Robert Ariail by Robert Ariail

Robert Ariail

Comments (15) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. mrs1wing

    mrs1wing GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Then,“technically”, he’s not being Presidential…

  2. ossiningaling

    ossiningaling said, over 3 years ago

    “Zat is not my dog.”

  3. neuturn

    neuturn said, over 3 years ago

    Do you know what his job is? Because he sure doesn’t. Ask him, he’ll tell he doesn’t know and found out only when you told him because his Administration won’t let him know when there are problems. I don’t understand why people are trying so hard to protect a President who is so derelict in his job. How many people would be able to keep a job if all of this was happening under their watch? Whether or not he is responsible for the problem, it is his job to know what is happening in the country and abroad. Especially if someone close to him knows about it.

  4. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 3 years ago

    Mr. Obama seems to enjoy being a ‘statesman". He’s driving the car, though Congress may not let him go the direction or speed he wants, and he enjoys driving the car. But every GOOD driver should know how to check oil and transmission fluid, change out fuses, and perform basic maintenance. They also need to know when to take the car in to be more thoroughly inspected.
    This cartoon shows a driver who is barely watching his gas gauge, much less watching for any other problems.
    Was Mr. Obama given “Plausible Deniability” by people who did not tell him what was happening at the IRS or the AP? Did they deliberately leave him ignorant of these abuses of power? Did he ever ask or imply that he WANTED deniability? Why weren’t stronger & more rapid actions taken by those who did know?
    I’ve been “taken for a ride” by a lot of Presidents, but I prefer one who can avoid micro-managing without being kept in the dark.
    Those aren’t his dogs, but they were left in his care, so he needs to deal with them. The longer it takes to attach names to these issues, the worse he looks, and the more damage our ‘car’ takes as it travels without its needed repairs..

  5. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

  6. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    The constitution- which the president swore to uphold and protect – says that congress – both houses in concert – has the job to “levy taxes” (I know I am simplifying). So they did that and collected them for various reasons *without the aid of the IRS until:

    The Civil War, when President Lincoln and Congress, in 1862, created the position of commissioner of Internal Revenue and enacted an income tax to pay war expenses. The income tax was repealed 10 years later. Congress revived the income tax in 1894, but the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional the following year.

    yeah. unconstitutional. LOL

    In 1913, the 16th Amendment gave Congress the authority to enact an income tax. That same year, the first Form 1040 appeared after Congress levied a 1 percent tax on net personal incomes above $3,000 with a 6 percent surtax on incomes of more than $500,000.

    In the 50s, the Bureau of Internal Revenue name was changed to the Internal Revenue Service. Only the IRS commissioner and chief counsel are selected by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

    So understanding THAT (from the IRS web site), you should understand that anyone appointed by the president to head up a department reports to the president so the president is then the one in charge.

    Yeah, I know, he can’t know everything in such a huge bureaucracy. Isn’t that the dog-gone point? Isn’t that why the president appoints the head of the departments so that the department head – who has a much smaller bureaucracy to watch – can tell HIM what is going on?

    At the risk of being too wordy, I’ll share an example in industry.

    A regional manager has direct reports to manage – even while he is managed by the corporate office – say the CEO.

    The regional manager’s reports are “district” managers who then supervise the assistant managers, foremen and workers in his district.

    I know – first hand experience – 2 regional managers that lost their job because of the actions taken by a foreman in one of 5 districts in his region. Did he personally instruct that foreman in the job he was to do? No. But, the mess-up lost the company 50K and HE WAS HELD RESPONSIBLE.

    Obama doesn’t even know what HIS direct reports are doing if you believe the BS that he “heard about it on the news” like JQ Public

    THAT si the definition of managerial incompetence..

  7. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 3 years ago

    “……. killing Bin Laden with the training and support his predecessor put in place……”
    Enough time and you’ll actually believe Bush got OBL. Selective memory is a wonderful thing.

  8. neuturn

    neuturn said, over 3 years ago

    Provide information that answer any question you would have if this was going on under a Republican Administration. There are too many unanswered questions. You could not let this go unanswered had it been your family in Benghazi or you were being targeted by the IRS. I am sure you would want things to continue until all information was uncovered. He has not been attempting to protect the Constitution of the USA from what I can see. Yet as I noted, he does not seem to know anything going on. Why do they always say they will investigate yet we never seem to get the full story. It is always the story they want told. I am not saying it would be different under a Republican administration and I would not be protecting the government if this was going on.

  9. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    Ansonia said, “You can read that article and STILL believe the president didn’t know anything?”
    I don’t know what the president knew or didn’t know. But I don’t see anything in the article to suggest that he did know. Here’s the relevant sentence: “The decision was made at the highest levels of the Justice Department, under longstanding regulations that are well within the boundaries of the Constitution.” I take it from this that the authors know or deduce from their experience that Holder knew. That’s all.
    But what I do notice is that you make absolutely no attempt to deal with the argument of the article, which is that the subpoenas were justified and legal.

  10. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    And President Obama could end all wars, solve the climate problem, and put a tofu dog in every pot, and you people would call for his impeachment.

  11. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Bush and Cheney had their rats and dogs go after Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson, sorry, but treason trumps a Fux News created “crisis” when folks claiming taxes are illegal get “checked out” and folks who printed classified information are checked out to try to find their source.

  12. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 3 years ago

    @Respectful Troll

    You do realize that there are some elements right here on these comment boards that would blame President Obama regardless of what he knows or does about ANYTHING. And such are also elements in such media outlets as Fox, and some in Congress as well!.

    I have stated this before, and I will probably have to state it again. There are elements that if President Obama were to come out for the traditional American “Mom and Apple Pie” would then declare motherhood to be somehow unconstitutional, and apple pie to be some kind of a Communist plot to destroy America! To me at least, this is actually a kind of sad commentary on the current state of American politics. And knowing your own moderate views, I think you would agree!!

  13. omQ R

    omQ R said, over 3 years ago

    claimed: "The yellowcake story WAS true. When the final report came out, it showed that Wilson was not telling the truth. The Brits stand behind that. "

    Do they now. Prove it. Show us the “final report”. :-|

    …also claimed: "Before going in, the UN agreed that Saddam didn’t offer adequate proof that he destroyed them. "

    Er, “agreed”? With what did it agree? Please expound. Prove it. Show us this “UN agreement.” :-|

    also said: “You need to educate yourself about Plame.
    Bush didn’t out her.”

    I find it interesting the partisan arguments flying and forth on this forum. Any scandal witin the opposition’s camp is that president’s fault. If your own side’s president’s administration presided over another scandal, it is the administration, some official, that is the real culprit. If the scandal is on the other side, their president is personally responsible.
    I read the comments about the current IRS & AP stories and I see the current US president’s name being bandied back & forth as if he was personally responsible for these investigations. I don’t care either way; I’m just interested in how the mud sticks.
    Bush didn’t personally out Plame, but someone in his administration did, so it has become “Bush outed Plame”.
    But then you counter David’s statement "“You will note that there is zero evidence that Presidnet Obama was responsible for this”
    You replied: “”There probably never will be. Some underling will take the fall for him.“

    Riiiight. Prove it.

    also claimed ”History will judge Obama as an “asterisk president.”

    That means that there will be an asterisk by his name to indicate that he won his re-election by illicit means."

    Oh? Now his re-election was illicit? sigh Prove it

    Interesting. Your politics is a far more better sideshow than others’.

  14. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 3 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    You are correct Mr. Landers,
    The tribal hostilities between the parties have made any comments of unity and bipartisanship from the capital seem farcical.
    ConserveGov rightly pointed out the other day how many of the tactics being used by Republicans were first introduced by Dems. He suggested that paybacks are a bitch. I could not disagree.
    Geo. Washington warned us of this tribalism between parties. I can’t remember if it was Washington, Jefferson, or Adams who warned about letting monied interests have too much influence in gov’t. The founders saw where we have arrived, and did what they could to warn us.
    Have you ever heard the Thomas Jefferson Hour? They recently began archiving their shows so you can listen to them at your leisure.
    If you listen, let me know what you think.

  15. neuturn

    neuturn said, over 3 years ago

    It is easy to not have things attached to ones hands, it can be a wink and nod while saying if I don’t know what you do I can’t be held responsible. We all know from different media spots that Obama and many others had suggested it would be the right thing to make sure the Tea Party was check into because of their movement. As far as radical hate, I would say it starts in the Democrats court because of there desire to have total control of who gets money. The republicans want controlled spending and common sense laws that follow the constitution. Why not get behind the investigations and get to the bottom of things then move on. There has been stone walling from this Administration all along the way. You can’t say that these investigations are not warranted, it is not a biased request. You have information that memos were altered, requests for support/protection went unanswered along with the military being told to stand down. There is evidence that the Administration went above the law in their quest for uncovering a leak, just how far above the law is what they are looking at. There is more than enough evidence to prosecute many of those involved in the IRS scandal.

  16. Refresh Comments.