More on Darrell Issa's Oversight Committee to Elect Willard Romney:
From Digby:
Whatever happened to "guns don't kill people, people kill people?"by digby
I haven't followed the Fast and Furious pseudo scandal all that closely because it seemed so unlikely to me that it could be the one to metastasize into a Village feeding frenzy. Why? Well, here's a concise description of the case:
It honestly never occurred to me that the right could turn this one into a cause celebre. After all, haven't we been told for decades that "guns don't kill people, people kill people?" Of all the hissy fits they might stage, freaking out over the origin of some guns just slays me. This has to be the only crime in history in which these right wing gun fetishists give a damn about the fact that guns got in the hands of criminals and someone was killed.
These are the same people who cheered this, after all:
Ashcroft ordered that all government lists — including voter registration, immigration and driver's license lists — be checked for links to terrorists. But there was one list Ashcroft did not want used - the gun purchasers background check.
Every person who buys a gun from a dealer must pass an instant criminal background check. It's called the National Instant Criminal Background check system or NICS. The records of those checks are kept by the FBI. After September 11th, the ATF wanted to review those records to see if any suspected terrorists had bought guns.
They wanted to know whether any of them had slipped through the system. The Department of Justice stepped in and stopped the FBI in their tracks. The Department of Justice said no, you can't do that. You can't use the records of approved gun purchasers in connection with a criminal investigation.
Attorney General John Ashcroft told the FBI to stop checking the NICS list...That mirrors the position of the National Rifle Association, which insists that the data collected when people buy guns is an invasion of privacy.
Even in the immediate wake of 9/11,
the thought of terrorists getting their hands on guns didn't bother them. These are not people who normally lose sleep over gun violence of any kind.
Now, they have floated a rationale for their extremely unusual exception to the "guns don't kill people, people kill people rule" but it's so stupid it's hard to imagine that even Darrell Issa would believe it:
Allowing drug cartels to get their hands on American weapons was an elaborate scheme to confiscate Americans' guns.
Meanwhile, in the congress you've got the nation's greatest braintrusts on the case:
Issa's close colleague, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), who has been equally zealous on Fast and Furious, was blunt about his goal. "The only think I want out of this is somebody's scalp that approved this," Grassley said on Fox News earlier this month. "They should just have to get out of government and be held responsible . . . because their decisions led to the death of Terry."
I'll be looking forward to Grassley's call for the heads of those who provided the guns to the next campus or workplace mass killer. '
It gets even more interesting:
"The Merida Initiative is the, and was the, basis for the 2008 HR-6028 Bill which specifically funded "Project Gunrunner."
Darrell Issa pretends he has never heard of Project Gunrunner, yet in 2008 he specifically voted to fund Project Gunrunner.
Apparently, there is more than just a huge connection between Merida Initiative and Project Gunrunner whereby Project Gunrunner funding, per HR-6028, is directly enveloped into the Merida Initiative.
In October 2007, President Bush and Mexico's President Calderon announced the Mérida Initiative, is a Billions of dollar aid package to support President Calderón's war on drugs by, among other things, sending military grade weapons and helicopters to Mexico. Project Gunrunner was Legislated into the Merida Initiative through HR-6028 in 2008. After ample Congressional debate on conditionality and appropriations, the US Congress approved the initiative in HR-6028 without any strings attached.
IMPORTANT FACTS:
1) Rep. Darrell Issa voted "yes" specifically to Fund: "Project Gunrunner" in June 2008.2) In January 2008: ATF went to Congress and asked Congress to Fund Project Gunrunner for 3 years.Merida is kind of like an octopus as Merida has many tentacles that go through many different areas of US security departments.
3) In 2008, HR-6028 combined "Project Gunrunner" with the "Merida Initiative" also known as the "Merida Program."
4) The Title of the Bill HR-6028 is:
Assistance for Mexico and Central America for Anti-Drug Programs (Merida Program)
5) A SubSection of the Bill HR-6028 is Titled: PROJECT GUNRUNNER INITIATIVE
6) Among other things, Project Gunrunner is directly funded through Merida Initiative
7) In 2007 the Congress held hearings on Merida Initiative
8) Merida Initiative is complicated because it is an initiative that crosses through: Homeland Security, Secretary of State, ATF, FBI & DoJ.
The notion that Darrell Issa had never heard of Project Gunrunner is bullsh!t since Issa voted "yes" to specifically fund Project Gunrunner in 2008."
**********
I brought Issa's background into the post below this one, and then was asked by some of my commenters why that was necessary.
This question was posed by members of a political faction that has ceaselessly examined every minutia of President Obama's background, starting with his astounding ability to be born in Kenya and then magically transported to Hawaii in order to receive a forged birth certificate, all the way to his Vietnam draft dodging days as a 6 year old child.
33 comments:
"Pseudo scandal?"
Tell that to the hundreds killed by those guns we put in the hands of the narcos.
Yes, guns don't kill people, people kill people, but our government gave those people the guns to kill others.
So it's a neat rhetorical trick, but like most liberal thought, is revealed to be a thin tissues upon closer examination.
Here is what I think should happen: The president and congress should jointly appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the whole thing, going back to the Bush administration. Get a full accounting and present it to the American people.
I realize that the right-wing gets a STD at the very thought of touching facts, but this article - by a person who isn't keen on invoking executive privilege - offers up some pretty good ones. Issa's committee should be renamed the Overreach Committee and Issa himself should be held in contempt for abusing his responsibilities.
http://gawker.com/5920526/the-gop-is-unbelievably-full-of-shit-on-executive-privilege
Here's the money quote, Leslie, from that article, which doesn't sugarcoat the Obama administration's actions in this issue:
A Border Patrol Agent Died Because of Fast and Furious
"Let's never forget that this is about the dead border patrol agent who was killed serving our country and was killed at the hands of our own weapons which is the real tragedy of all this," said Sekulow on Fox. Bullshit. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered in December 2010 after a gun battle with a group of five Mexican bandits. Two assault weapons discovered at the scene had serial numbers matching guns that had been tracked in Fast and Furious. Neither could be linked to the bullet that killed Terry, which was too damaged for detailed ballistic analysis.
Moreover, these were not "our own weapons." They were weapons that gunrunners purchased and smuggled to Mexico. The fact that ATF agents were watching them do so, and tracking the serial numbers, does not mean they were "our weapons." Precisely the same weapons would have gone to precisely the same places if Fast and Furious had never been launched. Terry would still be dead.
None of this means that Obama made the right call, or that Fast and Furious isn't worthy of investigation, or that Holder shouldn't be held to account for it. What it does mean, unequivocally, is that anyone in the Republican Party—unless they joined in January 2009—complaining about Obama's use of executive privilege is an opportunistic hack who has no interest in congressional oversight and every interest in generating a partisan shitstorm to damage their enemies."
Technically a valid point...
So how's that “new standard of openness” and the “most transparent and accountable administration in history,” “an unprecedented level of openness in government” and “work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration” administration working out for ya?
Meanwhile the Committee to Reelect the President (CREEP) Marches on.
Echoes of Nixon...
Silver - Indeed.
Apparently lost on the left however...
RN, every president operates a committee to re-elect himself.
Perhaps it is you who have lost the memory of that.
SF and RN are bashing you on their blogs, their readers freely bashing you on their blogs, and they bash you on your own blog.
Their is a time to end their fun with you, and refuse to be treated like that.
The time is now, but of course, it's your blog
Don't let RN fool you, they are two peas in a pod.
RN, I know, has posted as Anon on your blog, and was not nice to you.
Stop playing with these haters
At least allow your readers to expose their devious tactics, and bash them
Here's an example,
from SF's blog:
A comment from SF's reader:
"And I must congratulate you for your stance and replies to that Idiotic Pissant, Morons progressive blog regarding "Modern Conservatism Has Become a Form of Mass Hysteria"
Good job, keep it up my friend. You have won me over..
Thank you for doing an amazing job over there in that Hell Hole. And thank the Lord that at least some of us were born normal."
SF's reply,
"thank you for the fulsome praise! I'm humbled"
Yeah, Anon, in addition to calling me a piece of shit, his commenter called me a "Idiotic Pissant Moron" and claimed I wasn't "born normal."
I wasn't even on that thread!
Whoever wrote that apparently lurks here but doesn't have the cojones to comment and then goes running with his little tail tucked between his withered little legs and bashes me on SF's blog!
Y'know, Anon, I've tried to get an exchange of ideas here WITHOUT the flame-throwing.
I won't go back to SF's blog again as long as his creepy friends Darth Bacon and his ilk feel comfortable calling vile names. [SF believes calling me an "Idiotic Pissant Moron" and "piece of shit" isn't vulgar.]
I thought we could bridge our differences by presenting counter-arguments and ideas, but I've come to realize certain types of people get high on bashing those they disagree with--or worse, watching bullies do the job for them.
That behavior is no different from what was reported in the news this week about a woman who suffered at the hands of those 14-year old bullies on the school bus.
I'm getting off the bus. SF's was among the last conservative blogs I commented on, and there's no reason to go back.
It's disappointing, but it's another lesson learned.
KP has it right. He said something to the effect that we should speak to each other as though we were sitting across the dining room table.
I damn well know that if I, or anyone else, were a guest in SF's home or any other reasonable person's home he/they would not allow another visitor to attack guests.
Somehow, the internet makes it easier to be cultural slobs.
It's just the way it is.
You have a great blog, and have been cited by other sites, as such.
That makes you a target.
Take a deep breath, it's a presidential election year.
You cannot have a civil discussion with those whose motivation, is to bash you and will use anything (lies, vulgarity, deception, etc) to bash you.
Unlike the anon from your previous post comments (who is now going to ID him/her self) I will remain anon.
Anon is a good way, to not become a target and have to fight the annoying, hate filled flamers and blog attackers. It's not a matter of being afraid of them, just a matter of not allowing them to ruin my blog, and my readers experience.
You said,
"-or worse, watch bullies do the job for them"
You just described RN.
Ha! I had no idea Bill Maher did this routine the other day:
"Bill Maher Slams GOP: 'You Act Exactly Like 14 Year Old Boys'"
Shaw, I challenge you to visit RN USA and find a single post or commentator that bashed you where I did not correct them.
If you do I would appreciate you bringing the oversight to my attention for immediate correction.
I have said on more than one occasion, both here and at RN USA, that you are a class act. I may disagree bit I do not degrade you nor tolerate BS about you, or any other rational liberal.
As to anon, he/she/it is the individual no doubt that I posted on earlier at my site. Whoever he/she/it is must have just read the post and decided to raise its ugly head again.
Another thing, anon really does wonders for spreading the leftist "good news" of tolerance and understanding, now doesn't he?
But I suppose he/she/it has been well schooled in the tactics of Saul Ali sky.
Saul Alinsky? An American Hero:
Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) was an American community organizer and writer. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing, and has been compared to Thomas Paine as being "one of the great American leaders of the nonsocialist left." He is often noted for his book Rules for Radicals.
In the course of nearly four decades of political organizing, Alinsky received much criticism, but also gained praise from many public figures. His organizing skills were focused on improving the living conditions of poor communities across North America. In the 1950s, he began turning his attention to improving conditions of the African-American ghettos, beginning with Chicago's and later traveling to other ghettos in California, Michigan, New York City, and a dozen other "trouble spots".
His ideas were later adapted by some U.S. college students and other young organizers in the late 1960s and formed part of their strategies for organizing on campus and beyond.
Time magazine once wrote that "American democracy is being altered by Alinsky's ideas," and conservative author William F. Buckley said he was "very close to being an organizational genius."
One of America's best.
For the record, here is my complete response to the name-caller who posted in a comment thread at my blog:
And thank you for the fulsome praise! I'm humbled, although I wouldn't call Shaw a pos. She and others like her are in the thrall of their hero and it blinds them to reality and objectivity. I don't understand it.
To make themselves feel better, the latch on to such cotton candy fluff and jump around all giddy from the sugar high, but find themselves unable to intellectually defend their positions. It's a sad place to be.
I don't control people who comment at my blog. Name-calling is pretty tame. Had it gotten vulgar or threatening I would have zapped the person.
To each his own, I guess...
Just a word of advice. If you guys want to win this November you better pack up the pity party, drop the victimhood and develop some cogent arguments for Obama and your democrat positions.
And speaking of vulgarity, I give extremely wide latitude to the foul-mouthed lefties who visit my blog to argue with me, so no one can accuse me of being inconsistent.
SF, you missed the point entirely.
This wasn't a one-on-one confrontation. I wasn't even on that thread, and your commenters personally attacked me behind my back.
You are fine with that.
Okay.
Those are your values.
But I think they're lacking.
When Ducky and others go all vulgar and viral that's not the same thing, they're addressing you and other commenters on your blog.
What that creepy commenter [I don't remember his name--the one who complained about me and my blog and called me a pos, and Bacon dude] did was cowardly. I wasn't involved in the discussion; I wasn't on your blog.
That's not a pity party, dude. That's expecting some modicum of decency. You're uncomfortable with my expecting you to act decently.
You owe me nothing. You have your values. I have mine.
This has nothing to do with politics.
This was personal, and you didn't act like a gentleman.
Bullies on the Bus
By CHARLES M. BLOW
“Making the Bus Monitor Cry.”
That’s the name of the video. It’s more than 10 minutes long, but if you make it through more than three of them with your eyes not getting misty and your blood not boiling then you are a rock, or at least your heart is.
The video shows Karen Klein, a 68-year-old grandmother and bus monitor in upstate New York, being relentlessly tormented by a group of young boys.
They hurl profanities. One asks for her address because he says he wants to go urinate on her door. Others are more explicit about defiling her.
One boy tells her that she doesn’t have a family because “they all killed themselves because they didn’t want to be near you.” (Her eldest son committed suicide.)
One suggests that if he were to stab her, his knife would go through her “like butter.”
[skip]
But what, if anything, does this say about society at large? Many things one could argue, but, for me, it is a remarkably apt metaphor for this moment in the American discourse in which hostility has been drawn out into the sunlight.
Those boys are us, or at least too many of us: America at its ugliest. It is that part of society that sees the weak and vulnerable as worthy of derision and animus.
This kind of behavior is not isolated to children and school buses and suburban communities. It stretches to the upper reaches of society — our politics and our pulpits and our public squares.
[skip]
A Gallup poll released Thursday found that a record number of people (54 percent) say that they would be willing to vote for an atheist for president, and a Gallup poll last month found that more people support same-sex marriage than oppose it.
These dramatic shifts are upending the majority-minority paradigm and are making many people uneasy.
The Republican-Democratic divide is increasingly becoming an all-white/multicultural divide, a male/female divide, and a more religious/less religious divide — the formers the traditional power classes, and the latters the emerging ones.
This has led to some increasingly unseemly attacks at traditionally marginalized groups, even as — and possibly particularly because — they grow more powerful.
Women are under attack. Hispanics are under attack. Minority voting rights are under attack. The poor are under attack. Unsurprisingly, those doing the attacking in every case are from the right.
Seldom is power freely passed and painlessly surrendered, particularly when the traditionally powerful see the realignment as an existential threat.
The bullying on that bus was awful, but so is the bullying in our politics. Those boys were trying to exert power over a person placed there to rein them in. But bullying is always about power — projecting more than you have in order to accrue more than your share.
Sounds like the frightened, insecure part of American society."
What we hear from the looney right, is the last gasp of a dying political culture, white supremacy.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Interesting where we go from here no doubt.
History indeed does have a way of repeating itself.
RN: "History indeed does have a way of repeating itself." I assume you are referring to Republican Tea Party leaders acting like SS thugs.
"...one may safely say that it would be no sin if statesmen learned enough of history to realize that no system which implies control of society by privilege seekers has ever ended in any other way than collapse."
William E. Dodd
American Ambassador to Germany in a speech in Berlin, October 12, 1933
Assuming is generally not a recommended practice. Having said that... The qoute is of appropriate timing and value.
This was RN's response to the Obama event registry (make a donation and get a gift for your birthday, wedding, anniversary, etc. :
"No longer can there be any question. President Obama has removed any doubt. He is the most narcissistic, arrogant, and unethical man who has ever occupied the Oval Office. His arrogant, almost Godlike attitude should be enough to convince the voting public to pull the lever for anybody but Obama in November.
But that's just one persons view. More interesting commentary found here, here, here, and here.
Disgusting, simply disgusting."
So you judge, is that a rational response to such a little fund raising idea?
It shows total hate, even rage against Obama, something RN claims he does not have for Obama.
His site, is just another bash Obama site, for no rational reason other than hate.
Right RN, claim others lack tolerance, and then write hate like this.
Got you beat anon
This is what RN said about Obama raising taxes on the 1% :
"But of course it is always easier to find a scapegoat (the 1%) and create hate for that group. It worked very well for Adolf Hitler."
Obama is Hitler!
RN's site, is full of hate like this.
Shaw, as Issa continues this article recounts where he says there is no evidence of a coverup...
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-issa-no-evidence-white-house-covered-up-fast-and-furious-fallout-20120624,0,5244823.story
Yet for some reason, we must investigate just in case I guess...
Maybe we really should investigate Mitt just in case he really is a Unicorn... I mean even though there is no evidence, the possibility must not be ruled out...
http://politics.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981366705
Don't know where RR got his quote.
But what I posted was EVERY word you wrote on your Obama Event Post.
The complete context.
So much for your false allegation, that I took you out of context.
I suppose you have to make up some kind of lie, to try and defend the hate you wrote.
it's those who cannot accept the truth about themselves (deny, delusion, hate, lies) that need professional help.
Glad to see you recognize that anon. And accept your failings. My work with you is now complete.
I wish you many happy and pleasant sessions with your therapist.
Look, i didn't like Silverfiddle's commenter suggesting I wasn't "born normal," and I don't like it when my commenters attack each other in that manner.
If you don't agree with each other's political philosophy, can't y'all attack the idea instead of each other?
I'm tired of being the bus monitor.
BTW, I've never claimed to be nonpartisan. This blog is called PROGRESSIVE Eruptions, and it's pretty evident where I stand on the political spectrum.
RN, if you claim to be politically neutral, then explain your not-so-suble use of colors in your heading that says:
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
Liberty is highlighted in RED, as in " conservative red state," and "Tyranny" is highlighted in blue, as in "liberal blue state."
Now you could claim that no such implication is intended, but I wouldn't believe it for a minute.
There was no reason to make those words any color at all.
I agree with the anon who points out that your protestation of neutrality and disliking both parties is a bit disingenuous.
Shaw - Red for rational, Blue for irrational.
Agree with anon if you like. Frankly it is none of my concern.
Have a mighty fine day now, ya hear?
This is not a matter of believing me.
It's a matter of individuals judging YOUR words, that YOU wrote, on YOUR blog.
You really like to twist things, don't you RN?
"You really like to twist things, don't you RN"
Oh the mirror. the mirror, your refection must be stunning anon.
Glad to see you recognize that anon. And accept your failings. My work with you is now complete.
I wish you many happy and pleasant sessions with your therapist.
Post a Comment