IRS Apologizes For Targeting Conservative Political Groups In 2012 Ele (1 Viewer)

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

This only becomes Obama's problem if he knew something before the November elections and suppressed it.

Nonsense. This is already Obama's problem for the people who want to blame him for everything already.

The NY Times says that you're looking pretty foolish right about now.

...

They were told that an audit was being performed. They were not told of any conclusion per you own link.

Umm...
>Still, the inspector general’s testimony will most likely fuel efforts by Congressional Republicans to show that Obama administration officials knew of efforts to single out conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status for additional scrutiny, but did not reveal that knowledge during President Obama’s re-election ca

mpaign.

So? It is not like it takes much to get the House GOPers in a tizzy about nonsense.

Nonsense? It's clear the White house knew the alleged problem before/during the election

So they knew there was an alleged problem? So?

They knew what the allegations were, the reason for the audit.. They were not aware of the conclusion of the audit.. Whether the allegations were true or not..

Nice try though..

Nice try? You just repeated back what I said as evidence against what I said.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The NY Times says that you're looking pretty foolish right about now.

...

They were told that an audit was being performed. They were not told of any conclusion per you own link.

Umm...
>Still, the inspector general’s testimony will most likely fuel efforts by Congressional Republicans to show that Obama administration officials knew of efforts to single out conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status for additional scrutiny, but did not reveal that knowledge during President Obama’s re-election ca

mpaign.

So? It is not like it takes much to get the House GOPers in a tizzy about nonsense.

Nonsense? It's clear the White house knew the alleged problem before/during the election

So they knew there was an alleged problem? So?

They knew what the allegations were, the reason for the audit.. They were not aware of the conclusion of the audit.. Whether the allegations were true or not..

Nice try though..

Nice try? You just repeated back what I said as evidence against what I said.

You are suggesting to us that the administration did not know what the allegations where. It's clear that Mr. George made them aware of the allegations as per this NY Times article..

Mr. George told Treasury officials about the allegation as part of a routine briefing about ongoing audits he would be conducting in the coming year, and he did not tell the officials of his conclusions that the targeting had been improper, he said.

 

[pittstownkiller]

...but it is more likely that more people need to be fired.

Of course, but one of the safe guards of being a civil service employee is that it is not that simple.

...and it should be. Building a case against someone (such as civil service employee) requires investigation, usually involving the environment that the office was run in; I hope it is transparent, thorough, and contains people that rat each other out.

Oh, I think heads are going to roll. It will just take a bit of time. (I'm sure that more resume work was done this week in Cincinnati than scrutinizing applications.)

You might be correct but there has been recent "firings" under this Administration, that have not really been firings or really punishments at all. We will see and I am willing to see where an investigation leads.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

You are suggesting to us that the administration did not know what the allegations where. ...

Nope! Not once did I suggest that.

6:02PM: They were told that an audit was being performed. They were not told of any conclusion per you own link.

8:07PM: So they knew there was an alleged problem? So?

But most importantly 7:19PM

 

[joffer]

The fact that the hearings are on a watergate anniversary is important thank faux news

 

[Carolina Hustler]

You are suggesting to us that the administration did not know what the allegations where. ...

Nope! Not once did I suggest that.

6:02PM: They were told that an audit was being performed. They were not told of any conclusion per you own link.

8:07PM: So they knew there was an alleged problem? So?

But most importantly 7:19PM

They knew the alleged problem was the targeting of conservative and tea party groups..

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

You are suggesting to us that the administration did not know what the allegations where. ...

Nope! Not once did I suggest that.

6:02PM: They were told that an audit was being performed. They were not told of any conclusion per you own link.

8:07PM: So they knew there was an alleged problem? So?

But most importantly 7:19PM

They knew the alleged problem was the targeting of conservative and tea party groups..

So what? How is this a concern? Did they delay, thwart, imped, etc. the investigation? Were they strong arming IRS officials to lie to congress? How is this bit of information meaningful at all?Again what should the White House done [or not done]?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

You are suggesting to us that the administration did not know what the allegations where. ...

Nope! Not once did I suggest that.

6:02PM: They were told that an audit was being performed. They were not told of any conclusion per you own link.

8:07PM: So they knew there was an alleged problem? So?

But most importantly 7:19PM

They knew the alleged problem was the targeting of conservative and tea party groups..

So what? How is this a concern? Did they delay, thwart, imped, etc. the investigation? Were they strong arming IRS officials to lie to congress? How is this bit of information meaningful at all?Again what should the White House done [or not done]?

Admitted they knew about it? lol.. Instead of saying they knew nothing about it?

And as far as they may have influenced the investigation? I don't know. You don't know either.. I wouldn't put it past them.. I wouldn't put it past any politician.. You need to take those rose colored glasses off at some point..

 

[otello]

Has Congress requested all documents and info related to the audit?

 

[pantagrapher]

I wonder what the GOP is going to be going nuts about next month. Anybody care to guess?

Benghazi

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I wonder what the GOP is going to be going nuts about next month. Anybody care to guess?

Whatever other criminal or immoral issue the liberals have lied about..

 

[Hang 10]

I wonder what the GOP is going to be going nuts about next month. Anybody care to guess?

At this point, the Obama administration couldn't even make a ham sammich without effing it up. So, it could be anything really.

 

[CrossEyed]

So there are people who truly believe that the IRS was being investigated for something it had been accused of doing for well over a year, that was highly political, and in an election year, and nobody in the White House knew what it was about? And that it wouldn't be shared with the POTUS?

Really?

 

[sporthenry]

So there are people who truly believe that the IRS was being investigated for something it had been accused of doing for well over a year, that was highly political, and in an election year, and nobody in the White House knew what it was about? And that it wouldn't be shared with the POTUS?Really?

The burden of proof isn't on the President to prove he doesn't know anything. The burden of proof is to prove he knew something. I don't think people realize how many audits the government does on a yearly basis and to expect the President to stay abreast of it would be insane. And considering this is the umpteenth time that Obama has been accused of knowing something and most of them have been unsubstantiated, the Right has little credibility in arguing that Obama must have known something.

ETA: And even beyond that, just b/c he knows a possible investigation is ongoing, is he suppose to disclose all investigations? How many investigations and allegations are unfounded? Isn't the point of an investigation to let it run its course?

 

[pittstownkiller]

So there are people who truly believe that the IRS was being investigated for something it had been accused of doing for well over a year, that was highly political, and in an election year, and nobody in the White House knew what it was about? And that it wouldn't be shared with the POTUS?Really?

The burden of proof isn't on the President to prove he doesn't know anything. The burden of proof is to prove he knew something. I don't think people realize how many audits the government does on a yearly basis and to expect the President to stay abreast of it would be insane. And considering this is the umpteenth time that Obama has been accused of knowing something and most of them have been unsubstantiated, the Right has little credibility in arguing that Obama must have known something.

The President is lame-duck, any sniff of a negative public reaction to him and the house Democrats will abandon him.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The burden of proof isn't on the President to prove he doesn't know anything. The burden of proof is to prove he knew something. I don't think people realize how many audits the government does on a yearly basis and to expect the President to stay abreast of it would be insane. And considering this is the umpteenth time that Obama has been accused of knowing something and most of them have been unsubstantiated, the Right has little credibility in arguing that Obama must have known something.

ETA: And even beyond that, just b/c he knows a possible investigation is ongoing, is he suppose to disclose all investigations? How many investigations and allegations are unfounded? Isn't the point of an investigation to let it run its course?

How many of those audits result in the IRS having to apologize for unfairly targeting a specific group of people and the head of the organization resigning as a result?

I don't think it is unreasonable for the president to be informed of something like this ahead of time, instead of him having to find out about it at the same time we all did, no?

 

[CrossEyed]

So there are people who truly believe that the IRS was being investigated for something it had been accused of doing for well over a year, that was highly political, and in an election year, and nobody in the White House knew what it was about? And that it wouldn't be shared with the POTUS?Really?

The burden of proof isn't on the President to prove he doesn't know anything. The burden of proof is to prove he knew something. I don't think people realize how many audits the government does on a yearly basis and to expect the President to stay abreast of it would be insane. And considering this is the umpteenth time that Obama has been accused of knowing something and most of them have been unsubstantiated, the Right has little credibility in arguing that Obama must have known something. ETA: And even beyond that, just b/c he knows a possible investigation is ongoing, is he suppose to disclose all investigations? How many investigations and allegations are unfounded? Isn't the point of an investigation to let it run its course?

I was talking about his "I didn't know anything about it until I saw it on the news" claim. Sorry, but that's .

 

[otello]

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

 

[otello]

Or do people think that there is no relationship between the two?

 

[CrossEyed]

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word “targeting.” He said the so-called “be on the lookout” (BOLO) list was an “inappropriate” organizational tool or “shortcut” that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list.

“If the targeting wasn’t targeting, if the targeting wasn’t based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged?” Roskam confidently asked.

“They didn’t, sir,” Miller responded. “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).”

 

[#1Fan of CelticsBasketball]

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

What's the point? The IRS has been targeting political and social groups for decades.

 

[otello]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word “targeting.” He said the so-called “be on the lookout” (BOLO) list was an “inappropriate” organizational tool or “shortcut” that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list.

“If the targeting wasn’t targeting, if the targeting wasn’t based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged?” Roskam confidently asked.

“They didn’t, sir,” Miller responded. “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).”

Have any liberal-leaning groups come forward to state that they received similar treatment?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word “targeting.” He said the so-called “be on the lookout” (BOLO) list was an “inappropriate” organizational tool or “shortcut” that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list.

“If the targeting wasn’t targeting, if the targeting wasn’t based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged?” Roskam confidently asked.

“They didn’t, sir,” Miller responded. “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).”

Have any liberal-leaning groups come forward to state that they received similar treatment?

I posted one earlier... but Im not sure they would "need to come forward", only that the fact is that its not all tea party groups. And that 85% of all the money was Conservative driven tax exempts.

 

[Politician Spock]

I wonder what the GOP is going to be going nuts about next month. Anybody care to guess?

I am betting Obama leaving Israel to defend itself. I believe the odds of that happening in June are probably 4 to 1, but that being the most favored horse on the board.

 

[otello]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Have any liberal-leaning groups come forward to state that they received similar treatment?

I posted one earlier... but Im not sure they would "need to come forward", only that the fact is that its not all tea party groups. And that 85% of all the money was Conservative driven tax exempts.

I will look back for it.

 

[fightingillini]

So there are people who truly believe that the IRS was being investigated for something it had been accused of doing for well over a year, that was highly political, and in an election year, and nobody in the White House knew what it was about? And that it wouldn't be shared with the POTUS?Really?

The burden of proof isn't on the President to prove he doesn't know anything. The burden of proof is to prove he knew something. I don't think people realize how many audits the government does on a yearly basis and to expect the President to stay abreast of it would be insane. And considering this is the umpteenth time that Obama has been accused of knowing something and most of them have been unsubstantiated, the Right has little credibility in arguing that Obama must have known something.

ETA: And even beyond that, just b/c he knows a possible investigation is ongoing, is he suppose to disclose all investigations? How many investigations and allegations are unfounded? Isn't the point of an investigation to let it run its course?

I totally disagree with you. Now I am not saying that Obama directly ordered the IRS to target conservatives. We don't know that. But to think that Obama has no responsibility for it is totally ludicrous. Obama, IMO, is guilty on an indirect basis. The IRS reports up through the Treasury, where the Treasury Secretary is in the Adminstration. Obama set the tone. We all know that in speech after speech, he demonizes the GOP. Doing that is basically telling his adminstration of what he wants. And the President is surrounded by people who think exactly like him, so his adminstration (and levels below that) can come up with the idea of "hey, let's target conservative groups that are trying to get tax exempt status". Obama would expect his adminstration to do just that. He "told" them of his goals, and the administration figures out how to achieve those goals.....the biggest one being...demonize and destroy the GOP politically.

So I don't think Obama actually directly ordered the IRS to do it......if he really did, he better be impeached.

That said, say you're correct and Obama didn't know anything. If that's true, then Obama is just a terrible president. If he indeed didn't know anything, I would suspect that he would be more angry and would have immediately fired people and would have worked with Congress to get to the bottom of the matter. That's what a real leader would have done. How anyone can believe that Obama learned it through the media is beyond me.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

So there are people who truly believe that the IRS was being investigated for something it had been accused of doing for well over a year, that was highly political, and in an election year, and nobody in the White House knew what it was about? And that it wouldn't be shared with the POTUS?Really?

The burden of proof isn't on the President to prove he doesn't know anything. The burden of proof is to prove he knew something. I don't think people realize how many audits the government does on a yearly basis and to expect the President to stay abreast of it would be insane. And considering this is the umpteenth time that Obama has been accused of knowing something and most of them have been unsubstantiated, the Right has little credibility in arguing that Obama must have known something.

ETA: And even beyond that, just b/c he knows a possible investigation is ongoing, is he suppose to disclose all investigations? How many investigations and allegations are unfounded? Isn't the point of an investigation to let it run its course?

No Matter what the facts and truth is... lets just hang Obama.

Updated for brevity.

 

[CrossEyed]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

 

[pittstownkiller]

So there are people who truly believe that the IRS was being investigated for something it had been accused of doing for well over a year, that was highly political, and in an election year, and nobody in the White House knew what it was about? And that it wouldn't be shared with the POTUS?Really?

The burden of proof isn't on the President to prove he doesn't know anything. The burden of proof is to prove he knew something. I don't think people realize how many audits the government does on a yearly basis and to expect the President to stay abreast of it would be insane. And considering this is the umpteenth time that Obama has been accused of knowing something and most of them have been unsubstantiated, the Right has little credibility in arguing that Obama must have known something. ETA: And even beyond that, just b/c he knows a possible investigation is ongoing, is he suppose to disclose all investigations? How many investigations and allegations are unfounded? Isn't the point of an investigation to let it run its course?

No Matter what the facts and truth is... lets just hang Obama.

Updated for brevity.

Ah, there it is; the first baby steps of starting the "racism" defense

 

[Glass Joe]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

 

[drummer]

I got no problem if they go after Ralph Reed and the Heritage Foundation.

 

[culdeus]

Anyone want to clue me in why political groups should have tax exempt status at all? Who are they helping?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Anyone want to clue me in why political groups should have tax exempt status at all? Who are they helping?

tyvm

 

[CrossEyed]

Anyone want to clue me in why political groups should have tax exempt status at all? Who are they helping?

No argument here. But since they do, let's not allow the IRS to target the ones they don't agree with (and that applies when there's a Republican administration in charge).

 

[CrossEyed]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

 

[Hang 10]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

 

[sporthenry]

Anyone want to clue me in why political groups should have tax exempt status at all? Who are they helping?

It goes back to Citizens United. That ruling alone has pretty much set the US back a 100 years in politics. The problem with this scandal is that in the future, the IRS will tiptoe this line a lot more for fear of this happening again which is the exact opposite of what we need. There is no reason that some of these should qualify under a "social welfare" program. Of course that goes both ways, but as the name, social welfare suggests, it would seem that more liberal slanted programs would fall under that to begin with but then again, I guess that depends on your definition of social welfare. I guess the people against gay marriage actually see them as promoting "social welfare capitalism" or something similar.

 

[Glass Joe]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

Pro-abortion seems more accurate.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

Pro-abortion seems more accurate.

They trying to get everyone to have an abortion, or keep open the choices for everyone?

 

[MaxThreshold]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

Pro-abortion seems more accurate.

Weak response, CM. You got owned BIG TIME on that one. Even you have to admit that.

If you want "anti-gay" then you MUST agree with "anti-baby".

 

[Bengalsfan]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

Pro-abortion seems more accurate.

Weak response, CM. You got owned BIG TIME on that one. Even you have to admit that. If you want "anti-gay" then you MUST agree with "anti-baby".

Yep!

 

[MaxThreshold]

I think for all of you that are defending the Administration on this one

Anyone want to clue me in why political groups should have tax exempt status at all? Who are they helping?

That's completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. You're trying to throw up a smoke screen to distract from the main point which is the IRS should NOT be an arm of the Democratic Party.

Instead of finding ways to defend the Administration, you should be VERY, VERY concerned that a department of the Government YOU'RE GUY just handed a boatload of power to (thru Obamacare) is targeting political enemies.

Doesn't that bother you the least bit?

 

[CrossEyed]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

Pro-abortion seems more accurate.

They trying to get everyone to have an abortion, or keep open the choices for everyone?

For everyone? How about the baby?

 

[Politician Spock]

I think for all of you that are defending the Administration on this one

Anyone want to clue me in why political groups should have tax exempt status at all? Who are they helping?

That's completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. You're trying to throw up a smoke screen to distract from the main point which is the IRS should NOT be an arm of the Democratic Party.

It will always be, at the very least, a crutch of the Democratic Party.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

Pro-abortion seems more accurate.

They trying to get everyone to have an abortion, or keep open the choices for everyone?

For everyone? How about the baby?

unborn babies have no right

 

[CrossEyed]

Ok, I'm done talking about abortion, that's not what this thread is for.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Is there general agreement here that the

Is there general agreement here that the targeting of these groups helped Obama get elected?

of these groups helped Obama get elected?

Not sure if it helped him or not, but that's an irrelevant point, IMO.

At the hearing, outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller repeatedly objected to the use of the word targeting. He said the so-called be on the lookout (BOLO) list was an inappropriate organizational tool or shortcut that IRS staff used to find potential political cases. Miller claimed the tea party groups would have be subjected to extra scrutiny regardless of the BOLO list. If the targeting wasnt targeting, if the targeting wasnt based on philosophy, how come only conservatives got snagged? Roskam confidently asked.They didnt, sir, Miller responded. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. Thats 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).

Two points:1) "of the ones that were looked at" leaves a lot still to be known.2) How many other conservative groups were targeted outside of the 501©4 application process? (i.e. Billy Graham's organization being audited weeks after taking out an ad in favor of traditional marriage)ETA: A third question is what are the rest of the 300 that were looked at? Just because they weren't "tea party" doesn't mean they weren't conservative/Republican.

Can we stop sugar coating with terms like "traditional" marriage and just call it anti-gay please? That is what you mean...

Sure thing. I assume you'd also want to switch to anti-baby?

Pro-abortion seems more accurate.

They trying to get everyone to have an abortion, or keep open the choices for everyone?

For everyone? How about the baby?

Its nothing beyond the female host.

 

[CrossEyed]

Its nothing beyond the female host.

I hope that some day you realize how ridiculous this statement is.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Its nothing beyond the female host.

I hope that some day you realize how ridiculous this statement is.

Only to your sensibilities and I (and many others) dont live by your sensibilities.