Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 139
  1. #106
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,446

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDragon24 View Post
    LOL, then by all means, it isn't true
    I'll up the ante.

    Point me to anyone with experience dealing with the IRS that says its true and I'll watch MSNBC for an hour.

  2. #107
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,803

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    Anyone paying attention to the Tea Party understands that hundreds of groups who applied for these tax exemptions were made to wait for years to get their groups' exemptions approved. They were not denied the exemption, but made to wait extended periods of time without responses and required to submit excessive amounts of information, in some cases, even retaining legal help to get it done. Many simply gave up on the process, some joined larger groups.

    So yes, the convenient fact for your side is that "no Tea Parties were stopped". The truth is that the process was made so overwhelming, many gave up and others were made to wait (conveniently for your side, until after the election). Others still, had to retain legal help and calls from legislators to get things through. Some reapplied without right wing sounding names and got approved.

    I'm not certain, but think we discussed this way back in the days of the election. It hasn't been a secret. I suspect your better read on current events than to have missed this side of the story.

    The difference you are claiming is incorrect. Its not between "facts" and "a lot of wondering about possibilities", but between selecting convenient facts and looking at the entirety of a subject. That your claim treads closely to the personal afronts you often cry foul about is another matter.

    I don't see any of that in taman's posts.
    Sure dutch. I merely posted an opinion of what I actually read with no claims regarding any fouls. Facts. Unlike having to respond to a post that stated what I had previously posted was "all just contrived and imaginary" while joking with the posters sig.

    As to what your concept is regarding the "difference you are claiming is incorrect", I'd like to hear more about that and less about you publicly singling me out for my posting style with comments of deletion and "treading closely". Not that I'm telling you what to do.

    I've never defended the IRS for what it did to during the election cycle. I have pointed out what is needed for us to prevent and change what has been done to both liberal and conservative causes as well as the hypocrisy of your party that went silent on the topic when a different president was in office and it was GOP members of congress calling for the IRS to investigate liberal causes. That president, btw, was the one who appointed the guy in charge of the IRS during the time of the last election which makes the barking from the right against Obama only more humorous to my ears.

    As to what you think you remember on the past topic of the IRS during the election, I'd like to see a refresher on that so that I may respond-including your posts on the topic- if this is such a tremendous point to be made at this time.
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  3. #108
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Age
    40
    Posts
    6,498

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    I'll up the ante.

    Point me to anyone with experience dealing with the IRS that says its true and I'll watch MSNBC for an hour.
    OK. Any of the hundreds of tea party groups that were allowed to operate as a tax exempt entity while they were asked questions about their tax exempt status. If they were considered guilty first, they would have had their status yanked. They didn't. None of them.

    You don't have to watch MSNBC for an hour. Instead try refraining from FOX NEWS for an hour.

  4. #109
    Joined
    Jan 2003
    Location
    NW OHIO
    Posts
    1,680

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackDragon24 View Post
    OK. Any of the hundreds of tea party groups that were allowed to operate as a tax exempt entity while they were asked questions about their tax exempt status. If they were considered guilty first, they would have had their status yanked. They didn't. None of them.

    You don't have to watch MSNBC for an hour. Instead try refraining from FOX NEWS for an hour.


    Thanks for making me smile BD! Sorry for the side rail, just wanted to let you know I appreciated that
    Derailing topics with varied sidetracks since 2003.

  5. #110
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,446

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    Sure dutch. I merely posted an opinion of what I actually read with no claims regarding any fouls. Facts.
    And you don't like a response that calls into question your reliance on convenient facts. Got it.

    Unlike having to respond to a post that stated what I had previously posted was "all just contrived and imaginary" while joking with the posters sig.
    Since your essential point here was that no Tea Party groups were stopped from getting tax exemptions, its fair to say its contrived and imaginary, because it certainly isn't true, if that's the comment you're referring to. If its some other comment, too bad. You aren't being very clear.

    As to what your concept is regarding the "difference you are claiming is incorrect", I'd like to hear more about that and less about you publicly singling me out for my posting style with comments of deletion and "treading closely". Not that I'm telling you what to do.
    Reread your post to Taman. That's where the words "facts" and "a lot of wondering about possibilities" came from.

    This has nothing to do with your posting style. I've addressed that elsewhere, but not here. If you continue questioning in public what I've said to you privately, I'll simply give you a vacation.

    I've never defended the IRS for what it did to during the election cycle. I have pointed out what is needed for us to prevent and change what has been done to both liberal and conservative causes as well as the hypocrisy of your party that went silent on the topic when a different president was in office and it was GOP members of congress calling for the IRS to investigate liberal causes. That president, btw, was the one who appointed the guy in charge of the IRS during the time of the last election which makes the barking from the right against Obama only more humorous to my ears.
    That's all well and fine. Why you post this in a response to what I said is lost on me. I didn't address any of this.

    As to what you think you remember on the past topic of the IRS during the election, I'd like to see a refresher on that so that I may respond-including your posts on the topic- if this is such a tremendous point to be made at this time.
    I can tell ya this much off the top of my head... I remember Democrats in congress calling for the Tea Party applications to be scrutinized, Obama calling the Tea Party, "enemies", and Tea Party groups complaining about applications to the IRS being held up.

  6. #111
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,446

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    If you Google "Carter Hull", you won't get any results from any of the MSM outlets. Not AP, NYTimes, LATimes, etc.

    Its as if congressional hearings about the IRS squelching the Tea Party simply don't happen anymore, according to the MSM.

    Crazy arse white crackers.

  7. #112
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Kern River Valley, CA
    Age
    71
    Posts
    21,568

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    If you Google "Carter Hull", you won't get any results from any of the MSM outlets. Not AP, NYTimes, LATimes, etc.

    Its as if congressional hearings about the IRS squelching the Tea Party simply don't happen anymore, according to the MSM.

    Crazy arse white crackers.
    Speaking of MSM didn't you just love the way Chris Matthews apologized for all of us crazy arse racist white crackers.

    Gosh I feel so much better now.

  8. #113
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,273

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    But really... lets talk about race again...

    http://datechguyblog.com/2013/07/20/...-three-images/

    Why Obama staged his Impromptu Presser on Trayvon in three images

    by Datechguy | July 20th, 2013

    ReadabilityThree Images from Memeorandum 6:20 PM July 19th 2013
    Image 1: Memeorandom on the IRS Testimony:

    Image 2: Memeorandum on Detroit

    Imgae 3: Memeorandum on President Obama’s I could have been Trayvon Speech?

    Any questions?
    ********************************************
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  9. #114
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,803

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    But really... lets talk about race again...

    http://datechguyblog.com/2013/07/20/...-three-images/

    Why Obama staged his Impromptu Presser on Trayvon in three images

    by Datechguy | July 20th, 2013

    ReadabilityThree Images from Memeorandum 6:20 PM July 19th 2013
    Image 1: Memeorandom on the IRS Testimony:

    Image 2: Memeorandum on Detroit

    Imgae 3: Memeorandum on President Obama’s I could have been Trayvon Speech?

    Any questions?
    ********************************************
    Yeah, one. Do you actually expect people to believe the tinfoil Beck-like associations you post?
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  10. #115
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,273

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    Yeah, one. Do you actually expect people to believe the tinfoil Beck-like associations you post?
    Says the master of all things little and green...



    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...ditorialPage_h
    Noonan: A Bombshell in the IRS Scandal

    No, it wasn't confined to a few rogue workers in Cincinnati.




    -


    The IRS scandal was connected this week not just to the Washington office—that had been established—but to the office of the chief counsel.

    That is a bombshell—such a big one that it managed to emerge in spite of an unfocused, frequently off-point congressional hearing in which some members seemed to have accidentally woken up in the middle of a committee room, some seemed unaware of the implications of what their investigators had uncovered, one pretended that the investigation should end if IRS workers couldn't say the president had personally called and told them to harass his foes, and one seemed to be holding a filibuster on Pakistan.

    Still, what landed was a bombshell. And Democrats know it. Which is why they are so desperate to make the investigation go away. They know, as Republicans do, that the chief counsel of the IRS is one of only two Obama political appointees in the entire agency.

    To quickly review why the new information, which came most succinctly in a nine-page congressional letter to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel, is big news:



    Getty Images IRS Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division revenue agent Elizabeth Hofacre, left, and retired IRS tax law specialist Carter Hull testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Capitol Hill on Thursday.



    When the scandal broke two months ago, in May, IRS leadership in Washington claimed the harassment of tea-party and other conservative groups requesting tax-exempt status was confined to the Cincinnati office, where a few rogue workers bungled the application process. Lois Lerner, then the head of the exempt organizations unit in Washington, said "line people in Cincinnati" did work that was "not so fine." They asked questions that "weren't really necessary," she claimed, and operated without "the appropriate level of sensitivity." But the targeting was "not intentional." Ousted acting commissioner Steven Miller also put it off on "people in Cincinnati." They provided "horrible customer service."
    House investigators soon talked to workers in the Cincinnati office, who said everything they did came from Washington. Elizabeth Hofacre, in charge of processing tea-party applications in Cincinnati, told investigators that her work was overseen and directed by a lawyer in the IRS Washington office named Carter Hull.

    Now comes Mr. Hull's testimony. And like Ms. Hofacre, he pointed his finger upward. Mr. Hull—a 48-year IRS veteran and an expert on tax exemption law—told investigators that tea-party applications under his review were sent upstairs within the Washington office, at the direction of Lois Lerner.

    In April 2010, Hull was assigned to scrutinize certain tea-party applications. He requested more information from the groups. After he received responses, he felt he knew enough to determine whether the applications should be approved or denied.

    But his recommendations were not carried out.

    Michael Seto, head of Mr. Hull's unit, also spoke to investigators. He told them Lois Lerner made an unusual decision: Tea-party applications would undergo additional scrutiny—a multilayered review.

    Mr. Hull told House investigators that at some point in the winter of 2010-11, Ms. Lerner's senior adviser, whose name is withheld in the publicly released partial interview transcript, told him the applications would require further review:

    Q: "Did [the senior adviser to Ms. Lerner] indicate to you whether she agreed with your recommendations?"
    A: "She did not say whether she agreed or not. She said it should go to chief counsel."
    Q: "The IRS chief counsel?"
    A: "The IRS chief counsel."

    The IRS chief counsel is named William Wilkins. And again, he is one of only two Obama political appointees in the IRS.
    What was the chief counsel's office looking for? The letter to Mr. Werfel says Mr. Hull's supervisor, Ronald Shoemaker, provided insight: The counsel's office wanted, in the words of the congressional committees, "information about the applicants' political activities leading up to the 2010 election." Mr. Shoemaker told investigators he didn't find that kind of question unreasonable, but he found the counsel's office to be "not very forthcoming":

    "We discussed it to some extent and they indicated that they wanted more development of possible political activity or political intervention right before the election period."

    It's almost as if—my words—the conservative organizations in question were, during two major election cycles, deliberately held in a holding pattern.

    So: What the IRS originally claimed was a rogue operation now reaches up not only to the Washington office, but into the office of the IRS chief counsel himself.

    At the generally lacking House Oversight Committee Hearings on Thursday, some big things still got said.

    Ms. Hofacre of the Cincinnati office testified that when she was given tea-party applications, she had to kick them upstairs. When she was given non-tea-party applications, they were sent on for normal treatment. Was she told to send liberal or progressive groups for special scrutiny? No, she did not scrutinize the applications of liberal or progressive groups. "I would send those to general inventory." Who got extra scrutiny? "They were all tea-party and patriot cases." She became "very frustrated" by the "micromanagement" from Washington. "It was like working in lost luggage." She applied to be transferred.

    For his part, Mr. Hull backed up what he'd told House investigators. He described what was, essentially, a big, lengthy runaround in the Washington office in which no one was clear as to their reasons but everything was delayed. The multitiered scrutiny of the targeted groups was, he said, "unusual."

    It was Maryland's Rep. Elijah Cummings, the panel's ranking Democrat, who, absurdly, asked Ms. Hofacre if the White House called the Cincinnati office to tell them what to do and whether she has knowledge of the president of the United States digging through the tax returns of citizens. Ms. Hofacre looked surprised. No, she replied.

    It wasn't hard to imagine her thought bubble: Do congressmen think presidents call people like me and say, "Don't forget to harass my enemies"? Are congressmen that stupid?

    Mr. Cummings is not, and his seeming desperation is telling. Recent congressional information leads to Washington—and now to very high up at the IRS. Meaning this is the point at which a scandal goes nowhere or, maybe, everywhere.
    Rep. Trey Gowdy, a South Carolina Republican, finally woke the proceedings up with what he called "the evolution of the defense" since the scandal began. First, Ms. Lerner planted a question at a conference. Then she said the Cincinnati office did it—a narrative that was advanced by the president's spokesman, Jay Carney. Then came the suggestion the IRS was too badly managed to pull off a sophisticated conspiracy. Then the charge that liberal groups were targeted too—"we did it against both ends of the political spectrum." When the inspector general of the IRS said no, it was conservative groups that were targeted, he came under attack. Now the defense is that the White House wasn't involved, so case closed.

    This is one Republican who is right about evolution.

    Those trying to get to the bottom of the scandal have to dig in, pay attention. The administration's defenders, and their friends in the press, have made some progress in confusing the issue through misdirection and misstatement.
    This is the moment things go forward or stall. Republicans need to find out how high the scandal went and why, exactly, it went there. To do that they'll have to up their game.

    A version of this article appeared July 19, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: A Bombshell in the IRS Scandal.



    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  11. #116
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,803

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    Says the master of all things little and green...



    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...ditorialPage_h
    Noonan: A Bombshell in the IRS Scandal

    No, it wasn't confined to a few rogue workers in Cincinnati.




    -


    The IRS scandal was connected this week not just to the Washington office—that had been established—but to the office of the chief counsel.

    That is a bombshell—such a big one that it managed to emerge in spite of an unfocused, frequently off-point congressional hearing in which some members seemed to have accidentally woken up in the middle of a committee room, some seemed unaware of the implications of what their investigators had uncovered, one pretended that the investigation should end if IRS workers couldn't say the president had personally called and told them to harass his foes, and one seemed to be holding a filibuster on Pakistan.

    Still, what landed was a bombshell. And Democrats know it. Which is why they are so desperate to make the investigation go away. They know, as Republicans do, that the chief counsel of the IRS is one of only two Obama political appointees in the entire agency.

    To quickly review why the new information, which came most succinctly in a nine-page congressional letter to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel, is big news:



    Getty Images IRS Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division revenue agent Elizabeth Hofacre, left, and retired IRS tax law specialist Carter Hull testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Capitol Hill on Thursday.



    When the scandal broke two months ago, in May, IRS leadership in Washington claimed the harassment of tea-party and other conservative groups requesting tax-exempt status was confined to the Cincinnati office, where a few rogue workers bungled the application process. Lois Lerner, then the head of the exempt organizations unit in Washington, said "line people in Cincinnati" did work that was "not so fine." They asked questions that "weren't really necessary," she claimed, and operated without "the appropriate level of sensitivity." But the targeting was "not intentional." Ousted acting commissioner Steven Miller also put it off on "people in Cincinnati." They provided "horrible customer service."
    House investigators soon talked to workers in the Cincinnati office, who said everything they did came from Washington. Elizabeth Hofacre, in charge of processing tea-party applications in Cincinnati, told investigators that her work was overseen and directed by a lawyer in the IRS Washington office named Carter Hull.

    Now comes Mr. Hull's testimony. And like Ms. Hofacre, he pointed his finger upward. Mr. Hull—a 48-year IRS veteran and an expert on tax exemption law—told investigators that tea-party applications under his review were sent upstairs within the Washington office, at the direction of Lois Lerner.

    In April 2010, Hull was assigned to scrutinize certain tea-party applications. He requested more information from the groups. After he received responses, he felt he knew enough to determine whether the applications should be approved or denied.

    But his recommendations were not carried out.

    Michael Seto, head of Mr. Hull's unit, also spoke to investigators. He told them Lois Lerner made an unusual decision: Tea-party applications would undergo additional scrutiny—a multilayered review.

    Mr. Hull told House investigators that at some point in the winter of 2010-11, Ms. Lerner's senior adviser, whose name is withheld in the publicly released partial interview transcript, told him the applications would require further review:

    Q: "Did [the senior adviser to Ms. Lerner] indicate to you whether she agreed with your recommendations?"
    A: "She did not say whether she agreed or not. She said it should go to chief counsel."
    Q: "The IRS chief counsel?"
    A: "The IRS chief counsel."

    The IRS chief counsel is named William Wilkins. And again, he is one of only two Obama political appointees in the IRS.
    What was the chief counsel's office looking for? The letter to Mr. Werfel says Mr. Hull's supervisor, Ronald Shoemaker, provided insight: The counsel's office wanted, in the words of the congressional committees, "information about the applicants' political activities leading up to the 2010 election." Mr. Shoemaker told investigators he didn't find that kind of question unreasonable, but he found the counsel's office to be "not very forthcoming":

    "We discussed it to some extent and they indicated that they wanted more development of possible political activity or political intervention right before the election period."

    It's almost as if—my words—the conservative organizations in question were, during two major election cycles, deliberately held in a holding pattern.

    So: What the IRS originally claimed was a rogue operation now reaches up not only to the Washington office, but into the office of the IRS chief counsel himself.

    At the generally lacking House Oversight Committee Hearings on Thursday, some big things still got said.

    Ms. Hofacre of the Cincinnati office testified that when she was given tea-party applications, she had to kick them upstairs. When she was given non-tea-party applications, they were sent on for normal treatment. Was she told to send liberal or progressive groups for special scrutiny? No, she did not scrutinize the applications of liberal or progressive groups. "I would send those to general inventory." Who got extra scrutiny? "They were all tea-party and patriot cases." She became "very frustrated" by the "micromanagement" from Washington. "It was like working in lost luggage." She applied to be transferred.

    For his part, Mr. Hull backed up what he'd told House investigators. He described what was, essentially, a big, lengthy runaround in the Washington office in which no one was clear as to their reasons but everything was delayed. The multitiered scrutiny of the targeted groups was, he said, "unusual."

    It was Maryland's Rep. Elijah Cummings, the panel's ranking Democrat, who, absurdly, asked Ms. Hofacre if the White House called the Cincinnati office to tell them what to do and whether she has knowledge of the president of the United States digging through the tax returns of citizens. Ms. Hofacre looked surprised. No, she replied.

    It wasn't hard to imagine her thought bubble: Do congressmen think presidents call people like me and say, "Don't forget to harass my enemies"? Are congressmen that stupid?

    Mr. Cummings is not, and his seeming desperation is telling. Recent congressional information leads to Washington—and now to very high up at the IRS. Meaning this is the point at which a scandal goes nowhere or, maybe, everywhere.
    Rep. Trey Gowdy, a South Carolina Republican, finally woke the proceedings up with what he called "the evolution of the defense" since the scandal began. First, Ms. Lerner planted a question at a conference. Then she said the Cincinnati office did it—a narrative that was advanced by the president's spokesman, Jay Carney. Then came the suggestion the IRS was too badly managed to pull off a sophisticated conspiracy. Then the charge that liberal groups were targeted too—"we did it against both ends of the political spectrum." When the inspector general of the IRS said no, it was conservative groups that were targeted, he came under attack. Now the defense is that the White House wasn't involved, so case closed.

    This is one Republican who is right about evolution.

    Those trying to get to the bottom of the scandal have to dig in, pay attention. The administration's defenders, and their friends in the press, have made some progress in confusing the issue through misdirection and misstatement.
    This is the moment things go forward or stall. Republicans need to find out how high the scandal went and why, exactly, it went there. To do that they'll have to up their game.

    A version of this article appeared July 19, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: A Bombshell in the IRS Scandal.



    wow, complete with pictures. A bombshell. Right. So says Peggy Noonan, we'll see considering Issa specified an investigative report, not covering all aspects of IRS watch groups, only conservative and had discussions where he knew it would be expanded under closed doors and not public. Tinfoil hat time again. I can see that chalkboard with all the lines and arrows drawn dictating your every post or as you say "the left attacks anyone who points out the activity of the administration run by the scumbag they elected into office twice"
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  12. #117
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,273

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    wow, complete with pictures. A bombshell. Right. So says Peggy Noonan, we'll see considering Issa specified an investigative report, not covering all aspects of IRS watch groups, only conservative and had discussions where he knew it would be expanded under closed doors and not public. Tinfoil hat time again. I can see that chalkboard with all the lines and arrows drawn dictating your every post or as you say "the left attacks anyone who points out the activity of the administration run by the scumbag they elected into office twice"
    So your complaint is the tinfoil hat is chafing?
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  13. #118
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,803

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    So your complaint is the tinfoil hat is chafing?
    Only you can tell us that scoot. Is it getting tighter because your head is swelling? Does it chafe?
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  14. #119
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,273

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Just a coincidence I'm sure.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...s-david-french

    No, the IRS Did Not Target Progressives Like It Targeted Conservatives
    By David French
    July 31, 2013 2:19 PM
    Comments 53

    NPR’s politics blog has published a chart — compiled from a House Ways and Means staff analysis — of the different levels of IRS targeting between conservative and progressive groups. Bottom line? Far more conservative groups faced IRS scrutiny, they faced more questions, and were approved at a much lower rate than progressives. The chart is based on the IRS’s now-discredited “BOLO” (be on the lookout) lists.

    Looking at the numbers, the chart answers a question I’ve asked myself ever since the Left claimed that it had been targeted as well: If progressives experienced similar targeting, why didn’t they make any notable contemporaneous complaints? After all, conservatives raised the issue well over a year ago, members of Congress asked the IRS commissioner about it directly, and the New York Times was even moved by the complaints to write its now-clownish March 7, 2012, editorial claiming the IRS was merely “do[ing] its job.”

    Perhaps progressives didn’t complain because their targeting experience involved seven groups that were asked an average of just five additional questions (rounded up to be generous) and were approved at a 100 percent rate.

    By contrast, 104 ”phony scandal” conservative groups experienced an average of 15 additional questions (14.9 to be exact), only 46 percent were approved, and 56 groups are either waiting for a determination or have withdrawn in frustration. There is simply no comparison.

    I’ve pasted the chart below. (Full disclosure: I’m a senior attorney on the ACLJ’s lawsuit against the United States and key IRS defendants on behalf of 41 conservative groups in 22 states)

    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  15. #120
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,446

    Re: IRS vs. The Tea Party

    Lerner retired today.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •