Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rachel Maddow actually showed the language of the criteria used to target these groups.
Seems like this "scandal" is already dead in the water. Liberal groups were targeted as well, but no one is talking about it because Liberal groups didnt complain.
How many liberal groups seeking non-profit status have Tea Party as part of their blurb, just out of curiosity?
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,552 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1
How many liberal groups seeking non-profit status have Tea Party as part of their blurb, just out of curiosity?
72 out of 298.
well, if there were 298 groups total, and only 101 of them define themselves as conservatives, i would say a pretty large chunk of the 197 left are liberal.
Rachel Maddow actually showed the language of the criteria used to target these groups.
Seems like this "scandal" is already dead in the water. Liberal groups were targeted as well, but no one is talking about it because Liberal groups didnt complain.
You are embarrassing yourself. Take one quick look at the Google headlines, this is no where close to dead.
No one but you and Rachel Maddow are saying this was bipartisan. Every news outlet, including the NYT, admits they were targeting conservative groups. And reports tonight said the current and past heads of the IRS were aware of the targeting, but lied and/or avoided questions from Congress about this issue. This is not going away anytime soon, no matter how much you and Maddow wish it was.
Government is an evil, a necessary evil, and only acceptable when limited to (a) securing rights and (b) governing those who consent. Since big nasty marauders will beat the snot out of little folks, take their property and leave them to suffer, there had to be some remedy.
The remedy : cooperation in the mutual defense of person and property. As the Romans taught their children, via the fasces, even weak sticks become unbreakable when bundled together, united. It is one of the better ways to defend harmless productive people from harmful predatory people - until the predators infiltrate and take over the government - like now.
Consolidation of power, in the hands of a few or the one, is something to view with suspicion. Outside of securing rights, government needs consent of the governed to act. When it can ignore consent of the people, and attacks the rights of the people, the government and its officers become rogue predators instead of honorable protectors.
Distribution of powers, barred by strict limitations, and restrained by checks and balances, were the means by which the Founders thought to fashion a government that would serve the people best. However, no one imagined that institutionalized ignorance and propaganda would erase the memory of the American people. But all it took was a crisis, an appeal to their greed, and to pander to their vices, to corrupt an American generation and the three following. Now, millions believe it just to use the force of government to take from one to give to another, and to compel one to labor for the benefit of another. Ironically, they have embraced voluntary slavery, without questioning how and when they gave consent.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,552 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6039
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentwoodgirl
You are embarrassing yourself. Take one quick look at the Google headlines, this is no where close to dead.
No one but you and Rachel Maddow are saying this was bipartisan. Every news outlet, including the NYT, admits they were targeting conservative groups. And reports tonight said the current and past heads of the IRS were aware of the targeting, but lied and/or avoided questions from Congress about this issue. This is not going away anytime soon, no matter how much you and Maddow wish it was.
the google headlines are just that, headlines. You ever read the context of the articles with those head lines ?
only 101 of the 298 groups even identify themselves as Conservative.
The past heads of the IRS were Bush appointees,so you are saying Republicans targeted Republican groups.
Don't you think for a second that Valerie Jarrett wasn't apprised of the IRS' actions. She's the President's buffer....the one and only way to keep Barack Obama insulated in ways that Richard Nixon failed to do. Not a doubt in my mind that Obama was at least informed of what was going on. Valerie Jarrett is the key to unlocking this saga. All roads to Obama go through her.
You mean, name five leftist/democratic non-profit groups that have been in the news crying about being audited in the last five years, then you are right, I can't do that because people or groups getting audited isn't news worthy because people get audited every year.
i don't like the irs any more than the rest of you.
But all of this 501c3/501c4 stuff is bogus from the word go, and i doubt that many posting here even understand what those paragraphs in the tax code mean.
Overtly political organizations pretending to be apolitical nonprofit "social welfare" groups while funding political advertising, then going to the irs to apply for tax exempt status.
We should all be outraged. The IRS should never have an agenda other than the gathering of legitimate revenue of the federal government.
Um. If a group is seeking tax-exempt status and appears, by it's name, to be political...then yeah, the IRS is working to ensure they are getting ever penny they are entitled to when they double check to see if these groups are legit or not, under that specific tax code.
The only reason the IRS is even apologizing is simply political and PR. They did absolutely nothing inappropriate!!
How is this any different than the IRS flagging those for audit who claim the home office deduction? They flag those who are statistically more likely to violate regulations. Those applying for 501c4 status, who have political names, is an obvious red flag.
Since you have no problem with the IRS targeting individuals and organizations, lets expend their scrutiny to including specifically auditing all those who claim to be "Progressives."
After all, when the Secretary of the Treasury is both a Progressive and a known tax cheat, one has to wonder how many other Progressives are avoiding paying taxes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
