Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
IRS Targeted Conservative Groups Part 2  
User currently offlineiowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4368 posts, RR: 6
Posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 970 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Due to length of the first thread, here is part two.

Previous thread: IRS Targeted Conservative Groups (by DeltaMD90 May 10 2013 in Non Aviation)

Thank you to all who have kept the previous thread civil.

[Edited 2013-05-22 09:17:06]


Next flights: WN DSM-LAS-PHX, US PHX-SJD. Return: US SJD-PHX, WN PHX-MDW-DSM
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5359 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 955 times:

But, stop targeting the president.

Again, where is the president being targeted? Yup, his administration is being targeted. It seems that high officials within the IRS and folks inside The White House were well aware of the IRS targeting well before President Obama says he found out about it.

Like bringing down the cost of health care or creating good paying jobs

Maybe The Senate could pass a bill or two and let us know they're still there.

Can I also point out that there was ZERO outrage from the right when Cheney held secret energy meetings. ZERO outrage in 2004 when he forced John Ashcroft to sign off on his plans while Ashcroft was in the hospital. ZERO outrage when both Bush and Cheney were called to testify and did so behind closed doors and not sworn in.

None of which were illegal. By the way, has President Obama been called to testify, publically or privately? Hmmm, it seems that if the GOP was targeting him, they would call on him to testify.

Why, then, is there so much outrage over Obama wanting investigations over the IRS doing it's job?

There is no outrage over him calling for the investigations. In fact, I applaud his statement. I assume that he has told everyone in his administration and in the upper levels of the IRS to fully cooperate with the investigations so that "... we find out exactly what happened on this,".

I support the president in his efforts to get to the truth.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7832 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 926 times:

Seb, which Republican politicians are you talking about? I'm actually quite pleased that the GOP isn't going absolutely crazy like I thought they would. I'm sure there are some overreactions but by and large I see the GOP asking good questions. And it isn't just the GOP, people from both sides are questioning the actions of the IRS. I'm not really sure what you are seeing, I don't see this like other instances where the right clearly overreacted (IMO)

The worst criticism of the President I've seen (that has been voiced more than the random, extreme crap that always pops up no matter what) is the President hasn't been a good leader and he probably should have known more about it or had a better handling on the situation. I don't think this is an unreasonable criticism... while I don't expect every leader to be 100% responsible for 100% of a subordinate's actions, a leader ultimately takes some blame. When workers cause an oil spill, we get mad at the oil company's leaders even though they didn't spill anything personally. When a soldier does something stupid, the CO of the unit takes some heat as well. That's how leadership works.

I gotta say, so far (and unless I'm overlooking something) props to the majority of the GOP for not taking this too far (so far.) Also, props to the President and other Democrats for not just ignoring this since it happened to the other side. Let's see where it all goes from here



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 891 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 1):
None of which were illegal.

Obama held a meeting with an IRS official and the right went nuts with that. Some felt that was the smoking gun. But, testifying before Congress with no reporters and not being sworn in (Bush & Cheney) was just fine? I understand there are points of national security which could have been redacted, and they still could have been sworn in.

John Ashcroft was lying in a hospital bed and Dick Cheney went there and DEMANDED he sign off on illegal warrantless wiretapping. Any outrage from the right? Nope. In fact, the right said "it's a matter of national security. We must wiretap everyone at all times." Not just Cheney and Bush, but the whole cheerleading squad from FOX right down to members of this forum.

And still no outrage from the right.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 1):
where is the president being targeted?

Every time a (non) scandal is brought up, the first thing out of the right is "Obama knows something". It is really getting sickening.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 1):
There is no outrage over him calling for the investigations.

Then the right needs to stop acting like he did something wrong and stop acting like he is covering up stuff.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 2):
which Republican politicians are you talking about?

Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes and Thom Hartmann, the only "liberal" talkers we are allowed in this nation, play verbatim every instance of every right-winger implicating Obama. If you can find these three on, listen to them. They don't say "Someone said that someone said," but, instead, they say "Darryl Issa said..." or "Rand Paul said..." and they play the audio. The "fair and balanced" right-wing media does not do that.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2988 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 860 times:

Lois Lerner took the 5th amendment today.
A $4M statement as I see it and opened the door for a special prosecutor.
I am sure there will be a few in the executive branch working overtime trying to cover that damage.
Now she will have to testify whether she wants to or not I suspect she will when the deal is done hey $4M bucks is $4M bucks.

Okie


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 849 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 4):
Lois Lerner took the 5th amendment today.

And she is the one who brought all this to light.

And, still, Obama had nothing to do with it. Just wait.

As soon as Obama is cleared, this will all go away. No heads will roll. No right-winger anywhere in Congress will demand anything. Instead, they will hammer away at another non-event claiming Obama did it.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2988 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 845 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
And, still, Obama had nothing to do with it. Just wait

No one said anything about Obama, please read,the topic is IRS Targeted Conservative Groups.

If you want to start an Obama is a victim topic then feel free to do so.

Okie


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4487 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 842 times:

Who cares who had what to do with it? There is too much concentration on the elected politicians. The IRS is made up of career federal employees

At the end of the day the IRS has a responsibility to equally and equitably apply the tax laws to the US . They failed. Miserably Here We need to have a reckoning of that moment. The IRS should be absolutely Non Partisan.


Having said that, I still think there is more to the story about how many "Conservative " applications there were. However the scrutiny should not have been what it was. The federal government did police itself through, and we are were we are now through the due diligence of he people and recourse made possible by law. There are many other countres where this would not be possible.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 836 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 4):
Lois Lerner took the 5th amendment today.

Lois Lerner THINKS she took the fifth; this babe has a lot to learn about congressional hearings and court proceedings;

When you take the fifth, you say, "I'm not going to talk," PERIOD. After SHE said she wasn't going to testify, she THEN launched into a long, "I'm not guilty"..."I didn't do this", "I did nothing wrong"........none of which you are allowed to do. She effectively shot herself in the foot; They have already informed her that she will be back before the committee again tomorrow. The woman has already HUNG herself; she has already admitted gross bias towards conservative groups, then turns around and says "I have done nothing wrong" ! Unbelievable ! And the news people are saying she has a VERY interesting "background".........something tells me that we are about to start hearing a LOT about her "background" !



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2988 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 833 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 7):
At the end of the day the IRS has a responsibility to equally and equitably apply the tax laws to the US . They failed. Miserably Here We need to have a reckoning of that moment. The IRS should be absolutely Non Partisan.

Precisely is should be non partisan and I suspect from testimony so far the order came from up high and a lot of the fine government employees were just doing what they were told to do.
We have 2 issues
1. The issue of releasing donor names on 501c4's to special interest groups. That is title 18.
2. How high the food chain was the targeting command given to delay 501c4's for the ethnic, religious and political groups, along with IRS audits of their donors taxes.

Lerner took the 5th after giving testimony this morning. That opens the door for special prosecution.
That will get the wheels spinning at the exec branch.
A. Some might say she and her council are the dumbest people on the planet. (Which they are not by the way)
B. The Special Prosecutor will issue her Declination of Criminal Prosecution then an Administrative Warning, she is a government employee she has to testify or lose her job along with criminal prosecution. If she testifies to what ever they allow for exemption then she will not be criminally charged for those crimes allowed in the exemption, get a letter in her file and continue working to 65 plus retirement. This would be typical when they catch small fish and want to move up the food chain for larger fish.
She has about 12 to 16 years before retirement a 250k job with 100k bonuses. That conservatively $4M bucks.
Her and her legal council are pretty smart I would say, just wonder what the executive branch council has to say?

Okie


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4487 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 829 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 9):

Precisely is should be non partisan and I suspect from testimony so far the order came from up high and a lot of the fine government employees were just doing what they were told to do.

That's a possibility, but such persuasion would mean that they lack integrity, and would do the same for any elected official. Nixon? Bush> Clinton? Reagon? Carter? This issue is bigger than one administration, and quite honestly the fact that it took external prodding to me means that this issue is more to do with something out of the norm occurring in applications. I am not absolving the IRS of wrongdoing, but there seems to still be more to this story.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2988 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 823 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 10):
I am not absolving the IRS of wrongdoing, but there seems to still be more to this story.

Interesting to follow, my first thought was Lerner taking the 5th was not very smart, made me do research, she has excellent council. She will go to jail or testify, I suspect the later. I am sure whom ever it is up the food chain is squirming a little right now because that is what the special prosecutor will give her a pass on prosecution for testimony.

Okie


User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 3942 posts, RR: 28
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 823 times:

Really incredible... if I refused to answer any questions to my boss on a criminal matter involving my activities at work, I would be fired in less than 5 seconds, but if you are a government worker you can just go about your own business.

Regarding this case more broadly, either this administration / some elected officials are corrupt or the whole government is corrupt and devises out of its own volition mechanisms to try to stop those who pose a challenge to its authority. The second option is a lot more serious than the first one.



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4487 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 819 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 11):
Interesting to follow, my first thought was Lerner taking the 5th was not very smart, made me do research, she has excellent council. She will go to jail or testify, I suspect the later. I am sure whom ever it is up the food chain is squirming a little right now because that is what the special prosecutor will give her a pass on prosecution for testimony.

You are assuming a lot, and some may be correct, but how high up the chain is determined by responsibility or loyalty. It will be a witch hunt from here. Maybe some guilty , maybe not. Pleading the 5th to me is usually more about self incrimination. if I have nothing to lose, there is no gain from pleading the 5th



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2988 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 815 times:

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 12):
Regarding this case more broadly, either this administration / some elected officials are corrupt or the whole government is corrupt and devises out of its own volition mechanisms to try to stop those who pose a challenge to its authority. The second option is a lot more serious than the first one

Right now the appearance is that the executive branch of government would make Chavez proud.
That is why we have three branches and a constitution.
We have the legislative branch investigating the executive branch for violations of the constitution and abuse of power.
The IRS is the executive branch and with a few exceptions has been left out of the political process and just followed the tax code/laws. We have had a few presidents in the past that tried to use the tax code for political purpose and were impeached.
Right now they are in the first steps of determining who gave the orders to target the opposing groups of the present administration.
It will be maybe a 1 year process but we will do it legally to get to the source of the criminal activities.

Okie


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 815 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 6):
No one said anything about Obama

Except the right-wing elected officials and the right-wing media.

Also, no one is talking about the right-wing groups like Crossroads GPS and Americans For Prosperity who were granted c4 status but are not doing any charitable work. Why is no one talking about all the groups who were granted c4 status and are simply passing money through?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4487 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 813 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 15):
Also, no one is talking about the right-wing groups like Crossroads GPS and Americans For Prosperity who were granted c4 status but are not doing any charitable work. Why is no one talking about all the groups who were granted c4 status and are simply passing money through?

it will come up in the future,(2016) However he main issue for now is why the IRS went fubart on their processing the pastgfew years... or...... maybe more years. ?



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2988 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 809 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 15):

Except the right-wing elected officials and the right-wing media

Then vote Democrat more often and change channels. That is about all the help I can give you there.

Okie


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 784 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 16):
However he main issue for now is why the IRS went fubart on their processing the pastgfew years... or...... maybe more years.

And, also, how many of those given extra notice were denied?

Why is it an issue when they got what they wanted?

Again (go back to the other thread and see what I wrote): groups should not be targeted on political grounds. However, if there is some question, they should be questioned. Could it be that IRS was just doing their job?

Quoting okie (Reply 17):
Then vote Democrat more often and change channels.

25% of the country does. It is trying to wake up the other 75%. They have what they were told what they wanted and they are told they are still under attack and don't have it.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5359 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 781 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3):
Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes and Thom Hartmann, the only "liberal" talkers we are allowed in this nation, play verbatim every instance of every right-winger implicating Obama.

Please provide citations where Rand, Issa et al. have said, in unqualified language, that President Obama is to blame and should be impeached.

If I were to come here and say "well, Limbaugh, Medved, Hannity, Levin, etc. said a politician said 'X' and therefore it is true", without am adequate citation, I would be laughed off this board.

What I have heard is what we've all been saying here: IF Obama knew about it. IF Obama ordered it.

Do you have an issue with the word "if"?

Provide me a link to where Rand or McConnell (my senators) have linked Obama to this, in context and unqualified, and I will call their offices and email them today and demand that they back off and await the investigations before accusin

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
And she is the one who brought all this to light.

In a planted, scripted fashion that was designed to be a "mea culpa, ok let's get on with dinner sort of way", that back-fired massively because, whether you're right, left or center, everyone knows what the IRS did was illegal.

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/22/lois_lerner_irs_disaster/

Salon asks a good question: Why hasn't she been fired yet?

[

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
As soon as Obama is cleared, this will all go away. No heads will roll. No right-winger anywhere in Congress will demand anything.

I believe you under-estimate the severity of this.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 7):
Who cares who had what to do with it?

I care and you should care. I want to know who ordered it, who was aware of it and why it was allowed to continue for so long? I don't care if it was just career flunkies at the IRS or if it goes all the way to the top of the administration. This is a freaking serious matter. Laws were broken and the trust that the government says we're supposed to have in them has been shattered.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 10):
This issue is bigger than one administration, and quite honestly the fact that it took external prodding to me means that this issue is more to do with something out of the norm occurring in applications. I am not absolving the IRS of wrongdoing, but there seems to still be more to this story.

Yup. The IRS has been allowed, by too many administrations to run rough-shod over the people in the quest to get the revenue the government demands.

You know, this may just be the impetus, along with the Apple, et al. witch-hunt in The Senate, to get some meaningful IRS Code reform. Maybe? Possibly? Please?

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 12):
Really incredible... if I refused to answer any questions to my boss on a criminal matter involving my activities at work, I would be fired in less than 5 seconds, but if you are a government worker you can just go about your own business.

Yup, that's why, at the minimum, she should be suspended.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2988 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 779 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 18):
Could it be that IRS was just doing their job?

Err no, you seem to overlook the facts in the IG's report, or why the Democrats themselves are crying foul.

In spite of all the title 18 criminal charges involved we have the massive abuse of power denying First Amendment Constitutional Rights.
Ironic that Lerner who was involved with denying citizens of Constitutional Rights decides to use those rights to keep from incriminating herself.

Okie


User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5490 posts, RR: 28
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 767 times:

It is shortsighted to regard this as a partisan issue.

The power of taxation, and the enforcement of tax laws, is by far the most potent instrument of oppression possessed by our government. When those who possess the power to impose financial ruin on the citizens take it upon themselves to abuse the power vested in them, for whatever purpose, it should chill each and all of you. The fact that the groups targeted for extra scrutiny might be groups with whose politics you differ should never be grounds for approval; political parties and their power wax and wane; the implacable and unyielding power of the bureaucracy lives on, and grows inexorably if not vigorously and even-handedly policed.

If you do not object today, who will be there to object when they come for you?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 18):

Why is it an issue when they got what they wanted?

When African-Americans were relegated to eating in the kitchens, rather than the dining rooms, of restaurants, they still "got what they wanted" (a meal); when compelled to ride in the back of the bus, they still "got what they wanted" (transportation to their destination). I would vigorously challenge the contention that, so long as an applicant to the government achieves its ultimate goal, it doesn't matter what indignities, insults or extra steps were required to get there?

Equal protection under the law matters, and it matters a lot.



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 734 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 20):
Lerner who was involved with denying citizens of Constitutional Rights

Prey, tell, what "Constitutional Rights" were denied?

I would also point to the tens of thousands of applications submitted claiming 501c4 status and also, under penalty of perjury, swear they will not engage in political activity. Then, turn around and give money to political organizations. Those organizations with "Tea" and "Patriot" in their names, among others. Yet, somehow, they were still approved. Even when they lied on the application.

No one is pointing that out, either.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7832 posts, RR: 52
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 732 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 15):
Except the right-wing elected officials and the right-wing media.

Except they're actually not being that obnoxious about it. As much as we'd like it, it's impossible to shut all the pundits up but I don't really think the GOP is being that unreasonable so far

Quoting seb146 (Reply 15):
Also, no one is talking about the right-wing groups like Crossroads GPS and Americans For Prosperity who were granted c4 status but are not doing any charitable work. Why is no one talking about all the groups who were granted c4 status and are simply passing money through?

okkk... if you are correct that is valid but that is a totally different issue. We aren't talking about that, we're talking about the IRS targeting one political party and not the other

Quoting seb146 (Reply 18):
Could it be that IRS was just doing their job?

Why don't you ask our President that because he seems to disagree with you and agree with the bulk of the Republicans (the majority who is investigating this and not just trying to impeach the President.)

Seb, let's just remove all politics aside here, and this isn't a trap or anything:

Do you think the IRS targeted conservative groups only/more so than left leaning groups?
If yes, do you think that action is wrong?
If yes, don't you think that it should be investigated?

Trust me, I'm watching the GOP really closely and am ready to throw up the BS flag if they start going out of control. But I think, Republicans think, most Democrats I've talked to think, and the President himself thinks that the IRS targeted conservative groups (they even admitted it!) and that was indeed wrong and heads should roll. This is strangely bi-partisan, I can see you being wary of the GOP's position but it seems like you're actually disagreeing with the President here... which is fine, but you seem to be in disagreement to protect/defend him but are going into "sweep wrongdoings under the rug" territory.

No one is gonna think you're an Obama hater if you ask some of these questions. There are plenty of us here that want to get to the bottom of this without impeaching the President (unless he legitimately did egregiously abuse power which I HIGHLY doubt)



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5359 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 728 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 22):
I would also point to the tens of thousands of applications submitted claiming 501c4 status and also, under penalty of perjury, swear they will not engage in political activity. Then, turn around and give money to political organizations. Those organizations with "Tea" and "Patriot" in their names, among others. Yet, somehow, they were still approved. Even when they lied on the application.

You keep bringing this up, but it's a false flag. It is misdirection. If you want to discuss the merits of a particular 501(c)(4) or all of them or the whole process itself, feel free to start a thread about it.

This thread is about the IRS targeting conservative groups (their own admission) and the questions that arise from that. Questions like:

-how long has it been going on?
-who authorized it?
-who knew about it?
-when did those folks know about it?
-what did those people do about it when they found out?
-why did it happen?

When the questions (and I'm sure the attorneys out there will come up with more) are answered and accountability is meted as required, we will be satisfied.

Until then, we need to dig.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 735 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 24):
You keep bringing this up, but it's a false flag. It is misdirection.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 23):
we're talking about the IRS targeting one political party and not the other

Over a law.

That's what this is about. People are outraged over targeting political groups trying to get tax exempt status.

But, that's not what people want to talk about. People want to talk about targeting political groups period. People just want to ignore the whole "for tax exempt status" part of it. I do not think there should be a separate thread for it. This is all part of the 501c4 status the right keeps pointing to. The whole "tax exemption" and "not being used for political purposes" part. I think that is VERY relevant to the issue.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7832 posts, RR: 52
Reply 26, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 733 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 25):
That's what this is about. People are outraged over targeting political groups trying to get tax exempt status.

NO! No it's not! That is absolutely NOT what this is about! I and many others have agreed that these political groups are probably wielding too much power in our political system. But again, you are completely missing the outrage, the outrage that even the President is expressing.

Again, the IRS is doing it's job and, IMO, rightly going after groups taking advantage of the system. BUT you can just target one political party! This is stereotyping and putting one side at a disadvantage. It doesn't matter if "no harm has come from it," it doesn't matter if "one side is allegedly being shady." With that logic, I'll go back to my example: most illegal aliens are Mexican. Is it ok for cops to target Mexican looking people because Mexicans are comprise most of the illegal immigration and it's ok since no lawful Mexican looking person who is an American citizen is getting deported?

You're free to still disagree, but from what you are saying, you seem to be completely missing the point



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5359 posts, RR: 14
Reply 27, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 725 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 25):
That's what this is about. People are outraged over targeting political groups trying to get tax exempt status

No, you have missed the point.

This is about the IRS, and by extension, the government abusing its power.

This is about the government trying to silence a political movement...during an election.

It's bigger than the IRS. It's bigger than the administration and it's bigger than the presidency.

This is about an intrusive government that is growing more brazen in its action everyday.

It is about a government that is out of control.

That's what this is about.


Again, you want to discuss the pros and cons of 501(c) organizations; start another thread.

This thread is about so much bigger things.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11533 posts, RR: 15
Reply 28, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 710 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 27):
This is about the IRS, and by extension, the government abusing its power.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 26):
the IRS is doing it's job

By making sure that people filing tax exempt status will not be giving money to political causes.

Don't you think it suspicious that thousands of applications flood into the IRS with words like "patriot" and "tea party" are filing for tax exempt status? Follow the money. They turn around and give upwards of millions of dollars to right-wing politicians and political causes. Why is that so hard to understand? Why can't Congress be outraged over that? The IRS trying to do there job. The nerve!

EDIT:

Two links I found interesting:
http://www.propublica.org/article/six-facts-lost-in-irs-scandal
explaining why the focus is on the wrong thing and:
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicg81.pdf
which explains what 501c4 status is. There is a section down that explains that the interpretation of the law was changed at some point, but a group must still *primarily* focus on charity work.

So, again, I ask: what charity work has Crossroads GPS done? What charity work has AFP done? What charity work has America Future Fund done? Keep in mind: even with the change (not mandated by anyone. The spirit was changed in 1959) it is still assumed the *majority* of work done by these groups is charity work.

[Edited 2013-05-23 21:51:10]


Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5490 posts, RR: 28
Reply 29, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 659 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 28):

So, again, I ask: what charity work has Crossroads GPS done? What charity work has AFP done? What charity work has America Future Fund done? Keep in mind: even with the change (not mandated by anyone. The spirit was changed in 1959) it is still assumed the *majority* of work done by these groups is charity work.

Irrelevant to the current discussion (though possibly merits another discussion).

The decision to vary the stringency and thoroughness of review of applicants based upon the names used and the like is wrong.



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8792 posts, RR: 24
Reply 30, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 654 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 3):
John Ashcroft was lying in a hospital bed and Dick Cheney went there and DEMANDED he sign off on illegal warrantless wiretapping. Any outrage from the right? Nope.

Myth. Dick Cheney was not there. Ashcroft was asked to sign off on it (by others), and he refused.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 28):
So, again, I ask: what charity work has Crossroads GPS done? What charity work has AFP done?

Charities are not the only ones allowed tax-free status.

501(c)(3) — Religious, Educational, Charitable, Scientific, Literary, Testing for Public Safety, to Foster National or International Amateur Sports Competition, or Prevention of Cruelty to Children or Animals Organizations

501(c)(4) — Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Non Av Pic Thread Q2 2013 Part 2 posted Wed May 15 2013 22:37:27 by vikkyvik
Word Game Part 316 posted Mon May 13 2013 08:59:47 by iowaman
Two Bomb Blast In Boston USA Part 2 posted Fri Apr 19 2013 08:29:37 by jetblueguy22
Falkland Islands Sovereignty Referendum Part 2 posted Thu Mar 14 2013 01:56:56 by wilco737
Budget Stalemate Whos Fault? Part 2 posted Thu Mar 7 2013 15:02:40 by iowaman
Obama Wants To Raise Minimum Wage Part 3 posted Sat Feb 23 2013 09:31:06 by iowaman
Pope Benedict XVI To Resign Part 2 posted Tue Feb 19 2013 18:44:16 by iowaman
Obama Wants To Raise Minimum Wage Part 2 posted Sun Feb 17 2013 21:15:29 by jetblueguy22
CNN P. Morgan Rips Mil. Sheriff Over Guns Part 2 posted Sat Feb 9 2013 10:45:02 by iowaman
Conservative Criticizes Obama... posted Fri Feb 1 2013 08:00:33 by hOmsAR