If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   While the IRS central scrutinizer was singling out right-wing groups for nitpicking, they were waving through liberal groups' applications. In other news, Tea Party changes its name to Mother Gaia's Nuanced Vegans for Appeasement   (usatoday.com) divider line 321
    More: Followup, Champaign Tea Party, IRS, right-wing, appeasement, Florida Legislature  
•       •       •

904 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 May 2013 at 10:55 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



321 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-15 11:22:55 AM
I can't think of any reason that the IRS might look at a sudden influx of dozens of similar groups to make sure they weren't fraudulently claiming tax exemptions.

None at all.
 
2013-05-15 11:23:22 AM
So to recap, here's the "scandals" plaguing Obama:

There was an attack on a consulate that resulted in embassy staff and an ambassador being murdered, but the attack happened so fast and in such a remote location that no reactive measures could be taken, prompting us to have a frank talk about security needs.

The DOJ issued perfectly legal process to obtain journalistic records to find the identity of a leak that could develop into a threat to national security, promoting the Fourth Estate to piss themselves in fear of tyranny and the rest of the country to shrug and say, "leaks are maybe not always so good?"

And finally, the IRS may have singled out an indeterminate number of groups with "tea party" in the name for increased scrutiny as to their 501(c)(4) applications but hasn't denied any of them, and may have not taken a serious enough look at some applications by progressive groups, an act which in no way could be attributed to the President EVEN IF it is determined to be improper (which no one should concede).

And the last time we had a Democratic president, his big "scandal" was lying about his side piece.

Contrast that with the "scandals" of our past few Republican presidents, such as lying to start a war, deliberately ignoring intelligence about terrorists seeking to attack the US because it detracted from the boogeyman they really wanted to get, selling weapons to a nation holding our embassy staff hostage to finance right-wing death squads in Latin America, delaying the release of hostages to win an election, etc.

Tell me again why we aren't burning down every GOP headquarters and tarring and feathering every last R for treason?
 
2013-05-15 11:23:27 AM

Muta: The IRS gives churches a free pass.  Where is the outrage regarding this?


Democratic politicians are scared shiatless of being accused of being liberal. GOP politicians are not scared of being called conservative. Outrage occurs accordingly.
 
2013-05-15 11:23:59 AM

ikanreed: It just makes it look like they're trying to blame Obama, instead of those at fault.


They could want to keep the "scandals" going in the hopes that at some point Obama tells someone to be with his wife while she gives birth to their child instead of answering a congressional questionaire.  When that happens, Obama is hindering Congress and part of the cover up.
 
2013-05-15 11:24:02 AM
I'm glad the IRS is getting the magnifying glass.  They've needed to be brought down a peg or two for YEARS.  And I'm not talking Obama years, either.  I have seen first hand just how scuzzy the IRS is:  Reneging on contractual payments with taxpayers, contacting and scaring the beejeezus out of taxpayers for additional monies that are not owed (and are KNOWN to not be owed), unilaterally deciding the amount of allowances you may take on your W-4 regardless of actual dependents, etc.

I hope they investigate every aspect of the IRS, not just their approval of tax exempt status for organizations.  This has nothing to do with who is president, and everything to do with the IRS's imperious nature.
 
2013-05-15 11:24:32 AM

Scerpes: Muta: The IRS gives churches a free pass.  Where is the outrage regarding this?

You mean like when they give unions a free pass?


Citation needed.
 
2013-05-15 11:24:53 AM

Serious Black: Debeo Summa Credo: BMulligan: Obama's Reptiloid Master: "Perhaps dozens?"

Yeah, that was the line that caught my eye, too. Doesn't really fill me with confidence.

By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.

Umm. Thank you sequester?

I'm pretty sure the CBO report said that it was because of a stronger-than-expected economy that led to larger-than-expected federal revenues. You want to make the argument that the sequester strengthened the economy, be my guest.


The link that BMulligan included referred to "tax increases and cuts in domestic and military programs".

But you are correct that the improving economy is certainly a significant contributor.
 
2013-05-15 11:25:11 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: BMulligan: Obama's Reptiloid Master: "Perhaps dozens?"

Yeah, that was the line that caught my eye, too. Doesn't really fill me with confidence.

By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.

Umm. Thank you sequester?


So since that was Obama's idea, are you gonna give him credit for that or no?
 
