Colt .38s? Jeeze, that’s like, mid 19th century handgun technology. Why list the two most common military rifles in the world and then a middling powered wheel gun from a specific manufacturer (no Smith and Wesson .38s? Only Colts?).

    Finally, even allowing every other relevance between the Bush and Obama era programs, there is one startling difference (noted above). The Bush program was conducted with the knowledge and approval of the Mexican government. If they lost the guns after they crossed the border, that s not the fault of the Bush administration. The Obama effort happened without the knowledge of the Mexican government. Given that the Mexican government treats the drug gangs as a military style insurgency, the Obama administration committed an act of war against Mexico. Remember we were supposed to enter into an age of grown up diplomacy under Obama?

    Oh an Episode One sucked ass. I took my daughter out of elementary school to go see that turd. My brief review to my wife after seeing it:

    Me: “It was great ,except for one part”
    Mrs Ed: “What part?”
    Me: “the part where anyone talked.”

    Best review of it is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI

    Almost as long as the movie itself, but worth it (and it has Pizza Rolls).

    And now fucking George Fucking Lucas says that Han NEVER shot first. We were all confused, you see. Guido always took a shot first. What a jack ass.

    Thumb up 1

  58. Poosh

    No. An example of a piece of turd is “Inglorious Bastards” by a now defunct director. That, unlike Phantom Menace, is actually aimed at adults.

    The Phantom Menace could have easily been modified to greatness if Lucas had just let people advise him. That being said, I’ve been reading The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Heinlein and his character says “This is wizard!” just like Anankin in Menace…. so I forgive Lucas now. Phantom Menace is a movie made for children and it’s a wonderful movie for children.

    Thumb up 0

  59. Poosh

    >Poosh more offended by universal hatred of a movie featuring a chase sequence with giant fish, then 100s of Mexicans getting murdered with partial, accidental help from the American Government?

    Priorities…. they’re tricky.

    Thumb up 0

  60. balthazar

    No kim, your not an “Average Joe”, your an apologist for something that is obvious to anyone that actually LOOKS AT THE EVIDENCE sees there is no apology, as they are really not apologetic for what they wanted to do at all.

    I never said they “wanted” to kill people, I just think they didnt care about collateral damage. They wanted to use these walked guns to implement more back door REGULATION. REGULATION is key, since they can do it under the radar without a large stink, until after it is in place. There is DIRECT evidence of this as well, that you so cavalierly dismiss.

    Fuck you and the horse(CM) you road in on.

    Thumb up 1

  61. balthazar

    BTW, to anyone living in NJ, you cannot transport a weapon in your car even, without a nj firearms permit, so dont go and try and buy one out of state without one. NJ is only SLIGHTLY less restrictive than NYC Wash DC and Chicago.

    Thumb up 0

  62. Kimpost

    You are a funny guy, balt. :) I understand that you don’t usually read the threads you sort of participate in (lex ‘you don’t have teenagers’), but you really should.

    Thumb up 0

  63. AlexInCT *

    Yet guns did end up in the hands of cartels, and Mexican lives were risked.

    You got evidence of this Kimpost? Because try as I might, I can not find a single instance of cartel members using guns being tracked during the Bush administration operations to kill anyone. The count of those killed by the Fast & Furious operations, depending on who is talking, vary from some 500 to as many as 3000, just so far, and even include a US border agent. Operations ran under Bush where purposefully done in cooperation with the Mexican authorities so they could have confiscated the guns at any point, especially before they ended up being used. If your point is that the Mexicans could have failed to do so, because they might have been outsmarted by cartel operatives, or because of corruption allowing them to make the authorities turn a blind eye to the whole thing, then I feel compelled to point out you are now desperately seeking to split hairs. If your point is that there was risk in both operations then I must point you are now grasping at straws to defend the indefensible.

    I’m not trying to be an ass, but guns were walked (no trace) and did end up in the hands of cartels during Operation Wide Receiver. Operation Fast & Furious was larger in scale, but the problems were the same in principal, even if Operation Wide Receiver indeed seemed to have some (but failed) cooperation with Mexican law enforcement.

    Erm, link please? BTW, none of the liberal that where trying so hard to equate Fast & Furious with Bush era stings on the Mexican drug cartels, right after the LSM put out that hit piece trying to fool people into thinking that Fast & Furious had actually been started by the Bush administration and what was done by these agencies under Obama was just a continuation of Bush era policy, could provide evidence of a single gun used in the Bush operations to kill anyone anywhere.

    The fact that Fast & Furious was done without telling the Mexican authorities all but guaranteed the bad guys would get & use the guns. If your point that there was risk when Bush era operations ran, because the Mexican authorities might have been outsmarted by cartel operatives, or because of corruption allowing the cartels to make the authorities turn a blind eye to the whole thing, then I feel compelled to point out you are now desperately seeking to split hairs. The fact remains that the risk here was going to be totally owned and controlled by the Mexican authorities and their actions during Bush era operations. The Obama Fast & Furious operation, for some inexplicable reason that simply can not be ineptitude or incompetence, considering the DOJ, BATF, and FBI all had experienced agents that knew this should have been done and spoke up only to be silenced under threat, had nobody on the Mexican side guaranteeing anything. The only guarantee was that the guns would end up being used to kill. Frankly the Mexicans should/could have considered this horrible violation of their sovereignty, people, and authorities an act of war.

    Now let us not stop there. Ask yourself why the DOJ would coordinate and run any operation like that. Then look at what the main topic the LSM was pushing in the news was at that time and why. Here is a hint: easy access to American weapons was arming the cartels and they where killing people, so we need to stop easy access to weapons of all kinds in the US. That it violates the 2nd Amendment should be ignored because after all, innocents are dying, on foreign soil, which the Mexicans could conceive of as an act of war by the US. You can pretend this was all coincidental like you are doing with the Stephanopoulos question, there are way too many of these weird coincidences that look like anything but happening with these people for anyone acquainted with mathematical odds to buy into.

    People from the same failed operations later became involved in Fast & Furious. I don’t think it’s unlikely that that was part of the later problems. And even Issa has used the experiences from the failed Operation Wide Receiver for hammering the Obama administration. Link. He’s basically stated that the Obama administration should have known about gun walking during Fast & Furious, specifically because of the bad experiences learned from Operation Wide Receiver.

    Actually many people pointed out the problem with not letting the Mexicans know this only to be punished and even kicked out, as I already mentioned. You may desperately want to attribute this to incompetence or inadequate planning, but the fact that the whistleblowers where silenced for pointing out the problems, long before anyone died, and the operation continued as planned tells me otherwise.

    This operation was criminal any way you split it. I guess we can keep disagreeing on the reasons for it, but I am certain, based on the details I know, that sooner than later it will come out that these deaths were not because of incompetence or ineptitude, but what the operation intended to produce just that result. How high up the chain of command they will go to find who was behind ordering it will vary on how long they keep at the investigation. Right now Holder is toast. He has been caught lying to congress, not once but repeatedly. More likely than not, what we will get is Holder falling on the sword, and then Obama will pardon him. All the people that where up in arms over the whole Valerie Plame non story that turned out to be a withc hunt because they knew Armitrage leaked it, but they hoped to somehow bag Cheney, will suddenly not care about national security or about justice, because the ones really committing a crime are on their side, and they will tell us to stop wasting time.

    Thumb up 0

  64. balthazar

    You are a funny guy, balt. :) I understand that you don’t usually read the threads you sort of participate in (lex ‘you don’t have teenagers’), but you really should.

    And you are a hack that hasnt addressed your obvious need to justify the unjustifiable. A memo that is blatantly asking for the records of walked guns because they WANT TO REGULATE SALES, is a “smoking gun” of an attempt to REGULATE PEOPLES ACCESS TO GUNS, yet you put it off to incompetence when its obvious to anyone who can READ its a pattern forming to further restrict the peoples RIGHTS in the us to own a gun.

    So what, I misread what he wrote, it doesn’t make him any more right on the subject, teenagers will do what they do, making them go to bed wont make them go to sleep. My point is still valid, but its a nice attempt to deflect from your blatant fucking stupidity.

    Thumb up 3

  65. Kimpost

    I never said they “wanted” to kill people, I just think they didnt care about collateral damage. They wanted to use these walked guns to implement more back door REGULATION.

    That would be arguing semantics, wouldn’t it? How would they gain popular support for more regulations if there was no spike in violence? They either had those kinds of discussions, or the conspiracy theory is off.

    And you are a hack that hasnt addressed your obvious need to justify the unjustifiable. A memo that is blatantly asking for the records of walked guns because they WANT TO REGULATE SALES, is a “smoking gun” of an attempt to REGULATE PEOPLES ACCESS TO GUNS, yet you put it off to incompetence when its obvious to anyone who can READ its a pattern forming to further restrict the peoples RIGHTS in the us to own a gun.

    But I have addressed that, balt. In short I don’t believe that one end of the ATF necessarily knows what the other end does. It’s perfectly plausible to me, for the ATF to be gathering data on gun sales (in a desire to regulate sales), even though they themselves are simultaneously dumping guns into the hands of criminals during fucked up sting operations. That’s just how bad I think it is/was.

    In any case, that makes much more sense to me than the “Cold Blooded Murdering Administration-theory”, for reasons already outlined.

    So what, I misread what he wrote, it doesn’t make him any more right on the subject, teenagers will do what they do, making them go to bed wont make them go to sleep. My point is still valid, but its a nice attempt to deflect from your blatant fucking stupidity.

    You missed it once, which is fine. Then you missed it again, even after he pointed it out. Then I pointed it out. Followed by Hal. Yet not a word from you. Why didn’t you just write there what you just did here? Anyway, that wasn’t really important. It was just a small dig in response to your mean comment towards me. *sniff* You hurt my feelings there, you know… ;)

    Thumb up 0

  66. balthazar

    You missed it once, which is fine. Then you missed it again, even after he pointed it out. Then I pointed it out. Followed by Hal. Yet not a word from you. Why didn’t you just write there what you just did here? Anyway, that wasn’t really important. It was just a small dig in response to your mean comment towards me. *sniff* You hurt my feelings there, you know… ;)

    Wrong, I never replied after the quote in which i misread. I asked if he had kids because I didnt catch where he said he had them in the original article. Way again, to try to deflect by misrepresentation. I misread his reply, which was obvious, SINCE I ASKED HIM IF HE HAD TEENAGERS! Yes no word after, because none was needed. And I still stand by what I said, Teenagers do what they do, all you can do is try and set ground rules with consequences if they break them. YOU CANT MAKE THEM GOTO SLEEP IF THEY DONT WANT TO. But way to not address the point of my statements, WTG CM, oh wait, its Kim, whats the difference again? Oh one lives in NZ. That must be where they dump all the failed Soro’s clones.

    So, back to the actual point of which we were talking,for example you would agree with this then with your line of “logic”. I go and let someone live in my house, then call the cops and say they are trespassing, its because I cant remember that I let them stay, rather than me trying to fuck them over and get them arrested.

    You are a blind libtard. Thanks for playing.

    Thumb up 0

  67. balthazar

    That would be arguing semantics, wouldn’t it? How would they gain popular support for more regulations if there was no spike in violence? They either had those kinds of discussions, or the conspiracy theory is off.

    No, its not semantics you dumb shit.

    Not caring if people die from something you provide for them, is not the same as hoping and ENSURING they die.

    It would be like a cigarette company putting immediately lethal levels of cyanide in cigarettes instead of just letting them die IF they get cancer or heart disease.

    Thumb up 0

  68. Kimpost

    So, back to the actual point of which we were talking,for example you would agree with this then with your line of “logic”. I go and let someone live in my house, then call the cops and say they are trespassing, its because I cant remember that I let them stay, rather than me trying to fuck them over and get them arrested.

    Yes, that’s pretty much what the ATF controversy looks like. And if you extend the size of the family to thousands of people, while allowing it to fall into parts because of extremely bad parenting (mismanagement), possible corruption and failed inter-family communications (FBI, ICE, DEA), then you’ve got yourself a mess. Add to that a family (ATF) who’s grouping into totally different fractions, where some do politics, while others do criminal investigations, with bad or little oversight, then what have you got? I’ll tell you, possible idiotic “sting” operations.

    How about this for a theory? It’s stupid, but again, way more plausible than the evil guv’ment scenario.

    - Let’s allow the guns to walk. No traces this time. Let’s just see where they eventually end up. That’ll give us some useful information, won’t it? Information we can use to get to the cartels later, in a year or two or three or four…

    Thumb up 0

  69. Kimpost

    No, its not semantics you dumb shit.

    Not caring if people die from something you provide for them, is not the same as hoping and ENSURING they die.

    Well, it’s semantics since the people damn well had to die (in numbers, at that) for the evil conspiracy to even have a remote chance to work.

    Thumb up 0

  70. AlexInCT *

    Yes, that’s pretty much what the ATF controversy looks like. And if you extend the size of the family to thousands of people, while allowing it to fall into parts because of extremely bad parenting (mismanagement), possible corruption and failed inter-family communications (FBI, ICE, DEA), then you’ve got yourself a mess.

    As I and others pointed out repeatedly Kimpost, and you keep ignoring: if the gaping holes were caused by ineptness or incompetence, the many agents that spoke out and pointed the problems/consequences out would have been listened to. Instead they where not just silenced, but punished for speaking out, while the dangerously faulty problems kept in place and project went on. At that point it is at a minimum criminal action, and one has to wonder if something bigger was driving the reasoning there. If what you are doing can come back to hurt you, and people getting killed because you failed to put already identified measures to properly secure the level of risk to something acceptable, will hurt you bad, you are going to rethink what you are doing, unless you already believe you are not going to be held accountable for any of that.

    You seem to think, or at least to want to make others believe that’s what you think, they did it simply because they didn’t know better, or were afraid to admit their error. People like me, who know they had been doing things like this operation, and doing them the right way, for a long time already, understand there was no excuse for these glaring problems. Especially when they where brought to the attention of the planners, by the experienced agents in the field, only to have the agents dismissed & punished, so that the horrible operation could keep going ahead. The only reasonable conclusion was that the intent was to have things go bad in the first place.

    This is not a conspiracy theory: it is the logical analysis of all the pieces of the puzzle and the only way they fit well. The incompetence/ineptness angle breaks down when you understand that the organizers had already run operations like this one and knew the mechanics needed and the consequences of not having them in place. That they still went on with Fast & Furious is made even more unbelievable when you consider experienced agents pointing the problems out, then being silenced and punished for doing so by orders from on high, while the people in charge do nothing to address the problem, and keep the operation going.

    And frankly people that continue to push the incompetence/ineptness angle make you wonder if they simply do not understand the details of what went on, or have an ulterior motive. Especially when the LSM and the people involved are all now glomming onto this argument and pushing it. In my experience, the only time politicians on the left and their mouthpieces in the media admit they made a mistake, and in this case we are talking about one that has cost so many people their lives that it should be considered criminal, is when they need to cover up something even worse.

    Well, it’s semantics since the people damn well had to die (in numbers, at that) for the evil conspiracy to even have a remote chance to work.

    As we see they did die. Fast & Furious guaranteed the weapons would end up used to kill people. The incompetence/ineptness angle IMO was that they got found out, and their plan got derailed.

    Thumb up 0