Why are Republicans Wrong about Everything?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 43441 - 43460 of total 54847 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Jingy

climber
Somewhere out there
May 20, 2013 - 10:32pm PT



What a bunch of republigoons….


Editing leaked emails supposedly leaked by the administration?


Which of the birthed goons wants to take a crack at this one?
The Warbler

climber
the edge of America
May 20, 2013 - 10:40pm PT
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

Again.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
May 21, 2013 - 12:41am PT
I'm not so sure of that, Dr F. What's the name of the guy who ran against Elizabeth Warren? Scott Brown? I won't vote for him, but he seems like a pretty moderate republican.

Scott Brown is clearly a moderate Republican (after all he was elected to fill Ted Kennedy's seat in Massachusetts) but that leads to a couple of interesting observations.

1) He's a dying breed.

2) "Moderate" is a regional concept. In a more conservative (i.e. Republican) state, he would simply be labeled a RINO and be unable to even win his party's nomination for any office.

Curt
rSin

Trad climber
calif
May 21, 2013 - 10:19am PT
that means he uses more tame language to describe the protion of the electorate hes dedicated to screwing under


anyone noticed how many resources boston had dedicated to spying on peace activists during the recent bombing?

"sorry about that jack the ripper incident, we had betty crocker under the microscope..."

http://www.progressive.org/spying-on-occupy-activists
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
May 21, 2013 - 11:03am PT
Brandon said
But, he's going to have a hard time in NH. Both senators, both congress members, and the governor, are women. Kelly Ayotte is the only republican, and given her recent gun control voting, she will most likely be voted out.

Eh, don't be so sure. 2016 is a long ways away. She's tacked to the middle on a number of things and is paling around with some of the "more moderate" *cough* members of the RNC like McCain and Graham. That will pull a lot of water with NH independents. She was voted in during the 2010 tea party midterm when most sensible NH voters stayed home and the whole place went "coocoo banana town" as my daughter would say.


Dave Kos taunted
Recent poll confirms the obvious.

Republicans aren't fooling anybody except their own base:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/20/poll-benghazi-irs-politics-blame-gop-obama/2343519/

That poll...I do not think it means what you think it means. All it is saying is that people think Obama's job just got harder....kind of a no-brainer and a stupid question to ask. According to WaPo, 60% of Americans think that Republicans have acted "properly" in their response to Benghazi. I personally think that's just because they assume that people keep talking about it because there is something worth talking about but I could be wrong. There is something worth talking about in regards to Libya, but I don't see anyone talking about it.
rSin

Trad climber
calif
May 21, 2013 - 11:12am PT
wonder why a liberal media would ketow to the conservative establishment in sliming the president and the facts?


Conservative Groups Were Not “Targeted,” “Singled Out” Or Anything Else

You are hearing that conservative groups were “targeted.” What you are not hearing is that progressive groups were also “targeted.” So were groups that are not progressive or conservative.

All that happened here is that groups applying to the IRS for special tax status were checked to see if they were engaged in political activity. They were checked, not targeted. Only 1/3 of the groups checked were conservative groups.

Once again: Only 1/3 of the groups checked were conservative groups.

Conservative groups were not “singled out,” were not “targeted” and in the end none were denied special tax status — even though many obviously should have been.

From last week’s House hearings on this:

Rep. Peter Roskam, R-IL: “How come only conservative groups got snagged?”

Outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller: “They didn’t sir. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. That’s shown by the fact that only 70 of the 300 organizations were tea party organizations, of the ones that were looked at by TIGTA [Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration].”

Bet you didn’t see that blasted all over your TV news that night.


http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/05/21-1
rSin

Trad climber
calif
May 21, 2013 - 11:18am PT
Click here to watch the video clip of this. It’s worth it.

And from Bloomberg reporting: IRS Sent Same Letter to Democrats That Fed Tea Party Row, (emphasis added, for emphasis)

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. Progress Texas … faced the same lines of questioning as the Tea Party groups from the same IRS office that issued letters to the Republican-friendly applicants. A third group, Clean Elections Texas, which supports public funding of campaigns, also received IRS inquiries.

In a statement late yesterday, the tax agency said it had pooled together the politically active nonpartisan applicants — including a “minority” that were identified because of their names. “It is also important to understand that the group of centralized cases included organizations of all political views,” the IRS said in its statement.


http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4451984
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 21, 2013 - 11:34am PT

The IRS Targeted Conservatives Because It Could

Peter Suderman|May. 20, 2013 11:01 am


The opening day excuse for the IRS targeting conservative groups requesting tax exempt status was that the IRS was facing an unusual influx of applicants. But that turns out not to have been the case. Applications for tax exempt 501 groups didn’t surge in 2010. In fact, the number of applicants was down in every category from 2009. The new line on the scandal is that it was a product of poor management, incompetence, and a struggling, understaffed agency. Here, for example, is The New York Times, in a reported piece from yesterday: “Overseen by a revolving cast of midlevel managers, stalled by miscommunication with IRS lawyers and executives in Washington, and confused about the rules they were enforcing, the Cincinnati specialists flagged virtually every application with Tea Party in its name.”

The IRS doesn’t look particularly good in this version of events. But it’s useful to liberals who want to argue that the problems stem from lack of resources—not a government that is too big, but one that is too small.

That’s somewhat complicated, of course, by the argument being made by folks like former White House adviser David Axelrod, who argued last week that the president couldn’t possibly have known about (and therefore couldn’t have any responsibility for) the actions of midlevel bureaucrats in a regional office.

I lean toward a version of the bigness argument that is a little less friendly to the administration than Axelrod’s: Yes, the federal government is so vast that accountability has become extremely difficult. That’s not so much an argument for absolving the guys at the top as it is for limiting the size of government—for making it less vast.

But I think that critiques that focus on the government’s size miss an important factor. This isn’t just a problem of bigness or smallness. It’s a problem of power.

When public servants have the power to make life difficult for narrowly defined groups of people—their political enemies, or disfavored causes, or people on the wrong side of a national discussion—they’ll end up using, and abusing, that power. It’s all but inevitable, whatever the reason. Sometimes they’ll do it because they’re out to punish their foes. Sometimes because they honestly believe it’s the fairest and most reasonable way to do their jobs. Sometimes because they’re mean and petty people. Sometimes because they think they’re making the nation a better place for all. Sometimes because they’re instructed to do so from on high. Sometimes because they’re not given enough instruction. Sometimes because they’re just plain incompetent.

It’s not that the reasons don’t matter at all. They do. But in some ways the particular reasons miss the larger point. Power will find a reason. It always does.

That’s the point that James Bovard made last week in a Wall Street Journal piece reviewing the history of IRS abuses. Bovard starts with a quote from David Burnham, who wrote a book on the revenue agency’s scandals: "In almost every administration since the IRS's inception the information and power of the tax agency have been mobilized for explicitly political purposes." Roosevelt used the IRS to battle opposition newspaper publishers and protect political allies. Kennedy’s IRS went after conservative tax-exempt organizations. Nixon’s White House created special oversight for “all IRS activities involving ideological, militant, subversive, [and] radical” organizations. It eventually targeted more than 10,000 individuals. Under Clinton, conservative activist groups and publications were singled out by the revenue agency for extra special scrutiny.

The scandal in the news today may be primarily attributed to the incompetence and mismanagement of a relatively small cohort of mid-level tax bureaucrats. It may be confined to a few IRS offices. There may be no evidence explicitly tying the targeting to political motivations.

But focusing on the narrow particulars of this specific scandal misses the larger point. Which is that this is a problem of power—a problem that has a long history, and a problem that the IRS has fought to avoid fixing. As Bovard notes, despite a record of politically charged abuses, the IRS “has usually done an excellent job of stifling investigations into its practices” and "has a long history of seeking to intimidate congressional critics." Big or small, smartly managed or incompetent—what allowed the IRS to target conservative groups was that it could. And what the agency’s history indicates is that when it can, it will.
dirtbag

climber
May 21, 2013 - 11:49am PT
boo-hoo-hoo
rSin

Trad climber
calif
May 21, 2013 - 11:51am PT
goddamned christians


head in a bucket where the voices they imagine are amplified ...


targetting those who want to drown the state in the bathtub news?!?!?!
except of course it didnt happen!??!?!?!

except in your fact addled dream world where law enforcement will soon be given theologically based marching orders

and suddenly, everything will turn into dasies?
rSin

Trad climber
calif
May 21, 2013 - 11:55am PT
no kidding!!!

IF ONLY the state was wise enough to take away your guns and save your kids from the slaughter of their minds which your 'homes' are designed to produce
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 21, 2013 - 12:01pm PT
never underestimate a lib's enthusiasm for displaying his ignorance

the article is from REASON; they're not conservatives; they're libertarians


of course, in the lib mind, an all powerful government that threatens freedom of the press will never threaten them; hence, the ap is suddenly part of the vast right-wing conspiracy:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/21/how-hope-and-change-gave-way-to-spying-on-the-press.html


and libs see this as more reason to ban guns

winston smith is dead
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 21, 2013 - 12:08pm PT
let us be clear about this


Bookworm gets a government paycheck

he gets government healthcare

and he will get a Nanny State big government pension when he retires


yes folks, booky has got it made in the shade!

photo not found
Missing photo ID#303826

jghedge

climber
May 21, 2013 - 12:38pm PT

Repubs will back off investigating the IRS targeting of the Tea Party

Why?

Because they know the Tea Party is the 2nd biggest threat their party faces - demographics being #1

Anything that engenders sympathy for the Tea Party encourages moderate repubs being tea bagged out of the primaries, as has already happened, and actually cost repubs the Senate

If the Tea Party is seen as being persecuted by the Obama DOJ, we'll have actual Tea Party candidates that'll split the conservative vote, and who will actually win in some cases, pushing the repub congressional caucus further right, and exacerbating yet another factor that accelerates their inevitable demise

Almost have to wonder if Obama actually did order the targeting of Tea Party groups, for exactly that reason
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 21, 2013 - 01:33pm PT
obamacare buyer's remorse:

http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/300823-treat-nonprofit-healthcare-fairly#ixzz2Tvz7YuSt
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
May 21, 2013 - 02:52pm PT
Conservative Groups Were Not “Targeted,” “Singled Out” Or Anything Else

You are hearing that conservative groups were “targeted.” What you are not hearing is that progressive groups were also “targeted.” So were groups that are not progressive or conservative.

I'm not sure if your statement constitutes misinterpretation of facts or intentional distortion. Here is a snippet from Wikipedia, so these statements must be true[ ;-) ]:

For a 27-month period that began in February 2010, the IRS did not approve any Tea Party organizations that had submitted applications. During that same time period, numerous liberal organizations with names including words such as “progress” or “progressive” did receive approval. However, several liberal organizations were also targeted for increased scrutiny by IRS officials with the same letter sent to many Tea Party groups, leading to an organization called Emerge America being denied tax-exempt status for alleged election spending concerns.[9]

Flagged organizations were required to provide further documentation that Rep. Bill Flores said was "overreaching and impossible to comply with"[10] Documentation requested varied between different groups but, in some cases, included copies of “any contracts” or “training material” the groups may have exchanged with Koch foundations.[11] Some organizations were asked what books their members were reading, as well as what they had posted on social networking websites, according to Politico.[12] Organizations were informed that if they did not provide the information sought, they would not be certified as tax-exempt.

One pro-life group said it was asked to "Please detail the content of the members of your organization's prayers.".[13]

During the time period in which the applications were being scrutinized, the Cincinnati office of the IRS violated policy by releasing nine pending applications from conservative groups to ProPublica, an investigative reporting organization.[14] Pending applications are confidential and may not be released. ProPublica had made a records request to the office seeking only completed applications, which are public information.

An IRS watchdog report found that some IRS employees were “ignorant about tax laws, defiant of their supervisors, and blind to the appearance of impropriety.”[15]

When Media Trackers, a conservative organization, applied to the IRS for non-profit status, after waiting 16 months, it received no response. When the organization's founder reapplied with what he said was a "liberal-sounding name" ("Greenhouse Solutions"), the re-application was approved in just three weeks.[16]

[Emphasis added]

^ [9] IRS Sent Same Letter to Democrats That Fed Tea Party Row, Bloomberg News, May 15, 2013
^ [10] IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo, USA Today, May 15, 2013
^ [11] Plait, Phil (2013-05-11). "IRS Tea Party investigations: The Internal Revenue Service’s targeted conservative groups. - Slate Magazine". Slate.com. Retrieved 2013-05-15.
^ [12] The IRS wants YOU — to share everything, Politico, May 15, 2013
^ [13] "IRS reportedly grilled pro-life group about the 'content of their prayers'".
^ [14] a b "IRS Office That Targeted Tea Party Also Disclosed Confidential Docs From Conservative Groups". ProPublica. 2012-11-15. Retrieved 2013-05-14.
^ [15] IG report: ‘Inappropriate criteria’ stalled IRS approvals of conservative groups, Washington Post, May 14, 2013
^[16] Conservative group says IRS approved nonprofit status after applying with ‘liberal-sounding name’, yahoo.com, May 15, 2013

Norton and others often criticize me (incorrectly, of course!) for alleged false equivalences in my arguments. The argument that conservative and liberal groups were both "targeted," and that therefore conservatives have no cause to gripe, is demonstrably a false equivalence.

John
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
May 21, 2013 - 02:56pm PT
I bet NONE of the targeted groups, liberal or conservative, have a legitimate non-political purpose or deserve non-profit status.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 21, 2013 - 03:04pm PT
ok, I give up


exactly WHAT "social welfare" purpose does the majority of Tea Party groups serve?

someone?

JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
May 21, 2013 - 03:17pm PT
exactly WHAT "social welfare" purpose does the majority of Tea Party groups serve?

someone?

The same one that the majority of liberal groups serve. I frankly have never understood why the 501(c)(4) exemption exists. If you want to force changes of behavior in others, you're necessarily involved in politics, and the 527 exemption should be the only avenue. If, on the other hand, you're directly aiding others with your own money, the 501(c)(3) exemption applies. So tell me again, why do we need 501(c)(4)?

John
jghedge

climber
May 21, 2013 - 03:23pm PT
"exactly WHAT "social welfare" purpose does the majority of Tea Party groups serve?"

AcceleratIng the demise of the Repub party

No nobler social welfare cause currently exists

And now the Tea Party will be stronger than ever, and field a 3rd party candidate (Rand Paul, in all likelihood) who will split the conservative vote.

Win-win!
Messages 43441 - 43460 of total 54847 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews