|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 21:29:46 GMT -5
Lets assume you are right. What can you do?
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Jun 7, 2013 21:50:31 GMT -5
*L* And therein lies the rub huh? Difficult to even get to the bottom of the conspiracy as justice dept is obviously corrupt itself and controlled by the administration. Ideally, immunity would be granted to some of the crooks who would roll over on the rest the crooks. Then they should be rounded up and fired, every last one of them. And if some broke the law, off to jail. If it can be directly linked to the Prez ( I saw a story one of his campaign managers actually attended the meeting with the IRS head Schuler) the Prez should be impeached and prosecuted for election tampering along with all his gang. Then a new election should be held. Simple dream no? *L* I don't expect much when you have guys investigating themselves for their own wrongdoing.
I suppose, best we can really hope for is having enough stink made to make sure oversight is good enough in the future to prevent this crap from happening again with either party. Problem I see there, is unless folks go to jail or are fired, none of the wrongdoers will take it seriously. So far all we see is crooked jerks being promoted upwards and given bonuses for their evil services and a few scapegoats getting leave with pay and a gentle slap on the wrist. It's friggin disgusting how corrupt and shadey these folks are...Mel
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Jun 7, 2013 22:05:21 GMT -5
Excellent question, Helen! Well said, Mel! Stink, Stank, Stunk. Such a variety of things to be said, but for now my sentiment may be adequately expressed by the words of this villanelle by Dylan Thomas.
Do not go gentle into that good night, Old age should burn and rave at close of day; Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right, Because their words had forked no lightning they Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight, And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way, Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay, Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height, Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray. Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
P.S. This was penned for his dying father. Referenced here in allusion to the death of a Constitutional Republic, ours.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 22:31:52 GMT -5
LOL! I don't think this President has a thing to do with it, since the 'tampering' articles go back to 2001:).
Us 'making a stink' is only relevant if in fact we have a government that cares. On the one hand, you assume that the government cares with your comments. On the other, you post things that indicate a level of control that is pervasive enough for the government to not need to care at all.
You obviously believe the government cares and our voices make a difference. That's why I'm puzzled by the fatalistic attitudes. For one thing, none of this stuff is news, it's only news because the Obama Admin allows enough to come to light that we can actually see some of what's happened, and the results today. That's open, not as closed as the closed doors we used to have in Presidential Admins. I'm sure you all recall the surmise floating around JFK's and RFK's deaths. From the CIA to hiring mob hitmen to kill Castro, stuff that came to light 20 years later, pretty incredible stuff that absolutely no one knew at the time.
Yet here we are, able to pick on this Admin during it's term, and not 20 years later, because of the openness and availability of information. You can't see how open the US Gov't is actually becoming? This allows for healthy dissent. It's a bad thing? You want a Prez that leaves us guessing what he's up to INSTEAD of Obama?
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Jun 7, 2013 23:12:25 GMT -5
OK Helen, I'm calling Bullsh*t on that one. Two wrongs do not make a right and again, you are misdirecting the argument because you know you can't explain away all of what's going on.. If wrongdoing occurred prior to Obama, it was still wrongdoing and if found out, folks should have been punished. ( ala Nixon in Watergate) Your argument is stupid and misleading. If a guy committed murder and did not get caught and punished ten years ago, that has diddly to do with the guy caught committing murder now. Law breaking is law breaking. God, sometimes you are so shifty in the way you try to cover for your heroes.
I watched an interview the other day where one of Obama's campaign managers ( some blonde gal I think) was giving cover to the IRS head Schuler, by saying she was at some of the meetings at the Whitehouse and all they discussed was Obamacare. I find it odd that Obama's campaign people were privy to these meetings at all. It was before the election and it would certainly provide the opportunity for the Obama campaign to concoct and co ordinate dirty little tricks with the IRS at such a meeting. After all to commit a crime you only need motive ( getting Obama re elected) opportunity ( IRS meeting at Whitehose with campaign staff present at meeting) and means ( using the IRS to spread confusion among your enemies).
Motive, means and opportunity.
The IRS has already admitted the criminal wrongdoing/abuse of power. The campaign gal said she was at some of the meetings and Obama and some Democratic senators had been complaining about Tea Party types being their enemies and being a threat to their power base, clear and certain motive for an attack on your enemies. Sounds like a pretty good conspiracy case to me *L
Openness and availability of information. Don't make me laugh. Not from the folks at fault. They're still stonewalling and playing dumb, like you are. *L* Good God girl. They just got caught numerous times with their pants down. There was absolutely no openness from the administration to it to it. It was whistleblowers, good reporters and stupidity on the part of the wrongdoers that brought these scandals to light and its the members of this administration that are still trying to keep the facts hidden, taking the fifth refusing to provide documents etc etc...Mel
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 23:37:22 GMT -5
Every President has been guilty of 'misdoings', without exception. Name one that wasn't, I'll bet I can point out at least the misdoings we know about, since all of them have misdoings we don't know about.
Are you suggesting that the IRS isn't involved in Obamacare? One of Obamacare's main premise was to force insurance companies to pay out 85% of their premiums on patient health care, leaving companies that previously profited 40% on premiums to mail out refunds and squish their 72 million dollar CEO compensation into the remaining 15%. Darn right the IRS needs to figure out how to collect that extra out of them.
Obama has been re-elected, and can't be re-elected again. What motive would he have to do anything you suggest? He'd only be setting it up for the next Admin, which historically will be Republican. Matter of fact, nearly everything he is doing now will be going to his most likely Republican successor. So why would he bother? Motive? He has none, beyond trying to leave a historical legacy that on hindsight puts him in the history books in a favorable light. There's no more re-election for him, this is all there is for him to worry about, a legacy.
Means and Opportunity? He's the President of the USA. I agree he's got plenty of means to do whatever he likes. But he'd be doing it for the next probably Republican Admin.
The IRS isn't directly under the President. It's almost as independent as the Fed, and can be ordered by Congress to go after a sitting President, as they did during Clinton's Whitewater scandal.
I'm not playing dumb, I was a Republican my entire life, and only became a Democrat Bush's 2nd term. I apply all my reasoning based on past REPUBLICAN behaviors, which frankly, was about as crooked as you could get. I have no blinders about the possibilities, I know pretty well what they could be.
As for taking the 5th, that's funny, don't suppose you remember Ollie North and his Secretary? THAT was Reagan 100%. The IRS is not controlled by Obama, a military officer is 100% controlled by the Commander in Chief. So what a bizarre accusation.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 8, 2013 3:21:38 GMT -5
So, I'll ask a question that most could answer with just a tiny bit of common sense. If you were the NSA seeking to spend a cooll $2BILLION of a new data center. Who would you hire? Fluor at $200 MILLION is data center construction revenues or Google who seems to spend about $2 billion ANNUALLY?? The point is Google is a $50 BILLION a year company which spends over $2BILLION annually on construction of data centers. Your entire list, does not represent a billions in revenues. Once again, your data proves my point. So, thanks for the research. LOL! Ok, I'm going to try one more time to explain this to you. If you still don't get it, I guess I give up. First of all, Google does not build datacenters for OTHERS, the construction companies and software companies who specialize in that do. That's the one link. That's like saying, the Microsoft just built a 25 story bldg. to house their new offices. Therefore, if the Marriot Hotel chain wants to build a new big office bldg, they need to contract with Microsoft to build it. This is the level of your logic almost every time. What the HECK?! Or say Gloria Vanderbilt wants James to build her a gorgeous water garden in her backyard. After it's complete, Ted Turner wants a water garden too, so he'll contract with Gloria Vanderbilt to build him a watergarden too. And Gloria Vanderbilt must be a better water garden builder than James, because she's got a higher net worth. What the HECK?! WHY would anyone contract with a company who contracts for datacenters, to build their datacenter? The other link was for the largest FIVE datacenters in the world, and who owns them. Google's datacenter doesn't even make the top 5. So your assumption that EVERYONE should know that Google has the largest datacenter is just... well... sad. As for google spending billions more than the income of the construction contractors who build datacenters... a datacenter is many parts... starting with the DESIGN, which is both architectural and engineering, a process that can cost a lot and take years. Once that's done, 1. the building itself, which is construction. 2 the furniture in the bldg. and interior décor. 3. the equipment- servers, computers, cooling facilities for the processors, wiring, etc. 4. the software engineering for those processors, both configuring and design. 