" If no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else ? "
Because doing so caused some groups to be scrutinized who shouldnt have been and allowed some wbo should have been to slip by.
Treasury said EVERY groups should be scrutinized based on their activities rather than their namez.
Which may have been worse for the repubs because of rampant abuse of the 501 (c)(4) classification.
And lets not forget that the STATUTE forbids ANY election intervention activity for (4)s.
Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
The Psychology of Persuasion
Anyone else amused that every leftist in this thread has completely ignored the Cummings/Lerner connection?
No one can argue that Republican leaning groups made a huge push to funnel money into elections through 501c4 front groups leading up to and immediately after the citizens united decision. They did this purely to influence elections without disclosure. Liberal groups were not as well funded, and their funding mainly went into traditional 527 PACs.
The bulk of the increase of 501c4 groups were conservative groups. Among them were groups which were clearly misrepresenting their intentions to violate the law, groups which did not understand the restrictions on 501c4's and applied when they shouldn't have, groups which were formed to do activities which the IRS had previously allowed but were in violation of the actual law, and legitimate 501c4 groups with a political lean.
To try to deal with this in a fair and balance manner while understaffed and under funded, the IRS issued BOLO lists which targeted groups with political buzzwords in their names. This was a shortcut, aimed at quickly separating political groups from legitimate 501c4s. These included words like Tea Party, 9/12, Patriots as well as Progressive and Occupy. The IRS deemed this to be improper.
Yes, I was EXTREMELY concerned when I heard the first headlines. The politicization of the IRS should concern every American citizen regardless of party. So I looked into it, with an open mind, completely expecting the IRS to be in the wrong. I went through the groups they had processed and examined them myself. I did a statistical analysis of what I found. Instead of the expected bias against conservatives, my data indicated a bias against liberals; understandablly considering they were much fewer in number. Sure the IRS screwed up....but in a way that's totally understandable for overwhelmed and confused bureaucrats attempting to regulate something completely out of their expertise. These were your friends and neighbors who were just doing the best that they could.
And as a reality check, Obama is an outstanding politician. Anyone thinks that delaying the application of 20 or so TeaParty groups for a status they didn't have to apply for is an idiot, and doesn't have the political sense to get elected to dogcatcher. (in anywhere except New Jersey where they seem to like that sort of thing)
Moderator's Warning: Final warnings I'm going to give you folks. Keep the conversation focused on the top. A few snippet of things that are NOT the topic:
1. Poster's leans
2. Poster's "sides"
3. Poster's dreams
4. George Soros, Kochs, or any other thing like them
5. Peoples opinions about "liberals" or "RWers" in a general sense
Futhermore, this is a *Breaking News* thread with a specific subject. A news story that is directly tied to President Obama in zero ways. If you'd like to create a thread discussing the potential broader implications of the IRS scandal and how it affects the white house I suggest you make a thread in a more appropriate locatoin.
This is a thread for discussing THIS SPECIFIC STORY; not just an excuse to create a new generic and broad "IRS Scandal" warzone in a populated portion of the forum.
Keep it on topic, keep it civil, or points and thread bans may be coming regardless of how light the violation is
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Why do some continue to repeat this meme: The left continues "to silence criticism by any means" when in this specific instance it has been the right as exemplified by Darrel Issa who has time after time refused to release full documentation, preferring instead to push out edited and redacted documentation. It has been Issa who has held meetings without telling his Democratic committee members.
Once again the right accuses their opponents of the very tactics they, the right, are using. All in an attempt to draw attention away from the continuing failures of their efforts to take down the present Administration
“And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822