Conservative groups have rejected an Internal Revenue Service apology for unjustifiably scrutinizing tax-exempt conservative groups during the 2012 election cycle. The IRS apology has seemingly validated conservatives' fears of politically motivated regulation.
Tea Party Rejects IRS Apology, Republicans Vow Investigation
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 117||05/31/2014|
No, this will be forgotten soon. Who is going to vote based on some IRS investigations? No one cared about all the corrupt shit Bush's administration did, like not hiring DOJ lawyers based on political affiliation.
The Benghazi stuff might have a bigger impact, but only because it could hurt Hillary's run.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 3||05/10/2013|
It was stupid to apologize. TEA SHOULD be scrutinized!
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 4||05/10/2013|
They just want to institute their version of Sharia law. Poke out the eyes of the reviewers is what they are looking for.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 5||05/10/2013|
[quote]The Ds got complacent, vindictive & corrupt and there will be hell to pay.
Huh? I guess "Stop and Frisk" is only good for black youths. I mean, the GOPers are constantly breaking election laws, shouldn't we keep a very close eye on them?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 6||05/10/2013|
Will other Americans get an IRS apology too?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 7||05/10/2013|
Dem here and I just gotta say Dems need to be equally outraged here as Repugs - why? Cause if they can to it to them, and get away with an "apology" they can do it to us.
It's a super-outrageous breach of the contract between the our gov't and ourselves to have a "neutral" executive agency (esp. one with the power of the IRS) targeting groups for extra scrutiny based on their politics. That's not he IRS's job.
Trust me just like the old maxim about the holocaust, if you don't express some outrage over this (even though the targets were lame ass freepers), next time around it will be the gays or the pro-choice groups that get targed when there's a fundie in power.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 9||05/10/2013|
[quote]It was stupid to apologize. TEA SHOULD be scrutinized!
How utterly Nixonian of you
Defending the indefensible is the ultimate sign of stupidity
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 10||05/10/2013|
Anyone liberals who are outraged at this are high-minded but misguided. The fact is that the right wing in this country does not play by any rules that do not benefit it. They will undermine and obstruct in every way possible when it suits them but then cry foul when the tables are turned. Saying that "we should all stand against this despite politics" is a nice sentiment, but is totally unrealistic when you're dealing with today's Republican party. The only thing I'm upset about is that the IRS got caught.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 12||05/10/2013|
You don't think the GOP is compiling a list of liberal groups to tax audit the second they win the white house?
If this is covered up, that's exactly what will happen.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 13||05/10/2013|
not one single tea party or patriot group was denied its tax-exempt status because of this IRS scrutiny. They might have given them a little bit of a hard time but the end result was not investigation-worthy in any way. Nothing happened.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 15||05/10/2013|
Tea party groups are nothing but money machines for people like Jim DeMint that could find no other way to get rich. (real work is beneath people like him).
They should be investigated and stopped. I'm not a big fan of conservatives but I don't think anyone deserves to be conned.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 16||05/10/2013|
[quote]The Rs are (as usual) vindictive & corrupt and there will be hell to pay.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 20||05/11/2013|
Drink your tea, R2.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 24||05/11/2013|
But as far as GOP withholding....didn't they put Ted Kennedy on the no-fly list? Yes, they did.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 27||05/11/2013|
Holder was spying on reporters?!
All of this has helped Republicans prove to the American people that their fantasies in regards to 'evil Barack' are founded.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 30||05/14/2013|
The ACLU has now taken to the airwaves, and has announced that they will be going after the administration for this, saying that this is the stuff of nightmares.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 31||05/14/2013|
Liberal churches were singled out as well.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 34||05/14/2013|
r33, do you have a link?
[quote]The no government no taxes Tea Party is in a snit because the IRS investigated them? What a bunch of whiney little bitches.
I'm going to play devil's advocate here, wouldn't you be upset if liberal groups were being monitored by the IRS? I'm just saying. Let's try to be objective.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 35||05/14/2013|
The IRS went after the NAACP because they deigned to criticize Bush. Where was the outrage then?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 36||05/14/2013|
@R21, R28, R29 - Libertarian Idiot Troll.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 37||05/14/2013|
I am constantly amazed at how democrats, who consider themselves enlightened, refuse to engage in discussions or recognize any ideals held by anyone remotely contrary to their own. It reeks of simple-mindedness. There are always two sides to any argument ladies.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 39||05/14/2013|
Keep asking the question, R36, even though none of the freepers here will touch it.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 40||05/14/2013|
R40, that is my problem with this whole imbroglio
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 41||05/14/2013|
No, idiot at R39, there are not always two sides to every argument.
As for the current dust up - meh.
These Tea Bagger/Patriot groups are political and routinely violate their tax-exempt status requirements. They deserve extra scrutiny and should always get extra scrutiny from the IRS.
Other groups, let's say groups on the left who are political and violate their tax-exempt status, should also always be subject to extra scrutiny.
What alarms me most about this story is that even with additional investigation, these groups were all granted tax-exempt status. That is the real scandal here and the IRS ought to answer for it.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 42||05/14/2013|
Andrea Mitchell said on Morning Joe that this is one of the biggest white house scandals she has ever covered in all her years as a reporter.
I could provide a video clip, but no one here would like the source.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 43||05/14/2013|
Ah, what the hell! Watch it if you want. If not, ignore it.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 44||05/14/2013|
"have seen through Obama's slick rhetoric and realized he is just Bush 3.0."
And I guess the black version is the only one that going to get punished for it?
The Republicans WANTED the President to do this. Just not a black Democratic president. Again, the recurring Republican meme is how Obama is even worse than Bush. But they created and empowered Bush, and when BushCo outed Valerie Plame because she wasn't towing the party line, created no fly lists, held people for months and YEARS at a time without habeus corpus, tortured people and created an ILLEGAL WAR in the name of Halliburton--they barely got a slap in the wrist.
And they've been doing these dirty tricks for DECADES. Oh, but now it's biting them on the ass. And now, something must be done about it because their own dirty tricks are being done to them. Ah, cry me a river.
I have no illusions about Obama being a saint. He ISN'T. But politics has been a dirty game since it's inception, and the Republicans have made it dirtier. And FINALLY, the dirt is sticking to them.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 46||05/14/2013|
You're 95% right. Bush should have been impeached, imprisoned, tried and if found guilty executed for his war crimes against humanity.
A truly patriotic person would support bringing any surviving members of the Reagan, Bush1, Clinton, Bush2 and Obama administrations to court for crimes against humanity, and if found guilty punished by public execution as an example of what happens when you murder millions of innocent people.
Too bad most people are too partisan to endorse such justice since it would mean admitting "their party" was just as evil as the other.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 47||05/14/2013|
The Republicans will go nowhere but to the fundraising bank with this. It is all high dudgeon and cash ans more of the same "get the nigger" attitude.
Benghazi is nothing more than a shot across the prow for Hillary. But the Republicans will nominate another unelectable candidate so it will be EIGHT MORE YEARS OF DEMOCRAT GOVERNANCE!!!
It will rival the Roosevelt years.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 48||05/14/2013|
So they're going to start a war and destroy the economy? YIKES!
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 49||05/14/2013|
Too many "scandals" at once. The public is not interested. Bengazi, IRS and AP-DOJ news not breaking the top 10 of emailed news stories except at Yahoo News which is a conservative haven.
All the American public cares about is the ever shrinking access to the American Dream.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 50||05/14/2013|
Why is the access to the American Dream shrinking, R50?
Could it be because the Federal Reserve and TBTF banks, along with the MegaCorps and Military contractors that control the government are sucking all the money up?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 51||05/14/2013|
R47, it must be so simple to live in your world, in which you can summarily judge every single member of the executive branch to be guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. Everything is so clear, so obvious, so black and white to a person like you. It must be so easy to see things without any sense of nuance at all.
Irony tends to be lost on people with such stark world views, but if you're capable of it, you might realize that you're demonstrating the very binary thinking that you rail against. You, too, have chosen partisanship, but you're a partisan of one.
There's you, the paragon of morality who just happens to advocate the public slaughter of every executive official of the past thirty-two years. And then there's everyone else, who just can't live up to those high moral standards.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 52||05/14/2013|
[quote]The no government no taxes Tea Party is in a snit because the IRS investigated them?
Tea Party groups had to fill out some questionnaires. Hardly an investigation.
Much ado about nothing.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 53||05/14/2013|
[quote] Watch it if you want. If not, ignore it.
A link to Newsbusters? I think I'll ignore it. Whenever stuff like this hits, there are always the posters who insist "...but I'm not a freeper. Honestly, I'm not" while linking to right-wing websites.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 54||05/15/2013|
That must be the sickest, saddest thing I've ever read here.
So, you're defending the murder of millions of people by our masters in Washington, DC?
Please explain why you think that "partisan"? I think both parties have engaged in mass murder of innocent people who posed no harm to them, and that such criminal behavior deserves severe punishment.
You are one sick motherfucking bastard. If they decide to kill your stupid ass with an unmanned drone I will not weep for you.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 55||05/15/2013|
The video is the video, r54.
Don't be such a delicate flower.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 56||05/15/2013|
This is the text at the NEWSBUSTERS link.
President Obama knows he's in trouble when Andrea Mitchell—Andrea Mitchell!—proclaims the IRS and AP scandals to be among "the most outrageous excesses I've seen" in all her years in journalism [which pre-date Watergate]. The strength of Mitchell's statement drew gasps from Scarborough and Brzezinski. Then Ron Fournier, former AP editor now with the National Journal, darkly described the White House being "consumed" if it turns out someone there or in the Obama campaign had been aware of the IRS targeting of conservative groups. It happened on Morning Joe today.
But hey, President Obama still has his hangers-on. Take good old Carl Bernstein. As we reported, on yesterday's Morning Joe Bernstein blathered that he "can't imagine" that President Obama could be involved in the IRS mess. And there was Bernstein again today. When Fournier spoke of consequences of White House or Obama campaign knowledge of the IRS targeting, Bernstein quickly burped out that "we have no evidence of that whatsoever." Joe Scarborough had to remind the former Watergate reporter: "that's why you have investigations. You know that." View the video after the jump.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 57||05/15/2013|
The more I think about what R52 wrote, the sicker I feel.
How many people agree with her?
If I had murdered one person, or even asked someone else to murder someone, let alone murdering millions of innocent people, I would never sleep again. The guilt would eat me alive.
The fact that someone can defend this kind of mass murder turns my stomach. I hope I never meet anyone like you, R52.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 58||05/15/2013|
Huffington Post highlights right wing sites all the time.
Why bother searching for the video some place else just to please r54.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 59||05/15/2013|
POLITICO – Larry Conners, a veteran local news anchor at KMOV Channel 4 in St. Louis, says that the Internal Revenue Service has been targeting him since an April 2012 interview he conducted with President Obama — a fact that he dismissed as coincidence until the recent reports about the IRS targeting conservative groups.
“Shortly after I did my April 2012 interview with President Obama, my wife, friends and some viewers suggested that I might need to watch out for the IRS. I don’t accept ‘conspiracy theories’, but I do know that almost immediately after the interview, the IRS started hammering me,” Connors wrote on his Facebook page late Monday night.
Connors did not specify how the IRS has been “hammering” him. He did not immediately respond to a request for clarification.
According to his account, his questions for Obama touched on the economy and spending but were not exceptional in nature. But following “allegations that the IRS focused on various groups and/or individuals questioning or criticizing government spending, taxes, debt or how the government is run,” Connors now believes there may be a possible connection.
“Can I prove it? At this time, no,” he wrote. “But it is a fact that since that April 2012 interview … the IRS has been pressuring me.”
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 60||05/15/2013|
Oh R2, you can't be so naive as to think this country gives a shit about the tea party or Benghazi.
You're kind of a moron for thinking most sane people are voting based on either.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 61||05/15/2013|
Nate Silver thinks it could resonate in 2014
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 62||05/15/2013|
Hopefully Natey boy is wrong
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 63||05/15/2013|
This thing has special prosecutor written all over it.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 64||05/15/2013|
[quote] This thing has special prosecutor written all over it.
The IRS is SUPPOSED to scrutinize organizations requesting tax-exempt status that are overtly political in nature. And if you have "Tea Party" in your name, then you don't deserve a 501c-ANYTHING exemption, because you are ALL about partisan politics..
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 65||05/15/2013|
Put your politics aside r65.
The IRS can't insist on 2 to 3 yr anal probes for conservative political groups while at the same time giving liberal political groups nothing but the green light.
And that's exactly what the IRS did and that's criminal.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 66||05/15/2013|
No, R66, that is NOT what they did:
[bold] IRS Sent Same Letter to Democrats That Fed Tea Party Row [/bold]
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 67||05/15/2013|
Bullshit R68. Now back to Free Republic with you.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 69||05/15/2013|
I would like to find the people responsible for this at the IRS and kick their asses personally, if only because now those damn demons in the Tea Party are being treated like VICTIMS. Those lowlife, scummy shitbags have been handed a fucking victory because of this and it just makes me fucking sick. And I'm so tired of listening to the media describe them as "anti-government." They are NOT, nor have they ever been, anti-government. They are just ANTI-OBAMA and did not give a flying fuck when W and his overlord Cheney were using the Constitution for toilet paper for two terms straight. Give me a fucking break.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 71||05/15/2013|
Are you just being willfully ignorant 69?
Obama went on TV tonight and announced the resignation of the IRS commissioner.
Said the country has every right to be angry.
The Justice department, led by Holder, has started a criminal investigation.
None of that is bullshit. But, if you wish to live on Fantasy Island, go right ahead.
Will so enjoy seeing your head explode when a special prosecutor is appointed!!
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 72||05/15/2013|
Hillary is behind all of this, not Benghazi but the IRS leak & the AP reporters scandal.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 73||05/15/2013|
Andrea Mitchell is the only reporter who goes home and sucks Wall Street cock. Her opinion, actually sucks more than she does.
And lest we forget, the IRS hated the gay rights movement. And we hated them. They denied us for FUCKING DECADES.
The old IRS building in Hollywood is now the LAGLC. Yes, we bought their fucking building!
Go do something like THAT Tea Tards!
But for now, STFU.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 74||05/15/2013|
THIS is why the IRS investigation will bite Obama in his ass---
Lois Lerner, the senior IRS official at the center of the decision to target tea party groups for burdensome tax scrutiny, signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a shady charity headed by the president’s half-brother that operated illegally for years.
According to the organization’s filings, Lerner approved the foundation’s tax status within a month of filing, an unprecedented timeline that stands in stark contrast to conservative organizations that have been waiting for more than three years, in some cases, for approval.
Lerner also appears to have broken with the norms of tax-exemption approval by granting retroactive tax-exempt status to Malik Obama’s organization.
The National Legal and Policy Center filed an official complaint with the IRS in May 2011 asking why the foundation was being allowed to solicit tax-deductible contributions when it had not even applied for an IRS determination. In a New York Post article dated May 8, 2011, an officer of the foundation admitted, “We haven’t been able to find someone with the expertise” to apply for tax-exempt status.
Nevertheless, a month later, the Barack H. Obama Foundation had flown through the grueling application process. Lerner granted the organization a 501(c) determination and even gave it a retroactive tax exemption dating back to December 2008.
The group’s available paperwork suggests an extremely hurried application and approval process. For example, the group’s 990 filings for 2008 and 2009 were submitted to the IRS on May 30, 2011, and its 2010 filing was submitted on May 23, 2011.
Lerner signed the group’s approval [pdf] on June 26, 2011.
It is illegal to operate for longer than 27 months without an IRS determination and solicit tax-deductible contributions.
The ostensibly Arlington, Va.-based charity was not even registered in Virginia despite the foundation’s website including a donation button that claimed tax-exempt status.
Its president and founder, Abon’go “Roy’ Malik Obama, is Barack Obama’s half-brother and was the best man at his wedding, but he has a checkered past. In addition to running his charity, Malik Obama ran unsuccessfully to be the governor of Siaya County in Kenya. He was accused of being a wife beater and seducing the newest of his twelve wives while she was a 17-year-old school girl.
