• 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!

Claim: Obama campaign co-chair attacked romney with leaked irs docs

CalGun said:
Why couldn't you answer the question? Shocking
Click to expand...


It kinda looked like your question was rhetorical since you seemed to already know the answer.


So you folks on the left are saying "IF" the IRS or an IRS employee leaked confidential data on a presidential candidate that's ok? Really?
Click to expand...
No, I don't think they are saying that. Really.

Now if you want say it didn't happen fine, let the source put up or shut up, but to say it doesn't matter?
Click to expand...
I don't recall anyone saying it doesn't matter. Do you have a source?


So, I answered your questions, now how about answering mine?


Are folks on the right trying to saying that the tea party isn't political?
 
To ignore McCarthy is to ignore the '50s.
Don't blame you.
 
The tea party is of course political, but that does not mean a political group can't have an educational or non profit element. Doesn't the Sierra Club? I am pretty sure they do and they are quite political.

All I was asking to the left minded here was "IF" the presidents fans / supporters in the IRS leaked information to his campaign would that not be a serious problem for you? I don't know that this happened and I have my doubts it did, but what I'm seeking is denial rather than acknowledgement that'd be wrong.


Moot said:
It kinda looked like your question was rhetorical since you seemed to already know the answer.


No, I don't think they are saying that. Really.

I don't recall anyone saying it doesn't matter. Do you have a source?


So, I answered your questions, now how about answering mine?


Are folks on the right trying to saying that the tea party isn't political?
Click to expand...
 
apdst said:
What's McCarthy have to do with it?

It was FDR that built the concentration camps.
Click to expand...

This level of confusion is hard to fathom, even when spoken by a tea partier.
 
CalGun said:
The tea party is of course political, but that does not mean a political group can't have an educational or non profit element. Doesn't the Sierra Club? I am pretty sure they do and they are quite political.

All I was asking to the left minded here was "IF" the presidents fans / supporters in the IRS leaked information to his campaign would that not be a serious problem for you? I don't know that this happened and I have my doubts it did, but what I'm seeking is denial rather than acknowledgement that'd be wrong.
Click to expand...

What's particularly funny about this whole line of bogus tea party questioning is that the IRS didn't investigate ANY organization with "tea party" in its name. Rather, it investigated those with "patriot" in its name, on the premise that anybody so stupid as to put "patriot" in its name was probably promoting a political agenda.

By the way, Issa and his clowns still hasn't answered the basic question: how many applications did the IRS get from rightwing groups after Citizens United versus how many applications did they get from progressive groups. I bet it isn't even close, since Koch and his weirdos went made giving money to shill organizations after CU. So of course the IRS was scrutinizing rightwing groups -- they were the bulk of the applications after the CU fiasco.
 
CalGun said:
The tea party is of course political, but that does not mean a political group can't have an educational or non profit element. Doesn't the Sierra Club? I am pretty sure they do and they are quite political.
Click to expand...
So how is the IRS supposed to investigate whether or not the thousands of tea party applications aren't political when the tea party itself is defined as "a political movement"? I'd really like to know.


All I was asking to the left minded here was "IF" the presidents fans / supporters in the IRS leaked information to his campaign would that not be a serious problem for you? I don't know that this happened and I have my doubts it did, but what I'm seeking is denial rather than acknowledgement that'd be wrong.
Click to expand...
I don't know, isnt that what all the investigations and hearings are supposed to find out? So far all the republicans seem interested in is politicizing the hearings and attacking Obama instead of finding out the truth as to whether or not IRS agents singled out conservatives to deny them non tax status.

I can only speak for myself and if some of the IRS agents did single out conservatives for discrimination, then they should be held accountable to the full extent of the law. But unless or until the Republcans put their own bias aside and stop politicizing the hearings then I doubt we will ever know the truth. But then maybe that is their intent so they can drag this out until the next election.
 
head of joaquin said:
What's particularly funny about this whole line of bogus tea party questioning is that the IRS didn't investigate ANY organization with "tea party" in its name. Rather, it investigated those with "patriot" in its name, on the premise that anybody so stupid as to put "patriot" in its name was probably promoting a political agenda.