5. the employees hired to RUN the datacenter. OF COURSE any one of those contractors isn't getting paid for the ENTIRE COST google spends on a datacenter. Now, back to what *I* said. CISCO (one of several others dedicated to doing this type of thing) is probably who built the datacenter... that's part of what they DO... software/hardware solutions... um... FOR DATACENTERS: learningnetwork.cisco.com/docs/DOC-20452As for their net worth, balance sheet for CISCO tells you that their gross annual revenue is 46 BILLION a year.. building... DATA CENTERS. Google's entire revenue is 50 billion... SELLING ADS ON SEARCH ENGINES. But of course, doing none of the fact checking for what I said, you must have WON, and Google, who came out publicly to say they had nothing to with the gov'ts plans to help themselves to people's personal data (because google wants to hoard it all themselves), MUST be in cahoots with the government they lobby against - for invasion of privacy and fights their anti-pirating stance tooth and nail every chance they get. And further, who not only published all of WikiLeaks, has refused to suppress a single thing the Gov't wants suppressed, due to the First Amendment. OK. Sure. This is the logic behind most of your arguments. They are so... um... wrong... that I generally ignore your arguments. Yet you continue to 'prove' that google owns the largest datacenter and builds them too, by linking google's page... which doesn't mention building datacenters... but is an ad page for their search engines and products. THAT must prove your argument! Google selling search engine and retail hardware services proves they build the gov't datacenters, so you WON!!! Are you getting why I'm not particularly polite in response to your arguments yet? I know you must be a really nice guy, so how about we talk about granite countertops, which you sell so its an area where you know what you are talking about, instead?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2013 10:29:06 GMT -5
Haha! Your slip is showing! [wink]
That's it Helen. Look down your elitist nose at me. I am not trying to convince you. But anyone who reads your posts is learning far more about you than you are teaching them about me.
The fact google doesn't sell data centers is a straw man argument. That was never a factor. The statement you attempt to refute is that they are the largest builder of data centers in the USA marketplace. I proved that beyond any doubt, except that in your feeble mind. I said it before, you are a low hanging fruit and it's not fun anymore. You cannot even tell when you are so far off base you are arguing a different topic! It's really truly remarkable!
Restated, the topic was this: If you are the NSA spending $2B for a datacenter, who to hire? Google is the clear winner. They dwarf anybody else in the marklet place. You proved that!
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 8, 2013 11:01:32 GMT -5
If you are NSA spending $2 billion for a data center, you would hire Cisco, the pros at building datacenter, and who makes $46 billion dollars a year building data centers. Not google, a search engine company, who's only experience in data centers is that they have one.
Sort of like insisting on asking Warren Buffet to design and build you a $40,000 Ford Pickup Truck instead of buying it from Ford, because he drives one and has lots of money and experience with his.
You still don't get it yet, do you?
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 8, 2013 11:06:07 GMT -5
Where's my countertop advice Scott?
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Jun 8, 2013 17:22:00 GMT -5
OK Helen, here's a question for you, a hypothetical if I may: To my way of thinking , it's really quite simple, if one has any moral compass at all.
Your friends know you are in financial trouble and in need of money because you've mentioned in in conversations. Some of your friends ( of questionable moral fiber but very zealous) go out and rob a bank ( you don't even know about the robbery). They give you a sack of money. The law tracks them down and they are caught. Do you get to keep the stolen money or is it ill gotten gains? I'll answer it for you, no you do not get to keep the stolen money.
Obama and Democratic senators feel threatened by the Tea Party types. They send letters and go on the telly and complain about how Tea Partiers are a threat to their ideology and their power base. Unknown to them, their zealous supporters at the IRS, attack Tea Party groups and give free reign to pro Obama groups before the election so Dems have a much better chance of winning the election. In effect the fair election process is corrupted. Whether they knew about it or not, Obama's wins and the wins of many Democrats are ill gotten gains. Should they be able to keep those ill gotten gains or not?. Again, the answer would seem simple for anyone with a moral compass.
If they or their campaign folks actually knew about the IRS targeting or guided it, or even influenced it, they should not only lose their jobs, those directly involved should got o jail for conspiracy to corrupt the electoral process. Interestingly enough, according to recent polls, a majority of the folks polled do think Obama knew about it...Mel
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Jun 8, 2013 17:28:42 GMT -5
Helen; We have really pretty counter tops of South American granite. Sort of medium colored with lots of brown some black, blueish/tan feldspar and included beautiful red brown garnets. Doesn't stain or show stains, at least in the five years we've had them. We love them. only problem is, I can't remember what the granite was called. I'll try to look it up for you.....Mel
|
|
|
Post by cpdad on Jun 8, 2013 18:25:29 GMT -5
as far as "data bases" of people and info goes....google is tops.
amazon youtube sprint at-t and gov of course
the gov have hacked them all..wink...kev.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 8, 2013 19:08:27 GMT -5
OK Helen, here's a question for you, a hypothetical if I may: To my way of thinking , it's really quite simple, if one has any moral compass at all. Your friends know you are in financial trouble and in need of money because you've mentioned in in conversations. Some of your friends ( of questionable moral fiber but very zealous) go out and rob a bank ( you don't even know about the robbery). They give you a sack of money. The law tracks them down and they are caught. Do you get to keep the stolen money or is it ill gotten gains? I'll answer it for you, no you do not get to keep the stolen money. Obama and Democratic senators feel threatened by the Tea Party types. They send letters and go on the telly and complain about how Tea Partiers are a threat to their ideology and their power base. Unknown to them, their zealous supporters at the IRS, attack Tea Party groups and give free reign to pro Obama groups before the election so Dems have a much better chance of winning the election. In effect the fair election process is corrupted. Whether they knew about it or not, Obama's wins and the wins of many Democrats are ill gotten gains. Should they be able to keep those ill gotten gains or not?. Again, the answer would seem simple for anyone with a moral compass. If they or their campaign folks actually knew about the IRS targeting or guided it, or even influenced it, they should not only lose their jobs, those directly involved should got o jail for conspiracy to corrupt the electoral process. Interestingly enough, according to recent polls, a majority of the folks polled do think Obama knew about it...Mel Mel, I said this in the first note about the IRS thing... that maybe some of the Democrats in the IRS decided to take it on themselves to smack some Tea Party members. After all, they are privy to what they make and some very personal information to decide which party to support. That they do this has what to do with Obama himself? Other thing I said... someone who wants to donate to the Tea Party is going to donate to the Tea Party. Having 50 other Tea Party organizations to donate to is not going to get them more donations, it just divides their money. It's to Obama's BENEFIT that there are MORE Tea Party organizations. Consider, if a TV ad costs $100,000, a small Tea Party Organization with a budget of $50,000 from donations can afford 0 TV commercials. They will spend the same as another small tea party organization to round up donations... to the same people. So they spend 2x more in advertising, to get the same donation dollars. So hypothetically, if there is 1 Tea Party organization in an area, and they spend $20,000 on flyers/mailers/ads to get $100,000 in donations, what happens if a 2nd Tea Party forms in that same area? They both spend $20,000, and might get $50,000 each, or at best $60,000... there's only so many donors and those dying to donate already did. Now what kind of actual candidate help did they render? Almost none... because while the one alone could have bought an ad, the 2 now can't individually... and they are each clawing for their own donors. If they wanted to work together, they wouldn't have formed the 2nd non-profit. So WHY would anyone with a brain stop the Tea Party from forming all the organizations they want? And btw... there's NOTHING that stops them from forming anyway... they just can't get NON-PROFIT status. If they formed to truly help their candidate... they DONATE all their 'income', so they no longer have any, and file regular taxes of zero dollars. Only tea party organizations that want to have PROFIT to protect would need NON-PROFIT status. So the IRS prevented donors like you from getting ripped off. You should be grateful, not pissed. It didn't help Obama in the least. Going to talk about granite on the granite thread so we're not all over the place:P.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 8, 2013 19:10:45 GMT -5
as far as "data bases" of people and info goes....google is tops. amazon youtube sprint at-t and gov of course the gov have hacked them all..wink...kev. The Gov't already has us all hacked. Social Security, IRS tax filings, Drivers License, Passport. They know who we are, where we are, what we do, when we do it, what we make while doing it. You were worried about privacy? For what? We've never had privacy from the US government from birth to grave:).
|
|
|
Post by cpdad on Jun 8, 2013 19:52:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 8, 2013 20:09:16 GMT -5
What do you mean why do they want to know what ski's you buy? They want to SELL YOU the ski's. Once you BUY them, their ad WORKED and they want to place MORE ads.
Why do you think you watched TV commercials before the internet? Ads pay for the shows. No ads, no shows, you can buy DVD or back then, VCR, or go pay $10 to go see a movie. Nothing in life is free.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 8, 2013 20:45:01 GMT -5
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Jun 8, 2013 21:25:46 GMT -5
*L* Yeah, as with all things Obama, first it gets leaked, his administration gets caught with their pants down, then he claims his administration is transparent cause we can see the asses showing *L*. Wow, what openness.....Mel
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 8, 2013 21:56:07 GMT -5
Well, you may have something there. Maybe they DID leak it so they can then release it to claim credit for openness. That kind of deviousness doesn't seem unlikely.
|
|