• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

IRS targeting linked to Republican staffer

danarhea said:
You can come up with all the conspiracy theories you want to, but they can't change what is in the actual hearing transcripts, which is testimony under oath, and even by a Republican who oversaw the IRS Cincinatti office.
Click to expand...
Aren't there many "republicans" like this on this board?

Let him go to jail for a very long time. Then, while he is in jail let's go ahead and abolish the IRS. It needs to be done.
 
sangha said:
Like where Issa accuses the Obama administration of lying and covering up.
Click to expand...

Before we go down this rabbit hole can you explain the limits of 'the Obama administration' in your assertion?

Some think it means the President solely. Some think it is the President and his cabinet and yet others think it is the entire federal government...
 
sangha said:
Like where Issa accuses the Obama administration of lying and covering up.
Click to expand...

If you dont think the Press Secretary is a paid liar you havent been paying attention. Its more or less their job description.
 
danarhea said:
Interesting development, but whether the staffer was a Republican or not is not the question. The IRS DID target Tea Party groups a lot more closely than Progressive groups. However, this does not appear to be political, but bungling how the IRS investigates applications for 501(c)3 status by groups. Many Tea Party groups had applied, which appeared to be more political than providing social programs, may have had an impact on how the IRS investigated, but the IRS ended up going overboard. This seems more like incompetence than political motivation, but whatever the reason, the IRS does owe apologies to the Tea Party groups they overscrutinized.

However, take this story with a grain of salt. The story is laid out by a Democrat. What actually occurred could be different. Let's wait and see how quickly this can be verified, one way or the other.

Article is here.

Edit: The actual transcripts of the committee hearings (Part 1 and Part 2) seem to back this up. No wonder Daryl Issa did not want the transcripts released.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting this. I was really concerned that the IRS was "targeting" anyone, but politicizing their targets? That got my attention. It's good to know that the entire thing can be chalked up to the same IRS incompetence we all know and love. :lol:

I swear, this wild partisan finger-pointing on both sides of the aisle make me want to go rogue and nuke DC myself.

...Uh oh. Is that... a black helicopter landing in my driveway??? :ninja:
 
Dickieboy said:
Before we go down this rabbit hole can you explain the limits of 'the Obama administration' in your assertion?

Some think it means the President solely. Some think it is the President and his cabinet and yet others think it is the entire federal government...
Click to expand...

Ask Darrel "Arson" Issa. He's the one hurling accusations around
 
LowDown said:
And the fact that this program neutralized a significant part of the President's opposition during the 2012 election cycle is merely coincidental.
Click to expand...

OH PALEASE!!!!

You Extremist Right Wingers will do anything to keep yourselves from admitting you nominated a lousy candidate.
 
LowDown said:
And the fact that this program neutralized a significant part of the President's opposition during the 2012 election cycle is merely coincidental.
Click to expand...
Romney neutralized himself, the IRS had nothing whatsoever to do with it.
 
Jetboogieman said:
OH PALEASE!!!!

You Extremist Right Wingers will do anything to keep yourselves from admitting you nominated a lousy candidate.
Click to expand...

Mitt Romney was 'a lousy candidate'? How so?

And how is Barrack Obama better? In fact, where does Barrack Obama have any expertise?
 
pbrauer said:
Romney neutralized himself, the IRS had nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Click to expand...

How are you so certain? Or do you think it might just have been the media and the less sophisticated voters who helped re-elect this disaster?
 
Grant said:
Mitt Romney was 'a lousy candidate'? How so?

And how is Barrack Obama better? In fact, where does Barrack Obama have any expertise?
Click to expand...


Romney may be a decent human being, but like McCain before him, he is undeniably the worst possible candidate for the GOP to have chosen for that given election.

This is largely true because of RomneyCare, and is furthered Romney's thorough bastardization of the 10th Amendment as "Fifty Flavors of Democracy", but also other things as well, inclusive of how he handled the entire campaign... but that may have had a lot to do with his GOP handlers, which takes us around full-circle to the original problem.

The net result is a great many Conservatives, people that actually give a damn about our federal government and states operating in legitimate fashions, protective of individual liberties, actually did not vote, despite their extreme dislike for Obama.

The cure for Obama is not "more of the same, just a little less of it", except to vapid GOPers, and as a result, they're quickly going the way of the Whigs.
 
Grant said:
How are you so certain? Or do you think it might just have been the media and the less sophisticated voters who helped re-elect this disaster?
Click to expand...

From my perspective, you're a bit hasty in referring to "less sophisticated voters".

The only thing Romney's election would accomplish would be to make the GOP complicit in ObamaCare, and more. Even Romney's own campaign head indicated that Romney would not repeal or even de-fund ObamaCare, while Romney was on the stump saying the exact opposite, showing that Romney was deliberately playing both sides of the fence and really intending to do nothing.

It would seem those "less sophisticated voters" actually got sucked into polarized partisanship, empty promises, and a rotten candidate, even one unwilling to do what it takes to win, which shouldn't have been all that difficult, given the conditions.
 
poweRob said:
Who said Bush was responsible for that? Actually it was Senator Susan Collins and Representative Joe Scarborough who requested that the NAACP get investigated for having said something critical of a Bush policy.
Click to expand...

That is completely false.

Why not do some investigation before you submit this silliness, rather than just picking it up from some goofy left wing blog and leaving it at that.
 
Trip said:
From my perspective, you're a bit hasty in referring to "less sophisticated voters".

The only thing Romney's election would accomplish would be to make the GOP complicit in ObamaCare, and more. Even Romney's own campaign head indicated that Romney would not repeal or even de-fund ObamaCare, while Romney was on the stump saying the exact opposite, showing that Romney was deliberately playing both sides of the fence and really intending to do nothing.

It would seem those "less sophisticated voters" actually got sucked into polarized partisanship, empty promises, and a rotten candidate, even one unwilling to do what it takes to win, which shouldn't have been all that difficult, given the conditions.
Click to expand...

I never heard that about Romney's campaign workers so I would have to go with what the candidate says.

I acknowledge that Obama was a terrible candidate, with a history to prove it, which would seem to support the idea that those who voted for him were unsophisticated. They were voting for the party, not the candidate, just as they would support their high school basketball team no mater what scandals might occur. We see examples of that blind loyalty on this thread, where facts do not deter them from their strongly held beliefs. They will even lie in order to convince others that their candidate is right for the job, that nothing is his fault.

Economic woes with the real possibility of financial collapse, political scandals, the diminishing supply of energy sources, demographic patterns, and genuine international problems, appear to have no effect on their electoral decisions. Instead they will focus on the minutia with no recognition of the overall picture. When people put their party over their country then calling them 'unsophisticated' is being rather kind.
 
Grant said:
I never heard that about Romney's campaign workers so I would have to go with what the candidate says.

I acknowledge that Obama was a terrible candidate, with a history to prove it, which would seem to support the idea that those who voted for him were unsophisticated. They were voting for the party, not the candidate, just as they would support their high school basketball team no mater what scandals might occur. We see examples of that blind loyalty on this thread, where facts do not deter them from their strongly held beliefs. They will even lie in order to convince others that their candidate is right for the job, that nothing is his fault.
Click to expand...

It wasn't just any campaign worker; it was his campaign head, the campaign manager, responding officially to press questions.

Obama was far worse than a terrible candidate, and far worse than a terrible incumbent. His every action, prior to election, oath itself, and actions in office, show an extreme disdain for the Constitution, this country, and our freedoms. Despite this, and the terrible economy and deliberately destructive actions while in office, and serial abuse of power, Romney still lost.

At some point don't you think you should come to terms with the harsh answers to the obvious question as to why?

Grant said:
Economic woes with the real possibility of financial collapse, political scandals, the diminishing supply of energy sources, demographic patterns, and genuine international problems, appear to have no effect on their electoral decisions. Instead they will focus on the minutia with no recognition of the overall picture. When people put their party over their country then calling them 'unsophisticated' is being rather kind.
Click to expand...

Romney had no real hard stance on the fraud that is Global Warming, had a destructive stance government dictated health care, demonstrated penchant for destroying the Constitution, and declared an individual's rights to consist of the 'right' to flee to some other state, like some refugee in the country where our rights are recognized to be unalienable, has mixed reviews on the immigration and the Dream act, no burning desire to restore the constitution, a disdain for the Tea Parties, a despicable entitlement mentality to the office, and a notorious history for being wishy-washy.

How is voting for Romney any sort of "sophisticated" position, when getting to Hell only a tiny bit slower doesn't accomplish anything, and only serves to validate not only the route, but also validate the final destination of Hell itself?

It does not matter a wit who's driving, if the destination is unaltered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom