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 65
    More: Followup, Champaign Tea Party, IRS, right-wing, appeasement, Florida Legislature  
•       •       •

896 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»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-05-15 11:23:22 AM
6 votes:
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 11:03:30 AM
5 votes:
See, it really undermines my own personal concern for this scandal when apples and oranges are compared.  Tea party groups were put to particular scrutiny in Ohio, DC, and California.  None of the examples in the article are from those regions.

It wasn't a nationwide scandal, and pretending it was seriously undermines the credibility of the concerns.  It just makes it look like they're trying to blame Obama, instead of those at fault.
2013-05-15 12:41:45 PM
3 votes:
God forbid this be anything but left-vs-right, when either way it's  about blatantly political groups circumventing campaign finance law by filing as 501(c)(4)'s in the wake of Citizens United.
2013-05-15 12:05:28 PM
3 votes:
If the central pillar of your group's movement is taxes, you're a political group, pure and simple.
2013-05-15 11:27:14 AM
3 votes:
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 11:26:49 AM
3 votes:
So did TFA provide any examples of these dozens upon dozens of "liberal" groups that were "waved through" ? No?

Huh.
2013-05-15 06:26:38 PM
2 votes:

BojanglesPaladin: Is that the main thing you object to?


I object to dishonest shiatheels like you insinuating things into comments just so you can try and pick the fight you want to have instead of participating in the discussion that's actually going on.
2013-05-15 04:21:30 PM
2 votes:

BojanglesPaladin: Great pic, but do you REALLY think it is wrong to say that liberals groups have also threatened the country and resorted to terrorism?


Yea, this is one of those things where there's a huge elephant called "context" sitting in the room that you'd desperately like to ignore.

Allow me to illustrate.

Ward Churchill calls 9/11 victims "little Eichmanns" and he gets fired and widely maligned across the entire political spectrum.

Ann Coulter claims that widows of 9/11 victims are enjoying their husbands deaths and she gets a best seller and another book deal.

Crazy left-wing groups like environmental radicals mostly commit property crime. Serious property crime, but property crime none-the-less. And virtually nobody not directly associated with them has a problem with them being monitored as terror groups by law enforcement.

Crazy right-wingers like Adkisson go out and shoot "liberals" or abortion doctors or shoot cops dead because they think "they're coming to confiscate my guns" and there's a huge farking uproar from the right when they find out that, golly-gee, DHS keeps tabs on right-wing terrorists too.

Yea, there are left-wing terrorists. There are left-wing idiots. There are left-wingers with really stupid, far-out, whacky opinions who do really stupid, far-out whacky things.

Difference is the left seems to be pretty embarrassed by their nutjobs while the right scrambles to reward their most extreme personalities with radio and book contracts.

So, yea, I'm comfortable saying there's no equivalency in anything but the absolute broadest possible sense.
2013-05-15 11:19:55 AM
2 votes:
Remember them, the Christian Coalition lost its tax-exempt status in 49 states. The Tea Party is its corporate reincarnation.

Tax exemption for these groups is a shell game played by con men. Just rename the full group, rince and repeat.
2013-05-15 11:13:16 AM
2 votes:

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


This. If it really was about targeting conservative groups the IRS would have biatch slapped the 1100 pastors who went out of their way to denounce Obama from the pulpit and dared them to yank their status.
2013-05-15 11:13:01 AM
2 votes:

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


Precisely.
2013-05-15 11:08:52 AM
2 votes:
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.
2013-05-15 11:06:33 AM
2 votes:
Folks at the IRS thought Tea Party groups would be likely tax dodgers? I wonder why.

Profiling is only approved for use against the poors.
2013-05-15 09:53:30 PM
1 votes:
So? Liberal groups don't run around threatening not to pay taxes. That's like complaining that the FBI only investigates terror groups...
2013-05-15 06:41:15 PM
1 votes:

BojanglesPaladin: I'm not doing that. I was pointing out that "the left" does not reliably distance themselves from their own unsavories either.


There aren't any to distance ourselves from.

Dude, do you ever NOT play the "both sides do it" game? Is there ever a time you just recognize what farkups right-wingers are pretty much consistently throughout history for what it is?
2013-05-15 06:15:28 PM
1 votes:

BojanglesPaladin: Che Gueverra t-shirts on your property damage only 'activists'


Cute. You call them activists, a word only you used, but you put it in quotes to insinuate it's what I said so you can imply that I was making excuses for them - exactly the opposite of the actual point made.

Fark off you dishonest shiatheel.
2013-05-15 04:40:37 PM
1 votes:
While the IRS central scrutinizer was singling out right-wing groups for nitpicking, they were waving through liberal groups' applications.

You know what? Good. Liberal groups are by and large beneficial for this country and society.

Tea Party groups, not so much. And they have enough deep pocket donors that they could easily run their stupid selfish outfits without tax exempt status.

They're just too cheap to do it.

And despite the President's token 'outrage' against what happened, this marks perhaps the one time the Democratic-led Treasury Dept had the spine to stand up to the far right wing in this country.

tl:dr suck it haters
2013-05-15 02:48:28 PM
1 votes:

pacified: overzealous staffer Department. non issue.


I agree. The IRS did it wrong. But unless it is discovered that they were instructed to do this by the administration, there is no scandal here. It's effectively like the sexual abuse issue in the military; EVERYone agrees it shoudln't happen and it needs to be fixed. The end.

It's weird how many Farkers keep insisting that there was nothing wrong with what they did, when the President, The Attorney General, both parties in Congress, the RightWing Derposphere, the LeftWing Derposphere, and the head of this division at the IRS all agree that this was wrong and shouldn't have happened.
2013-05-15 02:37:12 PM
1 votes:
Okay, so, basically it looks like the IRS targeted tea party groups, which spend most of their time trying to influence elections, for scrutiny when they applied for 501(c)4 status.

So, no, this is not a thing, this is just more of the endless torrent of whiny butthurt from the right because their little foofoo tea groups got called out by the IRS for being antagonistic political entities trying to evade paying their taxes. The same IRS that continues to let Karl Rove run one of the biggest political machines in the country tax-free.

Yea. Okay. I'm terribly, terribly outraged.
2013-05-15 01:11:47 PM
1 votes:

A Dark Evil Omen: And the Dems are most definitely on the capitalist market end of the scale. Quite strongly, in fact.

Moran.


Shh...don't explain to him that military spending on the scale we see in the US -- staunchly advocated by Republicans, and urged to be increased by Republicans -- is a clear indicator of what he refers to as a "command economy"
2013-05-15 01:09:43 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Has anyone provided a non-hilarious description of the charitable/non-political activities performed by Tea Party groups?


On Chris Matthews the other night, he had a representative from Tea Party Patriots trying to defend their 501(c)(4) status as non-political. She, without a shread of irony, said part of it was how educating people about how Obamacare is unconstitutional and needs to be repealed since the Supreme Court won't rule it unconstitutional. Except, they had to call it "health care reform" instead of "Obamacare", because calling it "Obamacare" would count as express advocacy and they'd stand to lose their tax-exempt status for it.

It stops being funny when you realize these people have hundreds of millions of anonymously-donated money, and can spend it on elections without limit for exactlythe reason she just elucidated: after  Citizens United, issue ads "don't count".
2013-05-15 01:05:27 PM
1 votes:

Vindibudd: Epoch_Zero: I_C_Weener: 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.

Look, they voted Republican.  That's like...ultra-destructive and anti-American and something.

Knowingly voting republican is socially and economically destructive. If your country depends upon being socially and economically stable, supporting something that makes it less so is against the better interests of your country.

Hence, Republicans and the teahadists they nurture being cancer.

Well, yeah that's just your opinion.


