Fast and Furious: Big Deal? Or Tempest in a Teapot?

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Foxfyre, Aug 23, 2012.

?

What is your opinion of the Fast and Furious scandal?

  1. Much ado about nothing.

    3 vote(s)
    50.0%
  2. Big deal.

    3 vote(s)
    50.0%
  3. Never heard of it.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. Other (I'll explain in my post.)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    47,645
    Thanks Received:
    10,770
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +14,346
    Among other ministries, our church has adopted an orphanage located in one of the toughest areas of Juarez, Mexico. From time to time we load a truck or van with foodstuffs and other items for the orphanage, and send it down to Juarez to help out at much as we can. Those driving the van/truck and also the staff at the orphanage take the violent drug cartels and the resulting almost daily mayhem very seriously.

    So when a government initiative dubbed "Fast and Furious" was thrust into the forefront when an American border guard was murdered, supposedly with guns furnished by the United States (?), the family of the guard demanded answers, that have yet to be forthcoming, and some media attention was generated.

    The controversy has resulted in a bi-partisan Congressional panel holding Eric Holder, Attorney General, in contempt of Congress. This is the first time in our history that a sitting A.G. has been held in such contempt.

    So what do you think? Much ado about nothing? Or should this be considered a really big deal?

    Some facts compiled by the NRA Legislative Action Committee offered without comment regarding their accuracy:

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    47,645
    Thanks Received:
    10,770
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +14,346
    Some recent information re the impending legislation that is of interest, though I acknowledge I am taking it from a substantially biased source. Any legitimate rebuttal is welcomed.

     
  3. Vidi
    Offline

    Vidi CDZ prohibited

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,869
    Thanks Received:
    342
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Ratings:
    +343
    Its a big deal...NOT for the reasons the righties like to throw out there though.

    Its a big deal because YES, there were two programs similar that were run during the Bush years , but they were abject failures and canceled.

    Its was sheer arrogance on the part of the DOJ to reinstate failed programs with less safety controls in place than the previous attempts at this tactic.

    If Obama knew or not is up for debate. I choose to believe that neither he nor Bush were made aware of the programs until after the failures themselves.

    I also dispute the fact sheet you posted. I find it to be fast and furious with both context and facts and highly partisan. Some of it is true, other parts are half truths or pure speculation and others blatant lies.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    47,645
    Thanks Received:
    10,770
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +14,346
    I'll admit I haven't spent a lot of time delving into this particular issue so I'm still working on getting up to speed here.

    Which on that list do you consider half truths and which are lies? And why or how?

    And couldn't Obama have simple ordered Holder to turn over the documents the panel requested?
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2012
  5. logical4u
    Offline

    logical4u citizen

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    6,111
    Thanks Received:
    543
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Georgia
    Ratings:
    +543
    Obama said his plan is working, I guess he will be sending more guns to the drug cartels! Vote for him if you want to see the middle class to continue decreasing, and those on welfare and food stamps to increase!
     
  6. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    there is a reason your party dropped this like it was hot edited
     
  7. Vidi
    Offline

    Vidi CDZ prohibited

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,869
    Thanks Received:
    342
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Ratings:
    +343

    well I did spend a lot of time on it when it first hit the news. I could even rattle off all the specific dates for a couple weeks hehe.

    so lets go through them quick

    Lets start with every time it says Obama's in the possessive. When I speak about the previous two operations I always say "During the Bush Years.." Never do I say "Bushs ATF" or "The Bush administration" The reason for this is these operations were conducted by non political federal employees ( ATF agents ) NOT the executive branch.

    So any time I see Obama's ATF or The Obama administration in that fact sheet, I know already that its pushing blame that it cant prove.

    1 & 3 are partisan nonsense, 4 uses inflammatory language to make requesting cooperation sound draconian, cant speak to 5 but I can say it uses the blame language I described above, 6 is a blatant lie as it assumes without evidence that the entire purpose of Fast and Furious was to push a gun control issue, 7 simply restates 6 in a different way and thus is just as invalid, 8 is a flat out lie, Holder turned over more than 9000 documents in the multiple times he was "requested" to testify. Each time he did, they asked for more and different ones. It wasn't until Obama invoked executive privilege that Holder refused anything, 9 is half true, Obama DID exert executive privilege, but to use the words "conceal " is inflammatory. I could use the words "protect" and be just as accurate as that statement. 10 is absolutely true...but in my opinion fails to mention that they held him in contempt for Obamas actions which negates the entire thing.


    All that being said, the Fast and Furious debacle is one of the three things that I consider Obama failures that merit legitimate criticizism. The problem is, the Right is harping on the wrong aspects and thus invalidating their argument.

    Oh and before anyone says Bush Started it...thats BULLSHIT!...The last operation during the Bush years was officially ended a full TWO YEARS before Fast and Furious went into operation. It is NOT a Bush era program.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2012
  8. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    47,645
    Thanks Received:
    10,770
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +14,346
    Like Vidi, I don't know whether Obama was involved in or knew about the program, but he does seem to be protecting Holder.

    And lets keep this focused on Fast and Furious and related issues please. We'll deal with a declining middle class and the entitlement class in separate threads.
     
  9. Foxfyre
    Offline

    Foxfyre Eternal optimist Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    47,645
    Thanks Received:
    10,770
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Desert Southwest USA
    Ratings:
    +14,346
    So with the exception of No. 8, your primary objection is the language or implications rather than with the substance of the statements? Language and implication do not make something a lie. I don't doubt the statements include some partisan bias, but I don't really care why you don't like how the statement is worded. I want to know why or how the statement is a lie. (Anybody under the authority of the President can legitimately be referred to as related to his administration.)

    As for No. 8, how do you know that Holder turned over what was asked of him.? I'm sure any government agency could turn over thousands and thousands of documents to a Congressional committee without ever proviiding so much as a post-it-note directly related to the specific information requested by that committee.
     
  10. Vidi
    Offline

    Vidi CDZ prohibited

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,869
    Thanks Received:
    342
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Ratings:
    +343

    Agreed.

    i think its important to note however that your "fact"sheet comes from the NRA.

    While I am a member of the NRA, I have considered withdrawing my support from them as I feel they have become far too partisan and radical reactionary the last several years which has removed them from my own personal "reliable source" list.

    Up to you if you feel otherwise.
     

Share This Page