Sensing something wrong when he and a group of Missouri State students visited Kenya in 2009, Ken Rutherford, winner of the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize for his work on banning landmines, determined that Malik Obama was an “operator” and elected to give a donation of 400 pounds of medical supplies to a local clinic instead.
“We didn’t know what he was going to do with them,” Rutherford told the New York Post in 2011.
It is also not clear what the Barack H. Obama Foundation actually does. Its website claims the organization has built a madrassa and was building a imam’s house but there is no other evidence that the nonprofit was actually helping poor Kenyan children.
“The Obama Foundation raised money on its web page by falsely claiming to be a tax deductible. This bogus charity run by Malik had not even applied and yet subsequently got retroactive tax-deductible status,” Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, told The Daily Caller. Boehm described Malik Obama’s attempt to raise money as constituting “common law fraud and potentially even federal mail fraud.”
Boehm doubted that the charity is doing what it says it’s doing and wondered why the charity was given tax-exempt status so quickly after the evidence of wrongdoing came to light.
“How do you get retroactive tax-exempt status when you haven’t even applied to get it in the first place?” Boehm said.
Lerner continues to draw fire for her handling of the IRS targeting of conservative and citizen groups, but her colleagues have started to defend her, alleging that she behaves “apolitically.”
Larry Noble, who served as general counsel at the FEC from 1987 to 2000, hired a
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 75||05/15/2013|
Obama himself targeted the Koch brothers...
and the fish rots from the head down!
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 76||05/16/2013|
Someone SHOULD target the Koch brothers. With an AR-15.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 77||05/16/2013|
How democratic of you
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 78||05/16/2013|
I'd like to target the Koch brothers with my boot up their asses.
The IRS didn't go far enough with these Tea Party groups. All of their applications should have ben denied.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 79||05/16/2013|
Because they're republicans who give money to conservative organizations?
Does the right get to shoot Warren Buffet?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 80||05/16/2013|
no, R80. Because they are the asshats that bankrolled the whole "Tea Party" movement that is dragging this country through the mud. Because they and their ilk want to take this country back to the days before workers had any rights and protections, and before tehy were able to make a living wage.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 81||05/16/2013|
IRS official in charge during tea party targeting now runs health care office.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 82||05/16/2013|
Completely illegal, r81
And a constitutional lawyer should know that!
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 83||05/16/2013|
I'm not a constitutional lawyer R83. And In was responding to the poster about my previous comment about wishing someone would target the Koch brothers with an AR-15.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 84||05/16/2013|
I was referring to Obama....
you know, the man who's supposed to be some kind of expert on constitutional law.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 85||05/16/2013|
Nobody said a word when The Bush admin was targeting liberals for their 8 year reign of terror. The teatards need to stfu and go away.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 86||05/16/2013|
These people already have a persecution complex. It was shortsighted to give them this kind of ammunition when they had been all but decimated.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 87||05/16/2013|
Chris Matthews is already saying that Obama is responsible for all of it.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 88||05/16/2013|
All political groups should have their applications denied and all political groups who already have the tax exemption should be re-examined with a fucking microscope and have their exemption revoked.
I am sick to death of groups like Crossroads and Organizing for America, who are both obviously political organizations, being given tax-exempt status in clear violation of the law.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 89||05/16/2013|
Nah, R87. The teahadists need to be called out and scrutinized more, in all walks of life. Until every last one of them goes back under the rock they crawled out from under.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 90||05/16/2013|
Maybe all political groups should have their tax exempt status revoked?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 91||05/16/2013|
Only if the IRS wants to operate within the confines of the law, R91.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 92||05/16/2013|
Lets investigate how many billions Bush, Cheney and Powell all pocketed from lying to America and starting a senseless war that slaughtered thousands of Americans.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 93||05/16/2013|
Ok then all 501.c(3) & (4)'s should be subjected to long investigations unilaterally, the 4's seem to be a problem (ie money laundering operations).
That is what is fucked up about this, the R's got most of their apps subjected to the long investigations, even including what they read, etc, and most of the D orgs did not.
We need to have fairness across the board.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 94||05/16/2013|
are you referring to the wars that Obama has intensified during his reign? Or the new ones he has started in Libya and Syria?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 95||05/16/2013|
Not ONE organization that applied was denied status. No crime was committed. NEXT!
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 96||05/16/2013|
Giving retroactive tax-exempt status to Obama's brother's organization is clearly illegal, and should be on the front page of the NYTimes.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 97||05/16/2013|
[quote]not one single tea party or patriot group was denied its tax-exempt status because of this IRS scrutiny.
So what is all the screeching about then? There should probably be a lot more screwy groups scrutinized. Let'e start with the hate-mongering, homophobic evangelical churches who spread their bile internationally under the guise of helping the poor.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 98||05/16/2013|
More conservative groups received extra scrutiny but liberal groups received the same letters and requests for further documentation.
One liberal group was denied tax-exempt status. All of the conservative groups were granted tax-exempt status.
Every single one of these political groups should be denied tax-exempt status. They don't qualify for it.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 100||05/16/2013|
Conservative groups don't deserve equal treatment. Especially if they are teatards.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 102||05/16/2013|
Where was the protest when the IRS was monitoring the NAACP, R101?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 103||05/16/2013|
[bold] When the IRS targeted liberals [/bold]
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 105||05/16/2013|
They should investigate themselves for sedition against the government.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 106||05/16/2013|
Anal probes, r101?? You wish! It would be your last faint hope of ever getting anything dick-like anywhere close to your scary man-snatch.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 107||05/16/2013|
What is OUR side?
So, when Rethugs take control of the gov and decide to persecute liberal orgs we should just shut up and say "well, we did it to them!" and drop it?
Some of the people who deny this is a serious fucking scandal need to think about the precedent it sets.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 108||05/16/2013|
Wow, it really surprises me so many here think this is not a big deal. It's a HUGE f'ing deal. the IRS needs to be abolished, period. No governmental agency should have the power to strike fear in the hearts of it's constituents. And before you say not true, do you welcome a call from the IRS? No matter how in order you think things are, they will find something. It's frightening.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 109||05/16/2013|
Nothing to hide = nothing to fear, R109.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 110||05/16/2013|
Well from Salon it says that the IRS picked on smaller groups and that bigger ones did not get picked on. Further the IRS has had budget cuts so they decided to take shortcuts and lump things together, hence the TP, conservatives getting more of the problems from the IRS.
And none of this should be an excuse for this administration! None!
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 111||05/16/2013|
You mean the Republicans starved the IRS budget and the IRS agents did what to whom?
Oh, Mary, unclutch the pearls...
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 112||05/16/2013|
There's an air of hysteria about these threads.
I see nothing wrong with the IRS investigating these so called tax exempt groups. I wish I could care that the tea party got looked at but I really don't. Tea Party people are filled with so many insane people like Nugent, I don't blame anyone for giving them special attention.
Does the American public really care about this? From what I can tell the only thing the public got excited about this week was Angelina Jolie's double mastectomy.
Rethugs need to stop foaming at the mouth over this. Very unbecoming.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 113||05/16/2013|
That also said that the sequester starved the IRS but wasn't that also Barak's baby? Automatic cuts?
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 114||05/16/2013|
That's just it, R90. They HAD gone under the rock from whence they came. The 2012 election was essentially a message from America that The Tea Party was ovah. Tea Party folks had been effectively branded as kooks, bigots and/or morons. Even Republicans who initially courted them didn't want to be associated with them anymore.
A heavy handed approach by the government was unnecessary; it only fed their persecution complex and now serves as a rallying point.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 115||05/17/2013|
The next time the Rethugs are in power and use the IRS (or CIA, or ATF, or DEA) to target progressive groups, I hope every poster on this thread that has dismissed this as "just desserts" for the Tea Party remembers how they defended the government going after "the enemy" and doesn't bitch and moan because their favorite group was crushed by relentless paperwork and threats of jail.
|by they SHOULD be scrutinized||reply 116||05/17/2013|