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.

(National Review)   In the eyes of liberals progressives communists (they are all the same) what TEA party and other conservatives do is not worthy of the same benefits as their favored groups because the conservatives have evil intentions for the world   (nationalreview.com) divider line 173
    More: Fail, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, IRS  
•       •       •

928 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Jun 2013 at 9:34 AM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-10 08:20:55 AM
Most liberals I know think the targeting happened and was completely justified, because the Teabagger groups are political with just the barest fig leaf for cover.
 
2013-06-10 08:24:40 AM

EvilEgg: Most liberals I know think the targeting happened and was completely justified, because the Teabagger groups are political with just the barest fig leaf for cover.


Tea Party groups are the best politically active useful idiots that money can buy.
 
2013-06-10 08:28:15 AM
fdnblog.files.wordpress.com

/GIS for evil intentions
 
2013-06-10 08:28:29 AM
So surprised such an obvious troll thread as this was greenlit.
 
2013-06-10 08:34:13 AM
Well, comrades, it looks like they have us all figured out.  Time to hang it up.
 
2013-06-10 08:45:45 AM

Relatively Obscure: Well, comrades, it looks like they have us all figured out.  Time to hang it up.


Does this mean I can finally start showing off my Chairman Mao tattoo?
 
2013-06-10 08:49:15 AM
They're not all the same, subby. The best way to describe the difference between them is probably to use metaphor based on fantasy stories, since people like you probably get off on that sort of thing. See, think of the Lord of the Rings movies. The first three, not that Hobbit idiocy.

Now, we'll start with liberals. Liberals tend to be panty-waisted tree hugging peace-lovers. They're the elves. That's pretty much all the elves do in the movies...they sulk about in the woods and sing songs and whisper about crossing oceans. And they live in trees. They're supposedly immortal which means they think they're way smarter than everyone else, too, so they tend to be all preachy and whatnot. It's classic ivory tower syndrome. And they'll talk tough, too, but when it comes down to it all they're really good at is getting their asses kicked. Think about Helm's Deep -- that whole place was carpeted with dead elves by the end. And if you think about it, it's the elves' fault that the One Ring was even loose to begin with! That one elf from the Matrix could have put a stop to the whole thing by just shooting that guy who killed the evil dude with an arrow. But, no. Liberals don't like to judge people, they like to give everybody a second chance. And look what happened.

Progressives are more like the Dwarves. See, progressives have all these ideas about building "fair societies," utopias where everybody is treated well and has the support they need, but they never really think about things like "consequences" and "price." Moria is a classic example of a progressive society taken to its natural conclusion. There you had the dwarves digging deeper and deeper, building a vast underground city with place for everybody and enough wealth so that everyone could be in the 1 percent, and what happens? Boom, they unleash a demon. Not just any demon, either, but the mother farking king of demons. It doesn't matter how wonderful your society is if there's a demon on the loose,

And communists? Well, communists believe that everybody should share everything. Obviously, they're hobbits -- lazing about all day, doing just the minimal amount of work they can get away with before smoking their pipes and drinking their beer. Sure, they accomplished some cool things in the movies, but only when other people -- men, mainly -- were carrying their weight. The story isn't about how a pair of hobbits saves Middle Earth, although many people interpret it that way. The story is about how one man (aragorn), through his sacrifice, enables two hobbits to claim credit for saving the earth. That right there's classic communism -- profit on the backs of others.

So, you see, LOTR is actually a parable illustrating the rise of the Tea Party, who in the movies are represented by men. They're not perfect, living in tall trees and whispering about their accumulated wisdom. But they're hard workers, and they're brave. They want to live in peace but when their freedoms are threatened they will line up on a distant ridge and sound the clarion call to battle, and they will charge the field and scatter the dark forces arrayed against them. Selflessly, they will arise to save the world.
 
2013-06-10 08:58:46 AM
The I.R.S. was finding fraud and correcting it for the American people. Who cares which team the fraudsters are? If they were fudging the taxes, then they deserve to be found out. If they aren't doing anything wrong, then what are they worried about?
 
2013-06-10 09:01:13 AM
c9.nrostatic.com
Its good to see NRO hiring young conservative writers just out of high school.
 
2013-06-10 09:02:21 AM

Pocket Ninja: LOTR is actually a parable illustrating the rise of the Tea Party, who in the movies are represented by men.


Nice parable, but are they representing the men of the West or are they representing the Haradrim and the easterlings of Rhun?
 
2013-06-10 09:03:03 AM

Cythraul: Relatively Obscure: Well, comrades, it looks like they have us all figured out.  Time to hang it up.

Does this mean I can finally start showing off my Chairman Mao tattoo?


Sure but you know you are not going to make it with anybody.
But it will be alright
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-10 09:10:16 AM

SilentStrider: So surprised such an obvious troll thread as this was greenlit.


Why?  They usually are.

Besides, I would agree with that.  I think that many right wingers DO have evil intentions.
 
2013-06-10 09:20:23 AM

Lucky LaRue: Pocket Ninja: LOTR is actually a parable illustrating the rise of the Tea Party, who in the movies are represented by men.

Nice parable, but are they representing the men of the West or are they representing the Haradrim and the easterlings of Rhun?


i think they're much more representative of the gorillas and orangutans of the planet of the apes.
 
2013-06-10 09:37:59 AM
In the eyes of liberals progressives communists (they are all the same)


This is a punctuation abomination.
 
2013-06-10 09:38:17 AM
roundholesquarepeg.files.wordpress.com
The conservative movement, in one picture.
 
2013-06-10 09:38:44 AM
"In the eyes of liberals progressives communists..."

Is it just me or does this feel like it needs some commas or slashes or hyphens or something? You can't just string three nouns together like that.
 
2013-06-10 09:40:29 AM

Girl Pants: "In the eyes of liberals progressives communists..."

Is it just me or does this feel like it needs some commas or slashes or hyphens or something? You can't just string three nouns together like that.


Commas slashes hyphens are for the weak. Also conjunctions.
 
2013-06-10 09:43:23 AM
Dear right wing troll extremist site:
I don't think ANY group should have anonymous donations, regardless of party.  And if you're groups primary focus is to "fight the liberals" or "destroy Obama," then guess what; you're not a charity, you're a political group.  I don't care how much you hate the Democrats, that doesn't mean it's a charity to go after them.
 
2013-06-10 09:43:46 AM

Girl Pants: "In the eyes of liberals progressives communists..."

Is it just me or does this feel like it needs some commas or slashes or hyphens or something? You can't just string three nouns together like that.


That's freedom grammar, Pinko.
 
2013-06-10 09:45:13 AM

EvilEgg: Most liberals I know think the targeting happened and was completely justified, because the Teabagger groups are political with just the barest fig leaf for cover.


imgs.xkcd.com

I'd say the ratio of liberals is about 50/50 here on Fark who think the use of keywords and key phrases was justified and those who think it was not. Frankly, I think the hypocrisy meter spikes with conservatives. Every time I insist that the keyword system is profiling in the same vein as Stop and Frisk and Show Me Your Papers, they tell me I am wrong because those programs rightfully target the real lawbreakers while this one was clearly designed to destroy Obama's conservative Republican enemies (even though the program was instigated by a manager who admits he is a conservative Republican).
 
2013-06-10 09:48:38 AM

Pocket Ninja: So, you see, LOTR is actually a parable illustrating the rise of the Tea Party


Excellent metaphor, but you forgot to mention the largest kingdom of Men is Mordor.
 
2013-06-10 09:49:46 AM

Satanic_Hamster: Dear right wing troll extremist site:
And if you're groups primary focus is to "fight the liberals" or "destroy Obama," then guess what; you're not a charity, you're a political group.


It's a sad day for Politics when a group's goal is simply "fight <enemy>" and not to actually suggest and champion new ideas. It's nothing new, but still bums me out.
 
2013-06-10 09:50:00 AM
i thought conservatives, or regressives as i prefer, were quite open about their evil intentions.

they know that what they intend will harm other people, but it's okay because god.
 
2013-06-10 09:50:02 AM
All of these kinds of groups should be audited. Every last one of them, regardless of political or religious affiliation.
 
2013-06-10 09:51:56 AM
That headline is a goddamn disaster, Subby.
 
2013-06-10 09:52:48 AM

EvilEgg: Most liberals I know think the targeting happened and was completely justified, because the Teabagger groups are political with just the barest fig leaf for cover.


Ah, anecdotal evidence. The easiest way to paint an extremely large group of people with a broad brush.  On a more national scale, you'll find that the liberal response is anywhere from "the additional scrutiny should be applied to a random sample instead of by keyword" to "the additional scrutiny should be applied to every 501(c)(4) application regardless of name or filing party."

You'll also find a fair amount of "why do we have Congressional hearings and Fox News Special Reports about something that could be resolved with a middle management policy memo," but that's a different conversation.
 
2013-06-10 09:56:46 AM
As McClatchy reported last week, "virtually no organizations perceived to be liberal or nonpartisan have come forward to say they were unfairly targeted" since the scandal came to light on May 10.

Maybe that's because if a liberal or nonpartisan group lied on tax forms they're smart enough to realize it's not unfair for the IRS to get pissy.
 
2013-06-10 09:57:06 AM
The Teatards DO have evil intentions for the world. They're just too dumb to realize it.
 
2013-06-10 09:57:20 AM

Girl Pants: "In the eyes of liberals progressives communists..."

Is it just me or does this feel like it needs some commas or slashes or hyphens or something? You can't just string three nouns together like that.


Punchuations and grammer are for elitests.
 
2013-06-10 09:59:42 AM

someonelse: In the eyes of liberals progressives communists (they are all the same)


This is a punctuation abomination.


Have you tried to write "liberals/progressives/communists" or any other word with 32 letters or more?
 
2013-06-10 10:01:24 AM

Satanic_Hamster: Dear right wing troll extremist site:
I don't think ANY group should have anonymous donations, regardless of party.  And if you're groups primary focus is to "fight the liberals" or "destroy Obama," then guess what; you're not a charity, you're a political group.  I don't care how much you hate the Democrats, that doesn't mean it's a charity to go after them.


Dammit, the grammar on this post went all to Hell.
 
2013-06-10 10:01:34 AM

Cythraul: Relatively Obscure: Well, comrades, it looks like they have us all figured out.  Time to hang it up.

Does this mean I can finally start showing off my Chairman Mao tattoo?

No, we are Soviet style communists. At least get it right. Chinese Communists are our allies now and build us cheap stuff.
 
2013-06-10 10:02:00 AM

Serious Black: EvilEgg: Most liberals I know think the targeting happened and was completely justified, because the Teabagger groups are political with just the barest fig leaf for cover.

[imgs.xkcd.com image 500x271]

I'd say the ratio of liberals is about 50/50 here on Fark who think the use of keywords and key phrases was justified and those who think it was not. Frankly, I think the hypocrisy meter spikes with conservatives. Every time I insist that the keyword system is profiling in the same vein as Stop and Frisk and Show Me Your Papers, they tell me I am wrong because those programs rightfully target the real lawbreakers while this one was clearly designed to destroy Obama's conservative Republican enemies (even though the program was instigated by a manager who admits he is a conservative Republican).


There's a bit of a difference between profiling groups with 'Tea Party' in their name who claim to not be primarily political, and profiling based on the color of someone's skin.

Skin color cannot be considered probable cause to suspect someone of committing a crime.
Naming yourself after a political party is yelling to the world that you ARE political.

As better analogy would be to compare what the IRS did to police profiling someone who changed their name from 'Leroy Jenkins' to 'Lemme Sell Ya Some Crack'
 
2013-06-10 10:02:18 AM

calm like a bomb: That headline is a goddamn disaster, Subby.


It's a quote from the comments underneath the article.
 
2013-06-10 10:03:01 AM
i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com

When the NAACP and other such groups explicitly endorse congressional candidates who then go on to deliver official State of then Union responses on behalf of these private organizations, then I'll agree with singling them out for extra scrutiny.
 
2013-06-10 10:03:04 AM

hinten: calm like a bomb: That headline is a goddamn disaster, Subby.

It's a quote from the comments underneath the article.


Ah.  My brain refused to let me get that far.
 
2013-06-10 10:09:02 AM

Pocket Ninja: LOTR


SAUROOOOOOOOOOOS!
 
2013-06-10 10:11:32 AM
It's not a Conservative or Liberal issue.

It's about tax fraud. And folks are incensed essentially that groups that wanted a tax dodge had to wait a bit for their tax dodge to have their tax dodge approved.

Not stopped. Not prevented. Just delayed. It's about political party machines doing campaign work, and getting to write it off. The real scandal is that they were approved at all. And what some are calling "Liberal" groups, some were doing much the same thing, and others were doing legitimate charity work. That the rules are so lax and nebulous IS the real scandal, because it essentially greenlights tax fraud on a large basis.
 
2013-06-10 10:13:05 AM

Pocket Ninja: They're not all the same, subby. The best way to describe the difference between them is probably to use metaphor based on fantasy stories, since people like you probably get off on that sort of thing. See, think of the Lord of the Rings movies. The first three, not that Hobbit idiocy.


So ... Gollum was once a hobbit, aka a communist.  Despite his upbringing, he ended up killing his own for material possessions.  So that would make him ... a christian?
 
2013-06-10 10:16:02 AM
The Tea Party has no idea what real suppression when it comes to politics.

This is what real government suppression is:

upload.wikimedia.org

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hampton
 
2013-06-10 10:16:21 AM

hubiestubert: It's not a Conservative or Liberal issue.

It's about tax fraud. And folks are incensed essentially that groups that wanted a tax dodge had to wait a bit for their tax dodge to have their tax dodge approved.

Not stopped. Not prevented. Just delayed. It's about political party machines doing campaign work, and getting to write it off. The real scandal is that they were approved at all. And what some are calling "Liberal" groups, some were doing much the same thing, and others were doing legitimate charity work. That the rules are so lax and nebulous IS the real scandal, because it essentially greenlights tax fraud on a large basis.


They didn't want a tax dodge. They wanted anonymity of their donors. If all they wanted was a tax exemption, they could have filed as a 527 group. This fact frequently gets ignored or obscured by the media, especially conservative-leaning media outlets. It's inconvenient to point out that almost every single one of the groups scrutinized in this saga already had a tax exemption in the bag because the narrative of "we're getting jacked in the face for millions of dollars just for our political opinions" is a lot more potent than "we're being forced to reveal who gave us millions of dollars but we're not getting taxed one dime."
 
2013-06-10 10:17:13 AM
I agree! This is absolutely why their applications were approved!

Wait...  what?
 
2013-06-10 10:19:14 AM
I'll say it again:

The only real scandal here is that these obvious political groups could even qualify for tax exempt status.

(And I'd say the same for any liberal political group.)
 
2013-06-10 10:19:44 AM

hubiestubert: That the rules are so lax and nebulous IS the real scandal, because it essentially greenlights tax fraud on a large basis.


That is indeed the real issue, lost in much of the hyperbole. All this served to highlight is that when someone attempt to handle the most egregious forms of tax-dodging, they get persecuted for it.
 
2013-06-10 10:21:31 AM
NRO article?  Yeah, pass...
 
2013-06-10 10:27:07 AM

Dog Welder: I'll say it again:

The only real scandal here is that these obvious political groups could even qualify for tax exempt status.

(And I'd say the same for any liberal political group.)


No, there really isn't a scandal there. Political organizations have been granted tax-exempt status since sometime shortly after Buckley v. Valeo in 1976. Again, the big difference between 501(c)(4) groups and 527 groups is the disclosure rules that apply to 527s and not to 501(c)(4)s. They were after anonymity.
 
2013-06-10 10:28:38 AM
Are conservatives really positive it's not their terrible, terrible ideas people object to?

Plus historically speaking, their is a lot of reason to really distrust anyone trying to score your vote to at least a certain degree.
 
2013-06-10 10:31:03 AM

Serious Black: EvilEgg: Most liberals I know think the targeting happened and was completely justified, because the Teabagger groups are political with just the barest fig leaf for cover.



I'd say the ratio of liberals is about 50/50 here on Fark who think the use of keywords and key phrases was justified and those who think it was not. Frankly, I think the hypocrisy meter spikes with conservatives. Every time I insist that the keyword system is profiling in the same vein as Stop and Frisk and Show Me Your Papers, they tell me I am wrong because those programs rightfully target the real lawbreakers while this one was clearly designed to destroy Obama's conservative Republican enemies (even though the program was instigated by a manager who admits he is a conservative Republican).


I think it would be justified if said fig leaf were not sufficient for getting tax-free status, as is apparently the case.

I see no political motivation to any of it, though. Just disorganization and incompetence.

Also, anyone who supports stop and frisk should be mercilessly harassed every moment they spend outside their own house.
 
2013-06-10 10:32:04 AM
4. Absolutely no political motivations

How is this a "myth" if all you have to say about it is conjecture? Yeah, the shiat the TFA mentions would make sense if there were evidence of a conspiracy (DNC donors, Occupy connections, etc blah blah blah) but it is most certainly not evidence of political motivations.

I'll have to give this 4 krushed skulls on the skullkrusher pants-on-fire-o-meter

/patent pending
 
2013-06-10 10:37:15 AM

skullkrusher: I'll have to give this 4 krushed skulls on the skullkrusher pants-on-fire-o-meter

/patent pending


Well, I'll give it only 3.5 supporting Shakespearean characters on the Mercutio74 "The lady doth protest too much" hijinx scale.
 
Displayed 50 of 173 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report