Nope. Deficits, debt, social mobility and economic growth are all worse under Republican administrations. They are literally bad for this country. A resident malignancy, if you will.
2013-05-15 01:04:35 PM
1 votes:

lantawa: A Dark Evil Omen: lantawa: A Dark Evil Omen: lantawa: Free economy proponents vs. command economy proponents

Your a idiot.

No, U. That, free economy vs. command economy, is straight out of a college Economics course text book. But college isn't your thing, is it?

You're asserting the Dems are in favor of a command economy. You are in your own weird world that has nothing to do with this one.

From Merriam:  an economic system in which activity is controlled by a central authority and the means of production are publicly owned

Dear Omen, yours is the weird world. Go take some economics courses, please, before you make a further fool of yourself.


Ha ha, look at you, you really believe the Dems are communists.
2013-05-15 01:01:48 PM
1 votes:

Fart_Machine: Vindibudd: Just to clarify for all the ignorant people: Auditing someone based upon their name is ILLEGAL. It doesn't matter WHAT THE NAME IS. /Can't believe I actually logged in to post this

I can't believe you did either considering that nobody was audited.


Hey, man, my real name is Freedom Patriot TEA Party MacDonald and I got the shiat audited out of me. I'm pretty sure it was because of my name, and maybe also the tax evasion.
2013-05-15 12:58:38 PM
1 votes:

Vindibudd: Just to clarify for all the ignorant people: Auditing someone based upon their name is ILLEGAL. It doesn't matter WHAT THE NAME IS. /Can't believe I actually logged in to post this


I can't believe you did either considering that nobody was audited.
2013-05-15 12:30:04 PM
1 votes:
So "conservatives" are only against profiling when it is against them.  What a surprise.
2013-05-15 12:22:39 PM
1 votes:
IRS Sent Same Letter to Democrats That Fed Tea Party Row

"One of those groups, Emerge America, saw its tax-exempt status denied, forcing it to disclose its donors and pay some taxes. None of the Republican groups have said their applications were rejected."
2013-05-15 12:19:35 PM
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: 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.

Look, they voted Republican.  That's like...ultra-destructive and anti-American and something.


Knowingly voting republican is socially and economically destructive. If your country depends upon being socially and economically stable, supporting something that makes it less so is against the better interests of your country.

Hence, Republicans and the teahadists they nurture being cancer.
2013-05-15 12:16:43 PM
1 votes:

Cletus C.: LasersHurt: Cletus C.: LasersHurt: Cletus C.: Are we pretending the IRS singling out conservative groups was not political?

Define Political.

The IRS singling out a particular group for extra scrutiny and borderline harassment because its members advocate strong political positions in opposition to your favored party..

See now here is where you lose me, is the assumed motives and party alignment.

I'm going to go out on a limb and make that assumption, yes.


When Bush used the IRS to target liberal groups
2013-05-15 12:14:42 PM
1 votes:
inner ted:

mystery drone strikes
privacy issues
closing gitmo
not being real honest about benghazi
irs targeting his opponents

any of these, if during W's years, would have been a freaking uproar by the other side. and rightfully so.


So you agree? IDK what "closing gitmo" is supposed to be about. That can be traced to Republican obstructionism.
2013-05-15 12:05:19 PM
1 votes:

Mjeck: Bungles:

....the left say it was wrong, like Rachel Maddow. Yet as far as I can see.... it was totally sensible? What am I missing?

Exactly my sentiment


Here's the deal.

The left loses nothing by saying "oh it wasn't right to do that." No one cares if some low level workers in Cinncinnati get thrown under the bus in the media. They get to disclaim responsibility and no one gets hurt.

But if they say, "this was for a good reason, but the standards could have been drafted with better language," like they should say, the right wing media will whip itself up into a football-f*cking frenzy again and distract us all from real issues.

So they chose expediency. I get it. I don't blame them. I would too.

But it's like knuckling under and saying "yes dear" when your spouse wants to watch reality TV. Don't sweat the small stuff, basically.
2013-05-15 12:04:35 PM
1 votes:

ShadowKamui: And how many were actual teatards and not just racists and/or lunatics?


Same difference, though.
2013-05-15 11:57:57 AM
1 votes:

Bungles: As a foreigner, I don't quite get this. Surely a Tea Party group is, by definition, a political entity? And therefore of course should be scrutinised if it claims it isn't for tax purposes.

Does the Communist Party of America have tax exempt status.

And yet, Obama has said it was wrong. Intellectual reporters on the left say it was wrong, like Rachel Maddow. Yet as far as I can see.... it was totally sensible? What am I missing?


They thrive, recruit, and live off of a fake persecution complex. Now someone went and gave them supporting evidence. That, alone, is a giant PITA.
2013-05-15 11:57:14 AM
1 votes:

Bungles: As a foreigner, I don't quite get this. Surely a Tea Party group is, by definition, a political entity? And therefore of course should be scrutinised if it claims it isn't for tax purposes.

Does the Communist Party of America have tax exempt status.

And yet, Obama has said it was wrong. Intellectual reporters on the left say it was wrong, like Rachel Maddow. Yet as far as I can see.... it was totally sensible? What am I missing?


American centrist liberals like to immediately roll over and apologize any time a conservative accuses them of anything. All it takes is some fascist douchebag dressed as a fake pimp and a copy of Adobe Premiere to give the entire Democratic party the vapors.
2013-05-15 11:55:44 AM
1 votes:
Bungles:

....the left say it was wrong, like Rachel Maddow. Yet as far as I can see.... it was totally sensible? What am I missing?

Exactly my sentiment
2013-05-15 11:55:01 AM
1 votes:

joness0154: 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.

Why weren't keywords such as "Progressive", etc. used? It's just as easy.


Reading is fundamental.

There was a 0% rejection rate for these "conservative" groups per everything I've read, AFTER they implemented the increased scrutiny. Yes, some groups retracted, but that could be due to any number of reasons including not wanting to deal with that BS or maybe some were trying to pass themselves off as something they weren't.

Ehh... I would say about 50/50 chance between giving up and actual malfeasance.

I like the idea that these brave patriots with tea bags on their hats said "OMG filling out forms is tough. Let's give up."
2013-05-15 11:49:19 AM
1 votes:

SithLord: Occupy Wall Street ring a bell?


Wait, I thought OWS was a joke and should not be taken seriously by anyone.  How did they get to be a threat to the very existence of this country?

Oh wait - this is one of those doublethink things, right?  Like how 0bama is an ineffectual empty suit and a tyrannical dictator?
2013-05-15 11:42:44 AM
1 votes:

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 11:36:48 AM
1 votes:

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 11:36:08 AM
1 votes:

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 11:34:03 AM
1 votes:

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 11:33:24 AM
1 votes:

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 11:33:09 AM
1 votes:

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 11:28:20 AM
1 votes:

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 11:27:39 AM
1 votes:

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 11:25:11 AM
1 votes:

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 11:24:02 AM
1 votes:
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 11:23:27 AM
1 votes:

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 11:21:22 AM
1 votes:

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.
2013-05-15 11:19:15 AM
1 votes:

Muta: I was reading complaints from Teabaggers that the form they had to fill out had 55 questions. Can you imagine having to answer a whole 55 questions just to gain tax free status for your organization?


Given the fervent opposition to reading the Affordable Care Act, since it's so long (I mean, it didn't have the breezy fun that all of Ayn Rand's literature exudes), the GOP needs to add to its agenda next time the following: "Reading's hard."
2013-05-15 11:12:30 AM
1 votes:

ikanreed: See, it really undermines my own personal concern for this scandal when apples and oranges are compared.  Tea party groups were put to particular scrutiny in Ohio, DC, and California.  None of the examples in the article are from those regions.

It wasn't a nationwide scandal, and pretending it was seriously undermines the credibility of the concerns.  It just makes it look like they're trying to blame Obama, instead of those at fault.


That's what this is, another attempt to create some bullshiat "scandal" out of nothing. It's like the WWF in the 1980s, throw concepts at the wall and see what sticks. That's why we had ULTIMATE WARRIOR and not Duke "The Dumpster" as the main challenger for Hogan. Or the reason Isaac Yakem, DDS never took off as the challenger for the belt.

The GOP is basically Vince McMahon right now in 1993. The is the Friar Ferguson stage of scandal right now.

cdn.bleacherreport.net

Or maybe the Bastion Booger of Scandals.

cdn.bleacherreport.net

If they are lucky, the next "scandal" will be like "The Booty Man" and shake it's rump at Obama's presidency

cdn.bleacherreport.net
2013-05-15 11:12:09 AM
1 votes:

ExpressPork: 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?

Being treated differently by a government entity because of your speech?  Nah, not a thing to be concerned with at all.  Move along citizen.


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.
2013-05-15 11:10:47 AM
1 votes:
Due to budget cuts and just sheer numbers, the IRS has come up with a series of markers that help determine who may be fudging numbers.
If you claim the home office deduction, that really pumps up your likelihood of a second look.
Could someone have decided that putting TEA Party in your title increases the chances you are a cheat? With the 25% rejection rate, it seems so.

The real scandal is that all of those 540(c)'s (or whatever they are) aren't investigated. Karl Rove's, Obama's, and many more of those should exist.
2013-05-15 11:10:37 AM
1 votes:
Instead of updating the 50-year-old IRS regulations regarding how to tell whether a social welfare group is legit or a sham, Congress and the IRS's appointed leaders let a completely new campaign finance environment post-Citizens United v. FEC render those regulations completely irrelevant.
2013-05-15 11:09:11 AM
1 votes:

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.
2013-05-15 11:08:04 AM
1 votes:

ikanreed: See, it really undermines my own personal concern for this scandal when apples and oranges are compared.  Tea party groups were put to particular scrutiny in Ohio, DC, and California.  None of the examples in the article are from those regions.

It wasn't a nationwide scandal, and pretending it was seriously undermines the credibility of the concerns.  It just makes it look like they're trying to blame Obama, instead of those at fault.


All applications were processed in Cleveland
2013-05-15 11:07:50 AM
1 votes:
Is IRS a -ghazi yet?

Is Benghazi a -ghazi yet?

Studying it out with our cocks out (and in our hands). -The GOP
2013-05-15 11:07:26 AM
1 votes:

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?
2013-05-15 11:07:05 AM
1 votes:
userserve-ak.last.fm
2013-05-15 11:06:56 AM
1 votes:
Liberal groups usually aren't a threat to the very existence of the country.
2013-05-15 11:06:33 AM
1 votes:
One has a "taxed enough already" theme and the other type thinks everyone should pay their fair share.  Wonder which one would more likely being trying to cheat the government out of tax payments.

Doesn't change the fact the the IRS has to be independent of the Executive branch.

Also doesn't change the fact that the GOP won't care and will send it's hatchet Congress Critters out to lie through their teeth about how this is all Obama and add it to the long list of impeachment offenses.
2013-05-15 11:05:55 AM
1 votes:
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
2013-05-15 11:05:46 AM
1 votes:
Liberal groups are simply more honest, so the paperwork moved quicker.
2013-05-15 11:00:21 AM
1 votes:
If the requirement for tax-free status is being a non-profit, non-political group working for social justice, and you don't have unlimited time or funds, which of the following would you look at more closely:

"Mother Gaia's Nuanced Vegans for Appeasement"

or

"Patriotic Tea Party Patriots for Taking Our Country Back"?
2013-05-15 10:58:23 AM
1 votes:
The IRS gives churches a free pass.  Where is the outrage regarding this?
 
Displayed 65 of 65 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report