Show of HandsShow of Hands


Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
MrMilkdud June 4th, 2014 4:00pm

Assume each new scandal presented by Obama's administration is regarded as a unit of time. Anything more than 3 scandals old is regarded by the administration as ancient history. Anyone still talking about ancient history is dismissed as irrelevant.

agree disagree
5 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

smatsspats
06/05/14 12:12 pm

Hmmm how many scandals has Obama been involved in. I can think of 2 in the past month or so...

Reply
sdbrev210 The Pursuit of Happiness
06/05/14 3:37 am

Dude, that was, like, two years ago.

Reply
TomLaney1 Jesus is Lord
06/04/14 9:11 pm

Soooo true.

Reply
blitz6799 Chicagoland
06/04/14 7:38 pm

My only issue is I feel like the premise is being made only or this administration, this is undoubtedly not the case. News cycle? That's my guess.

Reply
geoag02 Dallas, TX
06/05/14 7:36 am

I think it is just more apparent with this administration due to the quantity of scandals it has had. We haven't had this many data points this close to each other before.

RJ1969 SoCal
06/04/14 11:11 am

Focus on the scandal du jour correlates precisely with the number of web hits reporting news outlets get on their webpages. Please don't forget that YOU are the customer. They're giving the public what they want...that's part of their business.

Reply
RJ1969 SoCal
06/04/14 11:12 am

You can believe me or not, but I guarantee you that if there is ANYTHING illegal or that he can be prosecuted for, congress will waste no time. It will be done as fast as possible.

DamageInc California
06/04/14 10:18 am

I wonder if this tactic would work with my wife. Honey, I made that mistake over three mistakes ago, it's old news and irrelevant now.

Reply
political Georgia
06/04/14 10:22 am

No

MrMilkdud
06/04/14 10:35 am

Technically, you'd be saying "honey I made that mistake 3 mistakes ago! Why are you still going on about it!"

presrvd Phoenix
06/05/14 6:57 pm

I say give it a try. If we don't here back from you in a month, we'll alert the authorities. =P

DamageInc California
06/06/14 9:06 pm

Okay. Three months from today; if you don't see any posts from me have them look in the back yard behind the bushes.

political Georgia
06/04/14 10:08 am

Mr. liar in chief needs to resign.

Reply
chickencookie Be my valentine
06/04/14 10:20 am

And notice he is conveniently out of the country this week

political Georgia
06/04/14 10:21 am

Did he leave on a plane that runs off of CO2?

chickencookie Be my valentine
06/04/14 10:39 am

Loaded up with a lot of hot air

RJ1969 SoCal
06/04/14 11:22 am

You know those international meetings are planned months out, right?

smatsspats
06/05/14 12:13 pm

Yup

ladyniner81 extremists are a cancer
06/05/14 6:10 pm

Screw that, he needs to get rid of Holder. I wish he could fire Reid but..

RJ1969 SoCal
06/04/14 9:40 am

Strangely, these scandals come and go at the exact same rate as news cycles. Hmmmm, I wonder....

Reply
MrMilkdud
06/04/14 9:44 am

I agree that they tend to work together well.

think4yourself Not a safe space
06/04/14 9:19 am

That is a tactic well played by this administration. If they can stonewall long enough they can make it "old news".

Reply
chickencookie Be my valentine
06/04/14 9:19 am

Okay so as I have said many times here I don't know procedures. What is the protocol when a pRresudent (writing on purpose) breaks constitutional laws, lies to the American public, sides with the enemy and hates the military? Even very liberal

Reply
chickencookie Be my valentine
06/04/14 9:22 am

Lawyers from liberal universities are saying from a constitutional view (and without bias) that he is breaking laws. What can be done to him to be found guilty of anything? Is it congress, a special committee or Holder?

RJ1969 SoCal
06/04/14 9:56 am

If <--- key word If the law would be held up as constitutional, rest assured that congress will waster no time whatsoever with impeachment proceedings. My guess (as a non-lawyer) is that this will be like all of the other "laws he broke" that

RJ1969 SoCal
06/04/14 9:56 am

congress wasn't going to try and fight in court because it was a lost cause.