By the way, Issa and his clowns still hasn't answered the basic question: how many applications did the IRS get from rightwing groups after Citizens United versus how many applications did they get from progressive groups. I bet it isn't even close, since Koch and his weirdos went made giving money to shill organizations after CU. So of course the IRS was scrutinizing rightwing groups -- they were the bulk of the applications after the CU fiasco.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind seeing every single tea party and patriot member whose application was denied by the IRS to testify at a hearing before congress. That would give them a chance to air their grievences and fear about the Federal Government while at the time showing the Federal Government isn't as tyrannical as they claim.
 
The problem is the themes are tyranny are starting to shine thru.


Moot said:
I wouldn't mind seeing every single tea party and patriot member whose application was denied by the IRS to testify at a hearing before congress. That would give them a chance to air their grievences and fear about the Federal Government while at the time showing the Federal Government isn't as tyrannical as they claim.
Click to expand...
 
Moot said:
All things being equal....it looks about right.....


Tea Party violence - About 39,800,000 results (0.23 seconds)

Occupy Wall Street violence - About 24,700,000 results (0.19 seconds)
Click to expand...

so even changing the search still shows that tea party violence pulls up more results,even though recorded tea party violence is non existent yet ows violence occured on epic proportions due to its unorganized to non existent leadership.

still proves a quite valid point,google search results in no way determine if anything is true or not,since the one with overwhelming evidence against it got less results than the one that had little to no actual anything other than blind accusations against it.
 
beerftw said:
so even changing the search still shows that tea party violence pulls up more results,even though recorded tea party violence is non existent yet ows violence occured on epic proportions due to its unorganized to non existent leadership.

still proves a quite valid point,google search results in no way determine if anything is true or not,since the one with overwhelming evidence against it got less results than the one that had little to no actual anything other than blind accusations against it.
Click to expand...


Okay, sure, why not? It's not like its a scientific or academic study now is it? It was more just for fun. lol
 
Moot said:
Okay, sure, why not? It's not like its a scientific or academic study now is it? It was more just for fun. lol
Click to expand...

but if its just for fun,why use it in a debate?????????
 
head of joaquin said:
What's particularly funny about this whole line of bogus tea party questioning is that the IRS didn't investigate ANY organization with "tea party" in its name. Rather, it investigated those with "patriot" in its name, on the premise that anybody so stupid as to put "patriot" in its name was probably promoting a political agenda.
Click to expand...

Really? So when the IG said this:

While the team of specialists reviewed applications from a variety of organizations, we determined during our reviews of statistical samples of I.R.C. § 501(c)(4) tax-exempt applications that all cases with Tea Party, Patriots, or 9/12 in their names were forwarded to the team of specialists.
Click to expand...
http://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2013reports/201310053fr.pdf

He didn’t mean it?
Of course your welcome to provide something to substantiate your prevarication…or is this just another example of the progressive meme?

throw **** against the wall hoping it will stick...:lamo
 
Moot said:
Hard to say not knowing what you typed in the search box.
Click to expand...

I Googled the word "moot" and got 19,000,000 results in 0.19 seconds.
 
Erod said:
Does anyone honestly still believe that the Obama campaign wasn't behind this? They sought to punish, delay, harrass, and prevent people from contributing to these organizations.

This doesn't take Inspector Clouseau to figure this out, folks.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the dems were the sole people behind this. I do believe both parties do this to potential third parties to keep their dominance over the government along with support from the public and donation money. This is probably just SOP on third party political groups. What I do believe is the l;eak comes from one party, but that is the republicans, because it would hurt obama. Of course no one will actually fix the problem that allows the government to help out the big 2 while harassing smaller parties who try to get in on the act. They will blame Obama and leave the abuses in place.

I am not delusional enough to think either of the big parties are on my side. BTW how is that working for you?
 
beerftw said:
but if its just for fun,why use it in a debate?????????
Click to expand...

have you seen what counts for debate around here? If you actually took debate seriously around here you would be traveling around the world to shoot people from this site. (Yes i do consider myself as being one of those who would be visited by the grim reaper of debate politics if there ever was one.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom