IRS Persecution Is A War On Women
By: Dana Loesch (Diary) | May 15th, 2013 at 08:05 PM | 7
Forget “binders full of women” — the IRS’s persecution of hundreds of tea party groups is the real war on women. I co-founded the movement in my hometown of St. Louis and have travelled the country with various tea party groups and I’ve seen it first hand: the tea party movement was predominately led by women. It isn’t a slight to our men; in speech after speech I mentioned how the nation’s men have been neutralized in this fight by the left’s ridiculous identity politics and bunk sexism claims. I’ve opined more than once “My husband can’t hit a girl, but I can.” It’s the truth — and it’s why women raised up from around the country to lead the charge.
That’s why this IRS scandal is all the more stunning. If the left can claim that Romney’s “binders full of women” remark is indicative of a festering female hatred on the right, if they can claim that the demand for grown women to pay for their own preventative pregnancy sexual recreation pills is a sign that conservatives hate women, then the IRS going all Spanish Inquisition on groups of a female-led movement is the war of all wars on women.
These groups were profiled. They were asked for more information than other groups, information about Facebook posts and even thoughts. While OWS was allowed to collect tax deductible donations through sponsor 501(c)(3)s, tax-exempt requests from groups like Smart Girl Politics languished.
The very people who called the requirement for photo identification are defending this. The people who defended the DOJ when it targeted states like Arizona for immigration reform and said such laws were “profiling” are silent about actual profiling of these groups.
So far, the Big Lady Champions™ like NOW and Sack-n-Save parking lot packer Sandra Fluke are silent.
Yeah. Here’s your war on women.
IRS Persecution Is A War On Women | RedState
Except that, as little as I know about various "Tea Party" groups, what I do know is that these loosely affiliated individuals--including me, depending--actually are those who are eager to see reform in the government and also accountability.
Which makes them definitely not poor or naive or uneducated or clueless. They aren't "low-information" voters.
Which gives the lie to your narrative and also to your bid for martyrdom here.
This may all be exactly what the people who don't like Democrats want it to be, so I am not defending them, but I am pondering some alternative motivation.
Here's a couple ideas, and again, just ideas, not arguing that this is what happened...
1. IRS employees were targeting organizations for political reasons, but not the obvious reasons, but very direct reasons - Groups that explicitly despise the IRS.
2. It may have been a keyword filter based on experience of groups that were political in nature and not eligible to be 501(c)4 social welfare organizations. It is possible that other political sounding name filters had long been exhausted, but Tea Party Patriot was a fairly new thing. Just a thought, but are any of us familiar with any social welfare organizations with Tea Party in the name?
3. Interestingly, 15 years ago and 23 years ago, the IRS was involved in the exact same kind of scandal, first again women's issue groups, later against gay rights groups, and now right wing groups. The said reality is that Congress had the power to stop this at any time but has refused to provide explicit direction, even after multiple scandals, leaving IRS agents to their own devices as they try to filter political groups from actual welfare groups. From Jeffrey Yablon, who wrote an article about this very issue 15 years ago called “Journal of Taxation of Exempt Organizations” - “Not surprisingly, some of the combatants believe strongly and complain bitterly that the IRS has become a partisan for the other side. The only solution is to remove the IRS from the battlefield. The current vague and subjective rules must be replaced with a set of bright line’ tests that require little factual analysis and legal interpretation. The war will go on, of course, but there will be less chance of respect for tax laws becoming a casualty.”
I know this doesn't push the partisan battle forward, so I expect this to be ignored by some, but I think it is something to think about.
Would appreciate links. Not a whit interested in any partisan agenda, just facts.
Smoke and mirrors
Steve Miller was leaving in June anyways
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure" - 2006 Senator Obama...leadership failure indeed!