Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Fast & Furious

Posted 2 years ago on June 22, 2012, 1:17 a.m. EST by francismjenkins (3713)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Project Gunrunner is an operation of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) intended to stem the flow of firearms into Mexico, in an attempt to deprive the Mexican drug cartels of weapons.[1]

In early 2011, the operation became controversial when it was revealed that Operation Fast and Furious and other probes under Project Gunrunner had allowed guns to "walk" into the hands of Mexican drug cartels since as early as 2006.[2][3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gunrunner

Bush strikes again!

65 Comments

65 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 6 points by SingleVoice (158) 2 years ago

Actually, the pilot program in 2005 was called project gunrunner but when it progressed into a national initiative in 2006, the program became wide receiver because the guns had tracking systems hidden on them. The point was to track the guns to the cartels. But, the cartels found the tracking systems and removed them making the program a failure so the government stopped the program in 2007.

After being dead for 2 years, the program was resurrected in Oct of 2009. However, no tracking devices were used. In fact, there is no apparent sound reasoning behind selling these guns to the cartels and have them used to kill innocent Mexicans and our own border agent, Brian Terry. Local border law enforcement tried to stop this new program but the DOJ under Holder refused and forced its continuation overriding state authorities.

The prevailing theory among some is that it was part of an agenda for more gun control by boosting statistics to "prove that American guns are arming the cartels and further budget political objectives. It has been established that this operation violated long established ATF policies and practices." After the assault rifle ban wasn't passed, it was seen as a way to have Americans call for the ban after seeing more bloodshed from American made weaponry coming over the border.

Since I don't trust the government and I know they go to great lengths for their personal agendas, none of this surprises me but it does sadden me that innocent people are killed for yet another political agenda.

Holder and Obama started this version of this program and now they are hiding behind executive privilege to cover it all up. This is all Holder and Obama this time.

This may be the first time that the crime is actually worse than the coverup because people were murdered over this one. No one was murdered in Watergate.

[-] 1 points by shadzworth (-394) 2 years ago

Excellent post.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

got it

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Wrong, this mess started under the Bush administration, ironically, congressman Issa (the leader of the witch hunt against Eric Holder) voted to fund the initiative (fast & furious was simply a local operation under the larger ATF gunwalking program, which started in 2005). Now, this has become the stuff of paranoid, fringe, NRA conspiracy claims. Typical right wing idiocy (but of course no surprise, look at their target audience) :)

[-] 2 points by SingleVoice (158) 2 years ago

Sorry, dude...you're wrong. Have a good weekend...I'm outta here.

[-] 1 points by shadzworth (-394) 2 years ago

Could you be anymore ignorant? I'll bet you can.

[-] -1 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

dont confuse the libs with facts.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (26587) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Libertarians?

[-] 0 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

liberals which include dems.

[-] -1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

And the evidence that Holder restarted it is where?

[-] 2 points by shadzworth (-394) 2 years ago

And the evidence that you would care about anything other than your Leftist narrative is where?

[-] -2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

brilliant answer!


since you get your info from "fair and balanced" sources
are you afraid to answer the question?
come on, pull down your pants, sit down, and push hard!


[-] 0 points by shadzworth (-394) 2 years ago

bwa hahahaha . … . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha . .bwa hahahaha . . . hahaha HEHEHE hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha . .bwa hahahaha . …….. . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . bwa hahahaha . … . ha BWA hahaha . . . bwa ha ha ha ha . . . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha . .bwa hahahaha . . . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . bwa hahahaha . … . hahaha HE HE HE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha ….. .bwa hahahaha . . . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . bwa hahahaha . . . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha . .bwa hahahaha . …….. . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . bwa hahahaha . … . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha . .bwa hahahaha . . . hahaha HEHEHE……………………….. BWA hahaha . . . bwa ha ha ha ha . . . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha . .bwa hahahaha . . . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . bwa hahahaha . … . hahaha HE HE HE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha ….. .bwa hahahaha . . . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . bwa hahahaha . . . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . . . hahaha . .bwa hahahaha . …….. . hahaha HEHEHE BWA hahaha . .

[-] -2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I don't think your "prevailing theory" is correct. Where does that assessment come from? It was a bad idea which got worse, but shouldn't the focus be on that aspect rather than communications much after it was cancelled for the second time? Obviously the folks who thought it was a good idea the first time were still pushing for it.

Where did this quote come from."prove that American guns are arming the cartels and further budget political objectives. It has been established that this operation violated long established ATF policies and practices." If you are going to quote people, they should be named, otherwise we can assess your judgement.

[-] 3 points by SingleVoice (158) 2 years ago

The quote came from the wikipedia link that started this post at the top. That's why I didn't attribute it. I thought people that responded to this went to the link referred at the top and did their own reading. Read down the wikipedia link to the "controversy" section just above the references section. That is only 1 place of many that it is referenced.

Also, yes, it was a bad idea but in wide receiver, at least a tracking device "receiver" was used thinking that that would lead to catching the criminals. When the criminals discovered the receivers and removed them, the program was stopped in 2007. In "fast and furious" (Oct 2009) 2 years after wide receiver was stopped, no such tracking devices or any other means to track the guns were used. There doesn't appear to be any reason for the program at all if the point wasn't to track the guns and catch the criminals. So then you have to ask what was the point.

Issa was asked about all of this on abc's "This Week" this past Sunday by Jake Tapper. The link is below. We'll never know why this program was done again after it's failures 2 years earlier when it was stopped and the fact that there was no way to track the guns, you have to wonder what the point was. Since it appears that everything anymore has some kind of political agenda it would make sense that if there is no other reason, then politics and new gun control laws could be it. Emails found in the investigation support the idea that this could be a reason. What is unclear is whether this reason came before fast and furious as a reason to do it or after fast and furious as a reason to take advantage of it. The reason I think it was the former is because I don't see any other reason for this program to begin with.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/darrell-issa-tougher-gun-laws-may-have-been-aim-of-fast-and-furious/

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Sorry. I goofed.

I agree when a program goes wrong, as this one did, management should do a thorough post mortem of the decisions that led to the failure. I think it is obvious that with the death of an agent, that management got down in the weeds checked it out and stopped it. At that point their focus should have been on why after it was stopped for good reason who was pushing it, and did the authority that restarted it have all of the information that they should have had and did they analyze it properly, did they make a decision that would withstand scrutiny? I don't know if this was done. But the second point is that it has been reported that the document Issa is insisting on, were created 2 years after the program was terminated.

If you have analyzed the first part and don't see a problem (that is the agency took appropriate remedial action), then the second part, which would presumably be how should the process be changed to prevent similar situations from occurring in this or other agencies, doesn't rise to the level of legitimate Congressional scrutiny.

In most cases, the correct call regarding all of this would be that of the Inspector General. If he/she reports an issue with how the process failed or how it was being systemically addressed that report would be the signal to Congress to get involved.

The IG has been reporting for decades that the DoD can't produce a balanced financial statement and hasn't for decades.Only $700 billion per year is involved. Congress has done virtually nothing to get that fixed, no fix has been demanded, nor is one anywhere in sight. Which is the more serious problem, I ask?

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 2 years ago

There are many serious problems in our government...the oversight committee has much to do with many agencies and I hope they get to all of it. (wishful thinking)

However, this particular investigation (fast and furious) is very serious because of lives lost. And the correct call regarding all of this IS the Oversight Committee of Congress. That is their job.

This investigation is still on-going and very important especially for the family of Brian Terry and I think all of us. "Management should do a thorough post mortem of the decisions that led to the failure" but that doesn't mean just stopping the program. It also means finding out who ordered it and why and beyond that. If an agency tries to coverup information to cover their ass, that should also be investigated. When whistleblowers are fired after 24 years of service, that also should be investigated.

Issa's report supporting a contempt vote against Holder said some of the documents he's now seeking "would include those relating to actions the Department took to silence or retaliate against Fast and Furious whistleblowers."

I think when 2 border agents and 300+ innocent Mexicans die at the hands of a US program, we all need to know why it was restarted, who gave the orders to restart it, and why is information being withheld? I think it does "rise to the level of legitimate Congressional scrutiny." And then when a cabinet leader being questioned, especially the head cop of the country "misleads" Congress, it rises a little more to Congressional scrutiny.

When a baseball player (Roger Clemmons) spends over a year in a court hearing for allegedly lying to Congress, shouldn't our government officials be scrutinized for lying to Congress also. Isn't what is applied to citizens be also applied to our "leaders." There is proof that Congress was "mislead" or as I call it, lied to, by the DOJ and specifically Holder. That's a fact.

There is also something that doesn't make sense to me. The so-called gun buyers had felony records but yet were still able to purchase several hundred assault rifles at a single gun shop at one time with felony backgrounds. Doesn't it make you wonder how they would know they would get away with it. And even if that doesn't make you wonder why were the 2 guns found at the murder scene of Agent Terry...doesn't it seem strange to you that someone would shoot this agent and then leave the guns there to be found at the murder scene. That area of the country is very dangerous. Why would a criminal leave the guns and not take them with him or them to use again. Why would they leave their "protection" behind. This has to make you think that those guns were meant to be found. So now ask for what reason?

I personally think there is more to this than the DOJ wants known. The communication after the program was over is important because that is the information exchanged to cover their ass...because of the dead agents and the Mexican innocents. I think the agenda behind running this program is much more incendiary and it should all be exposed. The victims' families deserve that as well as the rest of us.

I understand that many people just want this to go away and feel it is a witch hunt. I disagree. I am always looking for truth and communicating what I find out to be truth to dispel rumors I hear and I want to know the truth here wherever it leads. We should all be demanding the truth here. This is not an inconsequential issue that should go away. People were murdered because of a department of government that thought they could make a political issue out of an asinine scheme. The more I learn of this, the more I'm convinced of that.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

And the lives lost in Iraq were not serious? And the lives lost in Afghanistan were not serious? And the lives lost in Somalia, and Beirut, so unimportant?

And the loss of 40% of the wealth of all of the people of the US, is not serious, and the loss of 100,000 lives per year because hospitals will not use a simple check list and experts agree that nearly all of them could be saved, is not serious ...

You need to have a little perspective when you talk selectively about things that you say are serious, and where is your perspective on the number of lives that are being lost because of simple policies that could change the situation and save them. How many of the 50million uninsured will die for the lack of diagnosis and treatment of serious disease?

I know your little conspiracy is important to you, but are 300 Mexicans more important to you than 100,000 innocent Iraqi's? Who were the people who pushed so hard to get us into Iraq? Who lied to Congress and falsified the evidence? How can you worry so much about the Mexicans while trying to deport 1 million children who were brought by their parents, do not speak Spanish have never know a country but the US. There will be more Americans die next winter because they can't afford heating oil than the 300 you cite.

Will it make you feel vindicated when you find out that some midlevel ATF guy was pushing this to get a promotion or legalize the pot farm his Uncle has in Marin California?

When I see you work as hard on the larger, really more important issues, I may consider picking up your issue with an appropriate priority. Until then, you need to check you agenda because your underwear is starting to show. I thought you were just a concerned citizen until this last post, instead of a political hack..

I guess I am too trusting.

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 2 years ago

Yes, we have many, many issues to draw attention to and I am a very concerned citizen which is the reason for my posts.

So are you saying that we should let this issue go away because we can't address any other issues while we're dealing with this one? That doesn't make any sense. The government should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. And we, the people, should be able to discuss more than one issue at the same time. I was responding initially to untrue statements made on this forum post and wanted to correct them with the truth.

All the other issues you bring up are very serious and different forum posts bring light to them individually. I respond to issues as they come up. But one issue doesn't detract from the others. Since this post was about Fast and Furious, that is what I have been responding to. I believe every human life is important, especially the life of a border patrol agent who was the casualty of a bad government program whose purpose is still unknown. As usual, when someone can't think of anything else to say on the topic, they go for the insults and change the subject. There are so many important issues that we need to address and I respond when I have something to add or I see that the truth has been lost in rumor or stupid talking points like the way this forum post originally started at the top of the page. I had to respond to what I saw was not true.

To respond to all the other issues you've raised would require a book and days. I think that we actually agree on many of the issues you raise. I try to keep responses to forum posts, limited to the topic at hand to keep the discussion on point.

I will add something else to think about. My "conspiracy theory"...if it can happen in this program, don't you think it is relevant to all of government and the mess they've gotten us into. This kind of stuff is nothing new to any administration. Don't you think that their varying "agendas" are what got us into this mess to begin with on all the issues you mention? These "agendas" need to be brought to light every chance we get to the American people so we can try to "fix" what ails us and get rid of the people complicit in them.

I'm sure we will meet again on another issue and I look forward to an intelligent discussion.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

This situation may not be agenda driven (administration) at all. . But to answer that question calling witnesses from the ATF and the DOJ to get the history seem to be relevant. The Dems have demanded this. But Issa won't call them.

If you want to talk about walking and chewing gum, you might want to look at how the House has spent their time and the number of bills actually considered by subject and you will find a huge percentage of their time has been spent on radical antiabortion, contraception and women's health and other antisocial issues, anti union measures and other agendas, like refusing to raise the debt limit.

.I am glad to hear that you consider the other issues I raised as serious and that you are addressing them as well.

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 2 years ago

We can agree that not much of substance is being done to bring our economy back and our federal debt down not to mention the many other issues we have, but I blame both parties for that.

We need to make our positions known, whatever they are, to our own congressional leaders in our states and districts as often as we can until they get the message or we vote them out. The thing they really fear is losing the next election.

I personally believe that anyone who has been in office for more than 2 terms (12 years) as a Senator or 4 terms (8 years) as a Representative should be taken out. We don't need career politicians. We need citizens who have a sincere reason to serve and listen to their constituents. When they are there too long, Washington corrupts them and then they corrupt the system. Term limits would be great but we as citizens can enforce term limits ourselves by getting rid of all the career politicians. If you put in place good congressional leaders, the president becomes less important. It is, after all, the congress that makes the rules and laws. The President only signs them into law. Although lately that seems to be changing because our President has been overreaching with his office to usurp the congress and ignore the constitution. I think he wants to be dictator in chief.

Anyway, it's up to us to make our voices heard and not just to people on a website but to the people who represent us in the government on local, state and federal levels.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Why do you blame both parties equally? I would have also until the last 3 years. It is the first time I can remember (and I am old) a party actively sabotaging the economy for political purposes. We now know that they met and agreed to do this the evening of the inauguration. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/robert-draper-anti-obama-campaign_n_1452899.html

The only way this gets fixed is to get the money out of governance. As long as elections can be bought, they will be bought. This is true at all levels of government. Corruption is our biggest industry.

[-] 0 points by MattHolck2 (44) 2 years ago

just sounds like a reason to run guns

[-] 1 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 2 years ago

but shouldn't the focus be on that aspect rather than communications much after it was cancelled for the second time?

The "communications much after it was cancelled" are also the communications that led up to the retraction of their EARLY 2011 denial of gun walking. They are the communications that were a part of the COVER UP. Am sure you remember what brought Tricky DIck down if you are old enough. IT WAS THE COVERUP

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

And then Obama made it so no one could see the evidence in all those documents.

Tax dollars hard at failure.

Our society is run by insane people with insane objectives

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

What brought this to mind was watching Obama's press guy (Jay Carney) discuss this in a press conference, and according to him, all documents related to the program itself have been released. What the administration has not released is internal documents (generally, communications between administration officials) that were generated after the program was shut down, were not related to the program itself, but rather housekeeping sort of stuff (like strategy concerning press releases, stuff like that ... the sort of thing that would typically be covered under executive privilege).

On this one, I have to say (looking at the totality of the facts) I think Obama is getting a raw deal. This program was created under Bush, everything related to the program itself has been released, and it looks like the republicans are trying to use this as a pretext to get at information that's really not relevant to the investigation (and of course politicize something that really should put the Bush administration in a bad light, not Obama or the democrats).

I know I must sound like a little booster here (but believe me, I'm not ... this just pissed me off).

[-] 2 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 2 years ago

It's all about the cover up. And if the msm could bring themselves to report this story at all, you'd see this.

Holder has had to 'take back' 2 written statements issued by doj already because they were 'innacurate' (lies). He also perjured himself in testimony to the congressional committee when he said he had 'just found out about F&F a few wks ago' during one hearing

Yesterday was the first time abc world news ever covered this scandal. Today, not a word, tho they spent 2 or 3 minutes on Sandusky and did a cute little puff piece on Hillary unplugged. She is soooo kewl.

The documents now being requested are concerning the cover up and planning of new lies to retract old ones.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

It's all a smokescreen of bullshit, the cloud is so thick, the facts so obfuscated, who knows really. I mean, the bottom line is, it was a Bush administration program, Obama came into a shit storm when he took office. This is not an apology for Obama, as far as I can tell he's taken the torch of cronyism just like every other President, but still?

[-] -3 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

Hey, if the Obimination knew what he was doing and knew what he was getting into he wouldn't have run for office of the President.

But because he is so incompetent and clueless, he did run for the Presidency and now because he in over his head he blames everyone else because of how things are today.

I have never heard of an executive who took over a company that was failing, place blame on the previous executive because he can't turn the company around.

I have heard of executives who were hired to turn a company around get fired because they couldn't hack it.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

That's a bad analogy. An executive who takes over a company has the authority to terminate people blocking him from implementing his plans. Congress should help Obama out and fire themselves.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I totally disagree. I think Obama is perfectly competent, in fact remarkably competent (only republican Presidents are allowed to be borderline retarded). The system is totally fucked up, but Obama is just fine (insofar as his ability to manage our dysfunctional system). Imagine a dirt bag like Romney as President. Things might be shitty now (no thanks to Bush), but I'm still not that desperate :)

[-] 1 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 2 years ago

Obama is hardly competent. Except for a stimulus plan that even the WH admits was handled poorly and a health care plan that is going to be shot down, he's done nothing but point fingers and pass the blame. Reagan had a Democrat led Congress. The Repub led Congress impeached Clinton. BOTH presidents got things done. That's the job. Obama is in over his head and all he can offer is excuses and not results.

Oops, sorry. I forgot that he extended the Patriot Act beyond what Bush and the Repubs ever did. Don't want to forget that. He caves in just as well as he offers excuses. Good riddance.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I mean, I strongly doubt Romney will win this election, his numbers aren't very favorable, although that could change (but if you're placing your bets on any politician, you're setting yourself up for disappointment my friend :)).

[-] -1 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

Well lets see - everything that goes wrong the Obimination wants to blame someone else. He uses his executive order to bypass laws when in fact he doesn't have the authority to do that.

He spends trillions of dollars and still blames Bush because he doesn't know what he is doing.

He is now catering to the Hispanic voters to get re-elected by saying that he has the authority to bypass laws and give illegals amnesty.

Yet several years ago he stated he did not have the power to do so.

So, tell me it it the Obimination who is fucked up or the people of this country?

I say it's the Obimination and his government for allowing the big bank bailouts instead of diverting that money to the states directing them to use it to build bridges, roads and infrastructure.

Unemployment is still over 8% and he has yet to acknowledge that the working class people are hurting. Instead just the other day he said the working class people in this country are doing just fine and embarassed the hell out of himself.

So now he has diverted to lying about his executive priveledge that will allow illegals to continue to be illegal and yet take away jobs from citizens of this country.

So, will you please explain to me how you can consider him as "competent".

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Easy, I just read an economic analysis which concluded ... if republicans hadn't refused to provide funding to states (so they were able to avoid layoffs e.g. teachers, firefighters, etc.), our unemployment rate would be below 7%. So sure, after our economy has been effectively pillaged by conservative policies (i.e. banking deregulation, irresponsible tax cuts, needless wars, etc.), whatever anyone may think, government spending was needed to get us through the rough patch.

Put it this way, it's not like Bush didn't waste taxpayer money like a crack head who just acquired a meth habit. Republicans love spending taxpayer money when it goes to their friends, they hate spending it on programs designed to help people.

[-] 1 points by Apri1 (1) 2 years ago

'he said the working class people in this country are doing just fine'. I think what he said was that the 'private sector' is doing just fine. He's correct. I don't understand what all the fuss is about over that statement. Corp profits continue to post record highs. Whoot whoot!!

http://www.businessinsider.com/adam-smith-our-record-high-profit-margins-are-a-sign-the-us-is-going-to-ruin-2012-6

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

April1 you are correct I was referring to the private sector. The vast majority who were smart and paid attention to their expenses vs income are doing fine. The ones who weren't so smart are the ones who complain about the wealthy.

If they put that much energy into getting a job the economy would improve. But instead they think because they have a college degree they should get a job that pays equivelent to a college degree.

Well, when things go wrong, sometimes you have to "do what it takes" and go from there.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Alot of people are being hurt by this recession through little fault of their own. There are not enough jobs to go around. Putting more energy into getting a job doesn't work when there are more people unemployed than there are jobs at a ratio of 1:4. Looking harder does not create jobs. And lack of consumer spending, by those that can't find jobs, causes more pull back.

"do what it takes" - what exactly would you have people do?

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

April1 you are correct I was referring to the private sector. The vast majority who were smart and paid attention to their expenses vs income are doing fine. The ones who weren't so smart are the ones who complain about the wealthy.

If they put that much energy into getting a job the economy would improve. But instead they think because they have a college degree they should get a job that pays equivelent to a college degree.

Well, when things go wrong, sometimes you have to "do what it takes" and go from there.

[-] 0 points by HempTwister (667) from Little Rock, AR 2 years ago

Does Rachel Maddow count as msm? Two days in a row now on this. I am hearing wildly different "facts" on this.Got any non-propaganda evidence to support your claims?

[-] 1 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 2 years ago

I don't have cable but I think calling Rachel part of MSM is like calling Rush or beck or o'reilly msm.

This thing started a year and 1/2 ago. Here's a nice catch up article

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/why_fast_and_furious_matters_ufHzotjjbmq4dqaRnnF4JL

[-] 0 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I mean, the propaganda flows both ways, and comes from both sides. Surely you don't think the republicans are less innocent than the democrats? The only thing good I can say about republicans is at least they admit they do not work for or care about 99% of the people.

[-] 0 points by HempTwister (667) from Little Rock, AR 2 years ago

The Cons have the most and most brilliant propagandists in the history of the world. Dudes are really good. We have proof that they are very deliberately peddling deception. Th Democrats can't hold a candle to them. I am still waiting for someone to show me anything from the Dems that can match Frank Luntz stuff. Wish we had him.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Some days I wish we would just outlaw political parties :)

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago

I think that if the right and left (people not politicians) got together to discuss the issues, we'd find that we have more in common than the parties would have you think. Many conservatives lean left on certain issues, while some liberals lean right on others. It depends on the issue and it's why we have so many independents. It's advantageous FOR THE PARTIES to keep us divided. It gives them political cover when nothing gets done - They blame it on division when in reality, both sides get their money from the same source and BOTH parties represent that source.


                     No More Gangs in Government!
[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Democrats, republicans, independents, et al, are all confused.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Independents are the only ones who aren't confused.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I guess it depends on how one defines independent??

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (26587) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Unite under one concept - Democracy.

Support or oppose issues.

Support beneficial for all.

Oppose detrimental to all.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26587) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

What is so wrong with the concept offered that it deserves a down vote - but no comment as to why it is a bad concept?


Inquiring minds want to know.


[-] -1 points by DKAtoday (9480) from Coon Rapids, MN 14 minutes ago

Unite under one concept - Democracy.

Support or oppose issues.

Support beneficial for all.

Oppose detrimental to all.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply edit delete permalink

[-] 1 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

there are over 130,000 documents, about 7,000 have been released. most of them heavily redacted.

[-] 0 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

How do these people generate all this paper? I mean, an idea starts out as a proposal for a simple law, 5,000 pages later, it's a draconian cluster fuck ... oy :)

[-] 1 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

I have no idea. maybe they think that the more paper they generate makes seem that they're doing something of value,OR the more paper that's generated makes it harder to follow what's going on.

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Or, every special interest on earth greases the wheels a little bit, pays tribute to our political system, hires a small army of lobbyists, and everyone gets their little paragraph added to the bill (and soon enough, the thing turns into a giant monstrosity of incoherent gobbledygook) :)

[-] 0 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Source?

[-] 1 points by salta (-1104) 2 years ago

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjEd3HnV2VU

or you can just do an easy search ,......type in 140,000 fast and furious documents

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Thanks

[-] -1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

.Why are you pissed off with lies by the Rs ?


To paraphrase a line from the movie Terminator:
“Listen, and understand.
That republican is out there.
It can't be bargained with.
It can't be reasoned with.
It doesn't feel pity,
or remorse,
or fear.
And it absolutely - will not stop - ever.”


republicans were manufactured to lie and that is exactly what they do


Why are you pissed off with lies by Rs ?

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Actually, while we probably agree on most things, I'm not sure I agree with you on this one. Republicans proudly admit that they will only serve a fraction of 1% of the population, and that's exactly what they do, whereas democrats talk the talk of the 99%, turn around, and walk the walk of the 1% :)

Who do we trust? Ourselves ....

[-] 0 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

I don't think I've ever heard an Rs say "I serve the 1%"
Or anything even close
Have you?
The simple, proven Rs lie of tricke down, is a perfect example or how Rs lie that they work for all Americans
The lie is the foundation of their success. Whale there are a few idiots who would vote for an Rs who said
"I work for the 1% - not you - but maybe one day the 1%
will tricke down on you"

[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 2 years ago

This is a distraction so the media doesn't have to report real news and politicians don't have to actually perform.

[-] 1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

This needs to be addressed before any more rights are taken away.

We cannot grand the gov the ability to whatever the hell it wants, and then limit us in our ability to do so.

Many people are putting too much faith in this organization. And I could care less what the sillly letter at the end of their name is.

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

It's all after the fact stuff they're trying to hide (probably the way they put the old political spin on it), but don't you know, Obama, Bush, Clinton, (insert the name of the next guy) ... all one long continuum. You guys can throw tea parties until you overdose on tea, it won't matter, Moveon.org can send out emails until their fingers fall off, it won't matter ... get the picture?

This is just where they want us, quibbling about which slave master is better.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

Crooked politicians want to investigate crooked politicians, so that they can point the finger of guilt away from themselves.

Members of Congress, both Houses, are a sorry bunch. No wonder they have less than a 20% approval rating. http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/04/19/150995737/congress-approval-rating-recovers-slightly

The only people really interested in this whole mess are the anti-Obama people, who simply want another reason to hate him, regardless of his job performance. Search my posts, I'm no shill for either party, but I also recognize a red herring when I see one.