Thing is, I don’t think Obama is really in charge. I believe the Democrats have built some sort of politburo somewhere that is setting the tone of things and clearing decisions through a political lens and not from the position of running a government.

Obama and Holder know nothing about Fast and Furious or AP record confiscation. Obama and Hillary know nothing about Benghazi. Obama knows nothing about the IRS scandal or the coming EPA scandal. Nobody knows anything about anything. They are coming off like they are completely incompetent. But if you buy that, exactly who IS coordinating all of these decisions? You can’t be completely incompetent yet be so consistent on so many ways across so many different parts of the government.

It seems to me that they have quite possibly set up a government within a government of political operatives who are setting the tone on policy decisions. I believe that for the AP confiscation, Obama was advised to spike that football by someone else. I also believe that when that was foiled by the AP going public with the story hours before Obama was to do it, that same group advised DoJ to confiscate the records and retaliate against the leakers. A simple way to tell if that holds water is to look at when the confiscation was ordered. Was it ordered before AP released the story or after? If they were concerned about the leak, they would have ordered the records be obtained when they first learned that the AP had the story. If they were concerned about the political ramifications, they would have ordered the confiscation when AP published the story.

The Benghazi talking points follows the same patter. Who was really looking over the shoulders of the government operators involved? Do we have political operatives who aren’t subject to the same transparency laws calling the shots?

http://www.therightscoop.com/judge-jeanine-pirro-rips-the-obama-administration-in-another-fantastic-monologue/

I would say that the difference between IRS agents and the tax collectors of Jesus’ time was that the ancient tax collectors were basically able to defraud people by demanding more than was owed the government and personally enriching themselves enough to be conspicuously wealthy. We can complain—as I do—about excessive benefits to government employees, but IRS agents are not able to personally enrich themselves the same was as Zacchaeus could. You could say that they join what clearly is to me a corrupt system that abuses its power, but I don’t think that makes them personally corrupt in the same way the ancient tax collectors were.

My aunt recently retired from the IRS. Since then, she has moved back to Minnesota to take care of my grandma, who has mid-stage Alzheimer’s. She is a person of immense love and character, and I think most IRS agents are basically this way, even if they might not quite rise to the level of my aunt.

This may make it sound as if I’m minimizing the IRS scandal. I’m not. I’m actually fuming mad about it and want to see the investigations leave no stone unturned until we have all the answers and know who was responsible. And it does appear to me that a number of IRS employees at various levels were indeed utterly corrupt. As for the Obama administration, I’ll wait to see what the investigations turn up although it would be an understatement to say I don’t trust that they are at all innocent. I do hope though that we as conservatives can separate our appropriate indignation for the IRS and other dysfunctional, corrupt, and bloated bureaucratic government agencies and for the Obama administration from our feelings for decent individuals who happen to work for agencies like the IRS.

It’s amazing how the IRS’s “incompetence” and “not understanding the rules” only manifested itself when dealing with groups that were not committed to Barack Obama and Barack Obama’s agenda.

Which means Barack Pbama and the New York Times are lying.

V the K, seems like once again the Obama team’s excuse for wrongdoing is incompetence.

Amazing that the Times could even buy that excuse. If it was understaffed, as per this post, how did overburdened workers then find the time to craft the questions referenced above — or to expect to have the time to review the answers.

The next time a Leftist insists there is no voter fraud, remind them of the IRS playing politics to get Obama re-elected …

progressive groups
2009 17
2010 21
2011 27

I think ILC and Crosspatch make great points about the scandals still being a moving target. I particularly like Jeff’s suggestion about making it more about liberty vs. tyranny, since that’s a theme that the Tea Party coalesced around in 2009, and it may help to emphasize those themes with these recent examples in mind in the interest of a). winning more converts to our way of thinking, and b). bringing about substantive and worthwhile changes.

I asked the question mainly because after last fall’s election, the way forward still isn’t always evident to me. I know that we must not cede anything to this corrupt administration and its allies on the left, but that is mostly a defensive strategy. The question for me is one of knowing which offensive maneuvers and strategies are most likely to bring about the most positive consequences. The scandals offer a big opportunity to gain ground, but pursuing an overly aggressive strategy might backfire.