Obama fires Inspector General for doing his job

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
T'wouldn't be so pathetic if not from the standpoint of so obvious a personal vendetta she [he,they,it] has for the President (and I say "the President" instead of Obama quite deliberately here as it is undoubtedly a reality that will forever stick in her craw).

Mister B., having only joined this year would perhaps not know that the o.p. was allegedly a Democratic supporter, but only of Hillary Clinton, apparently. The subsequent nomination of Obama resulted in a tirade of mischaracterizations and venom to the point that she...they preferred supporting a candidate and a party that had little or nothing to offer to one of her alleged "loyalties".

Which causes me to wonder what is the point to all of what she's offered since. Certainly this person doesn't think that the discrediting of Obama will somehow result in a Hillary Clinton nomination come next election, or the party nomination of someone other than the incumbent. Obama's failure can only result in a Republican presidency.

And if that's fine with her (and those like her) then I figure she couldn't have ever really been a Hillary supporter in the first place.

And that's putting it nicely.
Being that I was one of the other Hillary supporters on this board, I was also somewhat critical on Obama during the primary and at moments even sided with the "entity" on some arguments. Of course, once Hillary lost (as b.c. said), the "entity" has done nothing but spew a long series of fact distorting hate threads against anything that remotely shows Obama in a positive light. Eighteen months later, and nothing has changed.

It's pretty apparent that the "entity" is desperately clinging to staying anonymous. That way, it can deny whatever affiliation or title you lob at its general direction. It never unveiled who it voted for in the actual election, while condemning other Democrats on this board who didn't jump ship once Clinton lost the nomination and praised Sarah Palin as if she was the second coming of Christ. It has started more anti-Obama threads than any other person on LPSG. Many of the outside sources the "entity" used to echo her disdain for the current administration ranged from a variety of conservative & neocon blogs, heavily politically slanted news periodicals... even some known white supremacists sites.

On the surface, it may seem as if the Politics boards is an extension of the Hatfields and the McCoys... at least, that is what people on the fringe (like the "entity") would like for you to believe. In reality, there's a major grey area where most people dwell. Even I, one of the most hated "libtards" on this board by various other unknown "entities" on this board, linger somewhere in the middle on certain issues, although I'm driven by my strong convictions for civil rights. That keeps me leaning more to the left than anything else. Alas, if the "entity" had its way with passing out labels, I'd be another one of those "blind Obama apologists". But I digress...

I sincerely hope that nobody here falls for the facade the "entity" portrays around here. Even though it may type in a tone that seems so aware and respectful, the more you analyze its overall actions you'd see that its overall motivation is absolutely vile. Something this dishonest deserves all of the scrutiny, chastising and scorn it gets from people around here.

:nono::nono::nono: Attacking me for presenting the facts of what Obama and his administration have done in this matter only serves to demonstrate just how much you both are Obamabots.

And you spend time questioning my support of Hillary Clinton when the issue is how Obama's White House got caught lying and changing their story after they fired an Inspector General doing his job for political reasons - specifically to protect a political ally that admitted to misusing Stimulus funds and tainted the Americorp Program, when you should be posting that Obama handled this inappropriately.

Instead we have Vinyl who never comprehends what he reads and can't make a decent argument even if he did, attacking the victims of an Americorp program and man who was trying to help them - all in the name of protecting Obama by throwing up smoke screens.

Attacking me only shows what a stain this is on Obama's administration...it's not only not explanable (the White House couldn't get it's story straight) it is indefensible.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Thanks for the morning laughs, Trannity!!!

:nono::nono::nono: Attacking me for presenting the facts

YAWN... there's no "O" in the word facts. However, I'm sure there's something just as hollow in your skull.

of what Obama and his administration have done in this matter only serves to demonstrate just how much you both are Obamabots.

Bitch, please. You still think I'm here trying to defend Obama? LOL!!! I was right when I said you look at my statements and only think "LIBERAL! OBAMA LOVER! ATTACK!". Again, all I'm looking at right now is the actions of Walpin and Johnson. YOU'RE the one trying to make this about Obama.

And you spend time questioning my support of Hillary Clinton

Because you're a fraud.

when my issue...

Fixed that for ya... :rolleyes:

...is how Obama's White House got caught lying and changing their story after they fired an Inspector General doing his job for political reasons - specifically to protect a political ally that admitted to misusing Stimulus funds and tainted the Americorp Program, when you should be posting that Obama handled this inappropriately.

Yeah, we already know you think Obama is the boogeyman. Tell us something we don't know, troll?

Instead we have Vinyl who never comprehends what he reads

Sit, Ubu, sit... Good dog! :rolleyes:

and can't make a decent argument even if he did, attacking the victims of an Americorp program and man who was trying to help them - all in the name of protecting Obama by throwing up smoke screens.

WTF? AmeriCoprs are the victims? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Last time I checked, it wasn't anyone from AmeriCorps that was under investigation, nor were any of their employees attacked or fired. All we know is that grant money that they provided to St. Hope Academy was going to educational programs sponsored by CUNY and Walpin did not agree with that. The so-called "sex scandal" is a nice deflection from that very fact. Your Neo-conservatardism shines through once again. And you wonder why I dare to question your so-called alliance with Hillary Clinton?

Keep talking, fraud... you're just putting your ass out there for more to laugh at.

Attacking me only shows what a stain this is on Obama's administration...it's not only not explanable (the White House couldn't get it's story straight) it is indefensible.

I actually do it because not only is it necessary for us to expose you as the sham that you are, it's actually quite fun to watch you squirm. Every attack you've tried to make on your opponents are geared to be some kind of a character degrading one. Watching you even try to judge me on my views surrounding sexual assault and for taking a stance against yours in a political thread, knowing full well you're too chicken shit and unpopular to be honest with yourself, is the height of hypocrisy. Usually, some people would cave in to your carefully scripted words of pseudo-shame and moralistic banter. Too bad for you I don't really give a damn if someone thinks I'm a little rowdy, raunchy or vulgar around here. It still doesn't take away from my overall message... that is, unless, you're just a shrew who is put off by dirty words. But if that was the case, would you have contributed close to 2000 posts on a site about big dicks? HMMMMMMMMMM....

So what's next, Trannifraud? Another 10 lines of moralistic bullshit? More evidence that you don't know how to fuckin' read by saying I'm trying to defend Obama when you've actually mentioned him more than I have? Still think the corporations are the "victims" here? Please, make it a doozy... do your best! Because I know it'll be even worse than what you've already let spew out of your cantankerous mind already.
 
Last edited:

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
Thanks for the morning laughs, Trannity!!!



YAWN... there's no "O" in the word facts. However, I'm sure there's something just as hollow in your skull.



Bitch, please. You still think I'm here trying to defend Obama? LOL!!! I was right when I said you look at my statements and only think "LIBERAL! OBAMA LOVER! ATTACK!". Again, all I'm looking at right now is the actions of Walpin and Johnson. YOU'RE the one trying to make this about Obama.



Because you're a fraud.



Fixed that for ya... :rolleyes:



Yeah, we already know you think Obama is the boogeyman. Tell us something we don't know, troll?



Sit, Ubu, sit... Good dog! :rolleyes:



WTF? AmeriCoprs are the victims? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Last time I checked, it wasn't anyone from AmeriCorps that was under investigation, nor were any of their employees attacked or fired. All we know is that grant money that they provided to St. Hope Academy was going to educational programs sponsored by CUNY and Walpin did not agree with that. The so-called "sex scandal" is a nice deflection from that very fact. Your Neo-conservatardism shines through once again. And you wonder why I dare to question your so-called alliance with Hillary Clinton?

Keep talking, fraud... you're just putting your ass out there for more to laugh at.



I actually do it because not only is it necessary for us to expose you as the sham that you are, it's actually quite fun to watch you squirm. Every attack you've tried to make on your opponents are geared to be some kind of a character degrading one. Watching you even try to judge me on my views surrounding sexual assault and for taking a stance against yours in a political thread, knowing full well you're too chicken shit and unpopular to be honest with yourself, is the height of hypocrisy. Usually, some people would cave in to your carefully scripted words of pseudo-shame and moralistic banter. Too bad for you I don't really give a damn if someone thinks I'm a little rowdy, raunchy or vulgar around here. It still doesn't take away from my overall message... that is, unless, you're just a shrew who is put off by dirty words. But if that was the case, would you have contributed close to 2000 posts on a site about big dicks? HMMMMMMMMMM....

So what's next, Trannifraud? Another 10 lines of moralistic bullshit? More evidence that you don't know how to fuckin' read by saying I'm trying to defend Obama when you've actually mentioned him more than I have? Still think the corporations are the "victims" here? Please, make it a doozy... do your best! Because I know it'll be even worse than what you've already let spew out of your cantankerous mind already.

Attacking me doesn't work. Name calling and filthy language only makes you look ignorant. And you still can't keep up in a discussion, can't comprehend basic information or demonstrate the ability to make a quality argument. :rolleyes:
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Attacking me doesn't work.

That's what you think. The rest of us are having a blast!
You act as if I'm here to enlighten you or change your mind. I don't go on suicide missions. I'm here to counter your nonsense with more objective insight for other people to read and decide for THEMSELVES, and despite your inability to notice it's working. If what I said was as irrelevant as you say, then why are you still arguing with me days later? Don't answer that... we don't need to read another lie disbursed from your venomous hole. :rolleyes:

Name calling and filthy language only makes you look ignorant.

I guess you missed the part where I told you how I didn't give a damn what you thought of me. Oh well. :rolleyes:

I do it because I know it puts you off, and you're such the tool to fall for it every single time. For some strange reason, you think nobody that talks with a foul mouth could ever have anything good to say. What a stupid way to think. If that's the case, then I hope you don't listen to or even agree with anything that comes out of the mouths of people like George Carlin, Dennis Miller, Lewis Black, or many other politically aware celebrities who have no problem getting a little raunchy when necessary. Because then I would have proven you to be a hypocrite AGAIN. Seriously, Trannitroll, you make this WAY too easy.

Somewhere between Romper and Room, you forgot that this is a penis site, Mary... not a High School or College debate. Not only am I getting my points across to the people that matter to me (and as you can plainly see, I don't give a fuck about you), but your constant ad-nauseam attempts to dismiss posts because it's not worded in a tone you approve of shows how much of a coward and a fraud you really are. Seriously, is that the best you got? Your adversary gets a little raw and al you can do is act as if you're above it all, knowing full well that you're not with every response you make in rebuttal that essentially says the same thing that didn't work before?

Wow... you really ARE that easy to manipulate. No wonder you can't show your face around here!!

And you still can't keep up in a discussion, can't comprehend basic information or demonstrate the ability to make a quality argument.

Sit, Ubu, sit... ah, you know the rest. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
No, you scwewy wabbit... this is your Fuddism.

Dis is youw new Ewmew Fudd anthem...keep up youw cawtoon sophomowic antics. Oh, dat scwewy wabbit! ..It is vewy befitting you. :wink:

And don't worry about me, troll... I have a million of 'em. Sadly, if you knew how to fuckin' read, you would have noticed the reference I betrothed to you. However, I'm sure the f-word got your panties/jockstrap in a bunch. Good to know that your comments on your own thread have been reduced to absolutely nothing. I thought we were discussing how you thought Obama was the anti-Christ? Or was it about the almighty Walpin and his holier than thou actions? Or was it about how AmeriCorps were victimized by the EVIL Kevin Johnson? Remind me what your pathetic point was so I can beat on you some more. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
:nono::nono::nono: Attacking me for presenting the facts of what Obama and his administration have done in this matter only serves to demonstrate just how much you both are Obamabots.

And you spend time questioning my support of Hillary Clinton when the issue is how Obama's White House got caught lying and changing their story after they fired an Inspector General doing his job for political reasons - specifically to protect a political ally that admitted to misusing Stimulus funds and tainted the Americorp Program, when you should be posting that Obama handled this inappropriately....

I don't think I could be characterized an "Obamabot" not at least to the degree that one might characterize you an "Anti-Obamabot".

I stated long before the election that I support certain principals and ideas and those whose vision most closely align with those ideas. For example, Republican Joseph Cao, the representative from my particular "neck of the woods" was the sole Republican who had the guts to vote his heart and conscious, with a keen eye on the needs of his constituency, rather than the influence and big bucks of special interest lobbyists. That is why he's getting my vote, next go-round.

I've said here that I'm no supporter of the War in Afghanistan, not any more so than I was/am the one in Iraq. Sometimes support of a particular administration simply boils down to the "best fit" possible.

Which is why I question where you are coming from. I frankly don't give a rat's ass who you voted for last election. Your words here make the answer to that quite apparent, I think. But you, a Hillary supporter?? Maybe not. Just an anti-Obamabot.

Because how can someone who embraced a candidate (Clinton) whose ideology is/was similar to Obama's, be so anti everything proposed by Obama and his administration?
 
Last edited:

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
There were no substantive reasons for Walpin's firing...at least no substantive reasons that the Obama Administration could get straight and have their stuff together on the matter to avoid getting their hands filthy in the seedy cover up of alleged Sexual Abuse of youths, admitted blantant misuse of Taxpayer Stimulus Funds, mismanagement of Americorps programs, cronyism for campaign supporters and feindish political game playing in the Chicago way.

Now...if only Jordan's dismissal somehow diminished the the misconduct of Kevin Johnson with the Americorp program or the his actions with those youths. If only Jordan's dismissal somehow excused the Obama White House from bold face lying and firing Walpin for actually doing his job.

That was a weak move for Obama and his supporters to reach with that Jordan lame dismissal as if it would neutralize the mess that is Kevin Johnson's and Rhee's fiascal and Obama's White House's continued bad behavior and poor decision making.

One more time, instead of doing the right thing...Obama proves more and more he isn't the man he claimed to be.

Below 50% Approval...people are realizing it day by day.

The point of the quoted text was not to argue the basis of the firing (substantive or not) but to point out that past firings have occurred at the discretion of the President on the basis of no reason at all.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
The point of the quoted text was not to argue the basis of the firing (substantive or not) but to point out that past firings have occurred at the discretion of the President on the basis of no reason at all.

You pointed out that Inspector Generals serve under employment -at -will.

That point is irrelevant and an insult to the intelligence of people expecting a great deal more from Obama. :rolleyes: It is irrelevant to the real issue that Obama's Administration fired a man for doing his job, couldn't get their story straight, lied about their actions and protected a reprehensible political crony who admitted misusing Taxpayer Stimulus funds.
 

D_Tintagel_Demondong

Sexy Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Posts
3,928
Media
0
Likes
74
Points
193
:nono::nono::nono: Attacking me for presenting the facts of what Obama and his administration have done in this matter only serves to demonstrate just how much you both are Obamabots.
[...]
Instead we have Vinyl who never comprehends what he reads and can't make a decent argument even if he did
[...]
Attacking me only shows what a stain this is on Obama's administration...it's not only not explanable (the White House couldn't get it's story straight) it is indefensible.

"Attacking" you is indefensible? What about when you attack Vinylboy (highlighted in blue)?
 

Guy-jin

Legendary Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Posts
3,836
Media
3
Likes
1,368
Points
333
Location
San Jose (California, United States)
Sexuality
Asexual
Gender
Male
The topic is Obama fired the Inspector General for doing his job. Join the topic or keep calling ridiculous names that only reveal that you are avoiding the shortcomings of Obama.

For the record, I never called you a "ridiculous name", but you certainly did try to side-step the issue by mentioning Bush when nobody was talking about Bush.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
"Attacking" you is indefensible? What about when you attack Vinylboy (highlighted in blue)?

At that point, they think they're speaking holy doctrine so they don't think about it. You know, because in order to be someone who understands topic that are cleverly worded to become another Obama smear thread you have to see things their way. :rolleyes:

Kinda funny how some entities who consider themselves to be "informed" won't even analyze intimate details of the the person who claimed they were fired for supposedly "doing their job". No comments about what Walpin's motives were when he suggested that AmeriCorp money was not being used properly after it was exposed that it was being used to fund educational programs sponsored by CUNY. No comments as to why the U.S. Attorney found Walpin's actions to be inappropriate. Instead, the entity would rather assume that Walpin was the perfect, morally superior politician who was just doing his duty by probing into Johnson's past, trying to rekindle discussions about sexual misconduct cases where no charges were made and the accuser recanted her story. Instead of focusing on the money trail, because we ALL know politicians only react when money is involved, the "entity" wants to make this political story more like a TMZ brief. But I digress...

These "anonymous" people have been calling me names for quite some time now. MANY moons ago I tried to be civil, but the more I was the more they got nasty. That's why I'm the bitch that I am on this board sometimes. If they want to stereotype, label and chastise people for their beliefs, I can do it too... and I'll guarantee that they will not like what I come up with.
 

Trinity

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Posts
2,680
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
181
Gender
Female
Who said anything about Bush?
I did.
Maybe you should join the rest of us here in 2009, dude.
You guys can talk all day about what Bush did...recognize the terrible mistakes of Obama and his Administration in this matter.

Or, at the very least, make an effort to stay on topic. That topic being, apparently, anti-Obama right-wing nut-job verbal masturbation.
The topic is Obama fired an Inspector General for doing his job. You refuse to acknowlege the topic when it involves mistakes and shortcomings of Barack Obama and his Administration.
For the record, I never called you a "ridiculous name"
I'm not an anti-Obama right-wing nut job...nor am I a dude.

"Attacking" you is indefensible? What about when you attack Vinylboy (highlighted in blue)?
Actually I was talking about the Obama's Administration's lying and changing their story, protecting a political ally that admitted to misusing Stimulus funds and allegedly committed a sexual crime against youth, coerced and bribed the victim to recant and then fired an Inspector General for uncovering the wrong doing and refusing to sweep the wrong doing under the rug...that was indefensible.

And when I referred to attacking me, I was referring to the numerous posts that start talking about me, questioning my politics, name calling and discussing anything but the facts that show the Obama White House couldn't get their story straight and then lied to do a political favor and to protect the Stimulus from looking bad.

At that point, they think they're speaking holy doctrine so they don't think about it. You know, because in order to be someone who understands topic that are cleverly worded to become another Obama smear thread you have to see things their way.

You can't smear someone with the truth. :rolleyes:

But I digress...

Your brain is a digression. :rolleyes: What really happened in this matter has been clearly demonstrated by the facts and backed up in the articles presented. It has been clearly pointed out to you that the Obama Administration played damage control and brought shame to the Obama Administration by protecting an undeserved political ally in Kevin Johnson. Their damage control entailed attempting to down play misuse of Stimulus funds by firing the Inspector General who's investigation would shine a light on the corruption in Stimulus spending and potentially bring down an Obama Supporter.

Walpin was cleared of any wrong doing in doing his job.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
This is getting tiresome. Time to get rid of the metaphorical prose and get right to the point.

If you're going to accept the fact that Walpin was cleared of his controversy despite the circumstances surrounding him and testimony given by the U.S. Attorney, then you must accept that Johnson was cleared as well given that no charges were given, the accuser's story was recanted and the case was CLOSED. Otherwise, admit that you're a fuckin' hypocrite who can't look at the issues down the middle.

Ironically, we already know what you're going to say... but for shits and giggles, do the honors of repeating yourself like an ass so we can laugh at you once again.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
325
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
VB: today's GOP derives most of its succor from victimization and martyrdom. In their alternate universe Walpin is a hero and Palin is the messiah.