2013-05-15 11:26:08 AM

lantawa: Free economy proponents vs. command economy proponents; that's what this issue boils down to.

Unfortunately, an enormous unethical "cheating" culture has enveloped the current "command economy" government regime, and there is now an enormous backlash that is beginning to seek out balance between the two economic polarities. The IRS effectively altered election results through harassment methods. IRS "operatives," so to speak, working directly in tacit agreement with the Obama campaign, worked as thoroughly as possible (while on taxpayers' dimes) to divert resources and money away from conservative efforts to encourage citizens for the conservative causes and candidates. There's really no two ways about it.  that's what was done. End of story.


Someone forgot to take his medications this morning.
 
2013-05-15 11:26:49 AM
So did TFA provide any examples of these dozens upon dozens of "liberal" groups that were "waved through" ? No?

Huh.
 
2013-05-15 11:27:03 AM

BMulligan: Obama's Reptiloid Master: "Perhaps dozens?"

Yeah, that was the line that caught my eye, too. Doesn't really fill me with confidence.

By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.


Funny how the liberal media isn't making a big deal out of that, isn't it.
 
2013-05-15 11:27:14 AM
Why is it wrong for the IRS to give an extra look at organizations, whose tag line is, NO TAXES, and seeking to not pay taxes?
 
2013-05-15 11:27:39 AM

cameroncrazy1984: So did TFA provide any examples of these dozens upon dozens of "liberal" groups that were "waved through" ? No?

Huh.


One of them took NINE MONTHS. Look at that speed. Why, they barely had to file anything.
 
2013-05-15 11:27:43 AM

BMulligan: phaseolus: BMulligan: By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.


You know how that thread's going to develop -- they'll claim credit for all the good outcomes, and pull an alternate fictional history out of their ass where an unchecked Obama would have ruined everything.

No, that's not possible. I'm sure that none of the honorable conservatives around here would ever...

Debeo Summa Credo: Umm. Thank you sequester?

Never mind.


The link you posted referred to how successful washington has been in reducing the deficit due to tax increases and spending cuts.

Do you honestly not think that the sequester has reduced the deficit?
 
2013-05-15 11:28:20 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Lionel Mandrake: I don't think the IRS was too hard on the TP groups.  They were too easy on the other groups.

The vast majority of these groups deserve nothing in tax breaks, regardless of ideology.

You are probably right from a conceptual standpoint, but the law is the law, and whether they were "too hard" on conservative groups or "too easy" on liberal groups it's still egregiously discriminatory.

My question is how much tax revenue are we talking here? Most of these groups are 501(c)4s, donations to which aren't tax deductible. What taxes are they avoiding? Income taxes on interest from their bank accounts? Property taxes on their owned premises? What?


Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code defines tax-exempt social welfare groups like this: Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.
But a few lines later, we have: To be operated exclusively to promote social welfare, an organization must operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare of the people of the community.
So, in 1959 when this change went in, we have taken a word with legal meaning and changed it to something that is undefined.
As I see it, this is the problem.
Primarily is totally undefined and open to individual interpretation.

Now, why does everyone want to be a 501(c)(4)? Because the donor list is private.
 
2013-05-15 11:28:45 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: BMulligan: phaseolus: BMulligan: By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.


You know how that thread's going to develop -- they'll claim credit for all the good outcomes, and pull an alternate fictional history out of their ass where an unchecked Obama would have ruined everything.

No, that's not possible. I'm sure that none of the honorable conservatives around here would ever...

Debeo Summa Credo: Umm. Thank you sequester?

Never mind.

The link you posted referred to how successful washington has been in reducing the deficit due to tax increases and spending cuts.

Do you honestly not think that the sequester has reduced the deficit?


The sequeter is what, $85B? How much has the deficit been reduced?
 
2013-05-15 11:29:09 AM

skozlaw: Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?


According to Farbongo it is a thing. So yea, you might want to read a newspaper or something and not get all your news from FARK.
 
2013-05-15 11:29:16 AM

coeyagi: I_C_Weener: Epoch_Zero: Liberal groups usually aren't a threat to the very existence of the country.

I wish I had the physical ability you have to carry that cross.  You must be muscled like Conan.

Dear Lord, you don't even know what it means to "carry that cross".  Did Epoch indicate that he was being persecuted?  No.  He was indicating that conservatives are primarily evil assholes hell-bent on destroying this country to elevate their theocratic platform.


You're right.  I should have said "carrying a chip on his shoulder the size of Lady Gaga's testicles."
 
2013-05-15 11:29:18 AM

Fifi Le Pew: I'm glad the IRS is getting the magnifying glass.  They've needed to be brought down a peg or two for YEARS.  And I'm not talking Obama years, either.  I have seen first hand just how scuzzy the IRS is:  Reneging on contractual payments with taxpayers, contacting and scaring the beejeezus out of taxpayers for additional monies that are not owed (and are KNOWN to not be owed), unilaterally deciding the amount of allowances you may take on your W-4 regardless of actual dependents, etc.

I hope they investigate every aspect of the IRS, not just their approval of tax exempt status for organizations.  This has nothing to do with who is president, and everything to do with the IRS's imperious nature.


That's weird. Somehow all of your citations seem to have disappeared.
 
2013-05-15 11:29:35 AM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: cameroncrazy1984: So did TFA provide any examples of these dozens upon dozens of "liberal" groups that were "waved through" ? No?

Huh.

One of them took NINE MONTHS. Look at that speed. Why, they barely had to file anything.


Wow! That is some special treatment there! Only 9 months?! Obama better get on this quick! This is like 10 Benghazis!
 
2013-05-15 11:29:36 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Lionel Mandrake: I don't think the IRS was too hard on the TP groups.  They were too easy on the other groups.

The vast majority of these groups deserve nothing in tax breaks, regardless of ideology.

You are probably right from a conceptual standpoint, but the law is the law, and whether they were "too hard" on conservative groups or "too easy" on liberal groups it's still egregiously discriminatory.

My question is how much tax revenue are we talking here? Most of these groups are 501(c)4s, donations to which aren't tax deductible. What taxes are they avoiding? Income taxes on interest from their bank accounts? Property taxes on their owned premises? What?


I agree.  But I hope this mess leads to a reevaluation of of the whole process.
 
2013-05-15 11:30:14 AM

Danger Mouse: skozlaw: Is this actually a thing? I've just been ignoring it on the assumption that it was just another in the seemingly endless right-wing whine fest over nothing. I figured some day they'd actually have a real reason to biatch, though, so is this it?

According to Farbongo it is a thing. So yea, you might want to read a newspaper or something and not get all your news from FARK.


According to "farbongo," if it IS a thing, he'll investigate it. It's not looking like it's a thing yet.
 
2013-05-15 11:31:31 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: BMulligan: phaseolus: BMulligan: By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.


You know how that thread's going to develop -- they'll claim credit for all the good outcomes, and pull an alternate fictional history out of their ass where an unchecked Obama would have ruined everything.

No, that's not possible. I'm sure that none of the honorable conservatives around here would ever...

Debeo Summa Credo: Umm. Thank you sequester?

Never mind.

The link you posted referred to how successful washington has been in reducing the deficit due to tax increases and spending cuts.

Do you honestly not think that the sequester has reduced the deficit?


Not during the time period covered by the CBO analysis.
 
2013-05-15 11:31:39 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Obama's Reptiloid Master: cameroncrazy1984: So did TFA provide any examples of these dozens upon dozens of "liberal" groups that were "waved through" ? No?

Huh.

One of them took NINE MONTHS. Look at that speed. Why, they barely had to file anything.

Wow! That is some special treatment there! Only 9 months?! Obama better get on this quick! This is like 10 Benghazis!


A whole decabenghazi? Or is that too eurosocialist metric-y? Did I just get gay married to Karl Marx?
 
2013-05-15 11:31:51 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Debeo Summa Credo: BMulligan: Obama's Reptiloid Master: "Perhaps dozens?"

Yeah, that was the line that caught my eye, too. Doesn't really fill me with confidence.

By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.

Umm. Thank you sequester?

So since that was Obama's idea, are you gonna give him credit for that or no?


It's Obama's idea now? LOL!! Every day some farklib was whining about how the sequester was going to ruin the economy and the austerity-minded GOP was to blame, and now that te sequester is actually reducing the deficit Obama is the one who gets the credit?

Fine. Good job Obama. Keep it up. More spending cuts please.
 
2013-05-15 11:33:09 AM

I_C_Weener: Epoch_Zero: Liberal groups usually aren't a threat to the very existence of the country.

I wish I had the physical ability you have to carry that cross.  You must be muscled like Conan.


You have no idea. I'm constantly swarmed by attractive, single women. The best is when I put on my three wolves howling at the moon t-shirt - oh man, so much instant tail.

/no seriously
//teahadists are a virulent cancer
 
2013-05-15 11:33:24 AM

Lionel Mandrake: Debeo Summa Credo: Lionel Mandrake: I don't think the IRS was too hard on the TP groups.  They were too easy on the other groups.

The vast majority of these groups deserve nothing in tax breaks, regardless of ideology.

You are probably right from a conceptual standpoint, but the law is the law, and whether they were "too hard" on conservative groups or "too easy" on liberal groups it's still egregiously discriminatory.

My question is how much tax revenue are we talking here? Most of these groups are 501(c)4s, donations to which aren't tax deductible. What taxes are they avoiding? Income taxes on interest from their bank accounts? Property taxes on their owned premises? What?

I agree.  But I hope this mess leads to a reevaluation of of the whole process.


That would sure be nice.  I agree with what the IRS did, placing more scrutiny on semi-political groups, but disagree with the way in which they did it, basically a key-word search.  We don't tolerate racial profiling, why should we tolerate political profiling?
 
2013-05-15 11:33:30 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: It's Obama's idea now?


Actually, yeah. The sequester was Obama's idea to avoid the debt ceiling idiocy. Study it out.
 
2013-05-15 11:33:30 AM

LasersHurt: inner ted: getting my laughs out of the way at what is sure to be an epic liberal ass hurty thread that basically boils down to: when my guy does it, it's fine & i just mock anyone who says otherwise or feign disinterest.

should be a blast

Because all accusations are equally valid and true, and no scrutiny should be applied?


EyeballKid: inner ted: getting my laughs out of the way at what is sure to be an epic liberal ass hurty thread that basically boils down to: when my guy does it, it's fine & i just mock anyone who says otherwise or feign disinterest.

should be a blast

Or, you might learn that the poor widdle opwessed Tea-per Tantrum Party groups weren't even half of those audited by the IRS, and the conservatives -- *surprise* -- are just trying to play victim to rack up sympathy points with the idiot voters.

But, I see you've invested heavily in this pity party, and I'd hate to bring it down with something like the truth. Please, put that crown of thorns back on, and don't take those nails out of your feet on my account.


so the IRS is apologizing for nothing then?
 
2013-05-15 11:33:39 AM

BMulligan: Debeo Summa Credo: BMulligan: phaseolus: BMulligan: By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.


You know how that thread's going to develop -- they'll claim credit for all the good outcomes, and pull an alternate fictional history out of their ass where an unchecked Obama would have ruined everything.

No, that's not possible. I'm sure that none of the honorable conservatives around here would ever...

Debeo Summa Credo: Umm. Thank you sequester?

Never mind.

The link you posted referred to how successful washington has been in reducing the deficit due to tax increases and spending cuts.

Do you honestly not think that the sequester has reduced the deficit?

Not during the time period covered by the CBO analysis.


The CBO projected deficit for the 2013 fiscal year that ends sept. 30? You don't think the spending cuts factored into that?
 
2013-05-15 11:34:03 AM

Epoch_Zero: Liberal groups usually aren't a threat to the very existence of the country.


Bill Ayers ring a bell?  Occupy Wall Street ring a bell?  I don't recall any Tea-Party types blowing up buildings, or looting or raping or pillaging the cities they staged marches in.
 
2013-05-15 11:34:07 AM

Mjeck: Why is it wrong for the IRS to give an extra look at organizations, whose tag line is, NO TAXES, and seeking to not pay taxes?


No taxes?  Got a citation for that?

And why should they be subjected to any further scrutiny than any group seeking any tax change, including increases in taxes on the wealthy?  This is nothing more than a governmental agency attacking those whose ideology it disagrees with.  That's a huge problem.  It's offensive and probably violates the First Amendment.  Unless you're ok with the FBI locking liberals up simply because they're liberals.
 
2013-05-15 11:34:11 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Obama's Reptiloid Master: cameroncrazy1984: So did TFA provide any examples of these dozens upon dozens of "liberal" groups that were "waved through" ? No?

Huh.

One of them took NINE MONTHS. Look at that speed. Why, they barely had to file anything.

Wow! That is some special treatment there! Only 9 months?! Obama better get on this quick! This is like 10 Benghazis!


Well, you libs probably don't know this, but it takes 9 months to make a baby. Clearly, the IRS was sending a message to these liberal groups - you are loved and wanted, like a Republican's child.
 
2013-05-15 11:34:15 AM

Scerpes: Muta: The IRS gives churches a free pass. Where is the outrage regarding this?

You mean like when they give unions a free pass?


The same could be said for 501c 6 organizations.  Business leagues, chambers of commerce, real-estate boards, boards of trade, or professional football leagues.

Why are professional football leagues tax exempt? 

The US Chamber of Commerce is political.  Why are they exempt?


One this this "scandal" did was open my eyes to how big of a scam 501c organizations are.
 
2013-05-15 11:34:33 AM

Gonz: If the requirement for tax-free status is being a non-profit, non-political group working for social justice,


and if it is not, then what?

do you think that MoveOn is a non-political group?
or OWS?

Since when is fixing the country so more people can get jobs not social justice?
 
2013-05-15 11:34:53 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: BMulligan: phaseolus: BMulligan: By the way, speaking of being Taxed Enough Already, I've been waiting with bated breath for the Fark thread about the CBO report showing that the federal budget deficit is decreasing at a shocking rate and the national debt has stabilized for the foreseeable future. I'm sure the usual suspects will be there to admit that they've been wrong all this time, and that federal fiscal policy seems to be working.


You know how that thread's going to develop -- they'll claim credit for all the good outcomes, and pull an alternate fictional history out of their ass where an unchecked Obama would have ruined everything.

No, that's not possible. I'm sure that none of the honorable conservatives around here would ever...

Debeo Summa Credo: Umm. Thank you sequester?

Never mind.

The link you posted referred to how successful washington has been in reducing the deficit due to tax increases and spending cuts.

Do you honestly not think that the sequester has reduced the deficit?


From that link:

" The $200 billion reduction to the estimated deficit comes not from the $85 billion in mandatory cuts known as sequestration, nor from the package of tax increases that Congress passed this winter to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff. The office had already incorporated those policy changes into its February forecasts.

Rather, it comes from higher-than-expected tax payments from businesses and individuals, as well as an increase in payments from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage finance companies the government took over as part of the wave of bailouts thrust upon Washington in the darkest days of the financial crisis.
 "
 
2013-05-15 11:35:18 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: The CBO projected deficit for the 2013 fiscal year that ends sept. 30? You don't think the spending cuts factored into that?


Oh, now it just "factored in"? Before it was "thanks sequester!" now it's "it factored in"

Keep movin them goalposts!
 
2013-05-15 11:36:08 AM

Scerpes: Unless you're ok with the FBI locking liberals up simply because they're liberals.


Asking to see if your TEA Party group is a social welfare group rather than a political support group is now exactly the same as the FBI locking up liberals.

You've got to be joking.
 
2013-05-15 11:36:13 AM

inner ted: so the IRS is apologizing for nothing then?


I don't know what you mean. The targeting of conservative groups was bad, and most people (including most liberals) seem to admit that.

That does not automatically lend validity to this article, with these new claims.
 
2013-05-15 11:36:37 AM

lantawa: Free economy proponents vs. command economy proponents; that's what this issue boils down to.

Unfortunately, an enormous unethical "cheating" culture has enveloped the current "command economy" government regime, and there is now an enormous backlash that is beginning to seek out balance between the two economic polarities. The IRS effectively altered election results through harassment methods. IRS "operatives," so to speak, working directly in tacit agreement with the Obama campaign, worked as thoroughly as possible (while on taxpayers' dimes) to divert resources and money away from conservative efforts to encourage citizens for the conservative causes and candidates. There's really no two ways about it.  that's what was done. End of story.


i159.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-15 11:36:48 AM

SithLord: Epoch_Zero: Liberal groups usually aren't a threat to the very existence of the country.

Bill Ayers ring a bell?  Occupy Wall Street ring a bell?  I don't recall any Tea-Party types blowing up buildings, or looting or raping or pillaging the cities they staged marches in.


The 60s were 50 years ago. Let it go.
 
2013-05-15 11:36:56 AM

Fart_Machine: Scerpes: Muta: The IRS gives churches a free pass. Where is the outrage regarding this?

You mean like when they give unions a free pass?

Citation needed.


He's right.  Unions are tax exempt as 501c5 organizations.
 
2013-05-15 11:37:26 AM

coeyagi: Try again.  Being treated differently by a government entity because your speech indicates that you are likely to not abide by the laws the government entity is tasked with enforcing?  There, nothing to be concerned with at all. Move along, patriot derper.


So if I see a brown guy with a big mustache who doesnt speak English it makes sense to ask for his ID?  Good to know.

Just to be clear, I'm libertarian so I don't agree with my above statement.  I'm just pointing out your liberal hypocrisy.  You see, because the brown guy who doesn't speak English is more likely to be an illeg-ahem undocumented citizen.  The IRS' actions are ethically reprehensible and go against everything this country is founded upon.
 
2013-05-15 11:38:09 AM

SithLord: Epoch_Zero: Liberal groups usually aren't a threat to the very existence of the country.

Bill Ayers ring a bell?  Occupy Wall Street ring a bell?  I don't recall any Tea-Party types blowing up buildings, or looting or raping or pillaging the cities they staged marches in.


Protip: OWS weren't viking raiders.

Teahadists like to stick with mass shootings. Or flying planes into buildings. (no, not that building)
 
2013-05-15 11:40:14 AM

Tomahawk513: That would sure be nice. I agree with what the IRS did, placing more scrutiny on semi-political groups, but disagree with the way in which they did it, basically a key-word search. We don't tolerate racial profiling, why should we tolerate political profiling?


Due to budget cuts, that's the way the IRS works. They have various flags that can be set off in returns. If you take the home office deduction, that is a big red flag 'cause most people don't know the narrow way that is to be used and counted.

Someone researched and found that 501s with TEA or Patriot were more likely to be fraudulent. Since the story coming out is that it was around a 25% rejection (or retraction) rate, they may have been on to something.

Another thought is that lets say they reviewed 10% of all 501s. Since 2010, there has been exponential growth of conservative 501s. So more conservative ones would have been reviewed.
 
2013-05-15 11:40:21 AM

Scerpes: Mjeck: Why is it wrong for the IRS to give an extra look at organizations, whose tag line is, NO TAXES, and seeking to not pay taxes?

No taxes?  Got a citation for that?

And why should they be subjected to any further scrutiny than any group seeking any tax change, including increases in taxes on the wealthy?  This is nothing more than a governmental agency attacking those whose ideology it disagrees with.  That's a huge problem.  It's offensive and probably violates the First Amendment.  Unless you're ok with the FBI locking liberals up simply because they're liberals.


Citation... TEA PARTY, as in the Boston TEA PARTY, a historical protest on taxes.

Is it wrong to give an extra look? I seem to remember a long time ago, around the 90's, some guy was handing out mailers on taxes being unconstitutional. So the IRS seized his mailing list and looked into every subscriber to see if they were paying their taxes.  Is that wrong?
 
2013-05-15 11:40:52 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Debeo Summa Credo: It's Obama's idea now?

Actually, yeah. The sequester was Obama's idea to avoid the debt ceiling idiocy. Study it out.


Then why did he want to avert it? Why was so strongly critical of ita couple months ago?

Maybe he was just blowing smoke to appease his virulently anti-austerity pro spending supporters, while in reality he recognized the need for spending cuts. If thats the case, good for him. Reduces my regrets in voting for him.
 
2013-05-15 11:41:20 AM

BMulligan: lantawa: Free economy proponents vs. command economy proponents; that's what this issue boils down to.

Unfortunately, an enormous unethical "cheating" culture has enveloped the current "command economy" government regime, and there is now an enormous backlash that is beginning to seek out balance between the two economic polarities. The IRS effectively altered election results through harassment methods. IRS "operatives," so to speak, working directly in tacit agreement with the Obama campaign, worked as thoroughly as possible (while on taxpayers' dimes) to divert resources and money away from conservative efforts to encourage citizens for the conservative causes and candidates. There's really no two ways about it.  that's what was done. End of story.

Someone forgot to take his medications this morning.


That would be you....and BTW, write something coherent, or STFU. What I wrote is spot on.
 
2013-05-15 11:42:44 AM

ExpressPork: Just to be clear, I'm libertarian


Thanks for giving us a heads-up. It saves a lot of time that would be wasted reading pretentious bullshiat.

/to the blimps!
 
2013-05-15 11:44:10 AM
Ahah...I can't believe you losers are still defending president clueless and his thuggish administration. No wonder history is filled with tyrants backed by a bunch of useful idiots.  Shameful.
 
Displayed 50 of 321 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report