Announcement Module
No announcement yet.

IRS vs. America

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
Conversation Detail Module
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • IRS vs. America

    Let's argue about something else for a while. So, is the IRS simply a tool to provide cover for the great socialist elite to attack their political enemies or was it performing a societal good by trying to force political action committees outside of the tax-exempt world. Secondarily, estimate the odds that the BSA was also investigated .

  • #2
    Regardless of what happened recently, the IRS is a political tool that is used by politicians of all stripes to modify social or business behavior. The only solution is to repeal the 16th Amendment and institute a flat tax, fair tax, 9/9 tax or something else. The tax code was ridiculous 30 years ago when i studied it in law school and it has grown exponentially since.


    • #3
      The actions by the IRS staff may have not been proper but can we at least accept the premise that hundreds of small mom and pop PACs popping up in a relatively short time period is a cause for concern and warrants some scrutiny ? The potential for criminal abuse by these types of organizations is huge. Or are we supposed to just assume if you associate yourself with the Tea Party all is good.


      • perdidochas
        perdidochas commented
        Editing a comment
        Sure they warranted investigation, but the problem is the criteria used were partisan. If all PACs received the same scrutiny, I would be applauding. The problem is that any explanation used is not a good thing for the shape of our republic. Either the IRS (among the most powerful agencies of the government, that is about to be given even more power) is corruptly partisan or they are criminally incompetent. Neither of those ideas sit well with me.

      • King Ding Dong
        King Ding Dong commented
        Editing a comment
        That is the same logic that has or had the TSA strip searching "grandma". You investigate something because it is suspicious. A group whose stated position is tax revolt is cause for suspicion.

      • Brewmeister
        Brewmeister commented
        Editing a comment
        While it's pretty clear you are a liberal Ding Dong, you can at least have the intellectual honesty to recognize that conservative groups were given an anal probe by the IRS, the likes of which was not being applied to those on the other side of the government-control spectrum. Plus your "logic" makes no sense unless "grandmas" as a class raise suspicion, in which case searching each and every "grandma" would be a parallel, which is not the case.

    • #4
      Clearly if you DON'T align yourself with the Tea Party, civil liberty organizations or selected church groups all is good.

      Richard Nixon is rolling is his grave at the lack of indignation coming out of the press on this, Bengazhi and the AP wire tapping scandals.


      • #5
        Since I am Thomas Jefferson, I guess it is appropriate that I should answer this one.

        I never intended there to be a tax code or a national treasury. My frenemies Washington and Hamilton were in favor of it. This was one of the issues upon which Federalist and Democratic Republicans enjoyed spirited conversations. As President, despite my principles and feelings on the matter, I did see to it that our great nation acquired the French and Indian territory to the West known as Louisiana by establishing and then raiding national coffers of some substance.

        We did not institute national taxes at the time because taxation was a state and local matter. We did not want a national government with great power to create a tyranny of conformity among the disparate peoples of North America. What appeals to a resident of Philadelphia and a gentleman of Charles Town are often at odds and wholly incompatible. We sought to create a multiplicity of states which shared military responsibility and a common brotherhood of Constitutional Law and Natural Rights.

        It is with regret that I inform you that your nation is not the nation I founded. You found yourselves facing situations I did not foresee. Who could have imagined that one day the Bear of Russia would be only a few minutes away by rocket, or that the savage people of the East would one day emerge as a world power greater than any Europe had produced?

        Taxes must be collected to fund great enterprises, whether obtained by separated states or a federal oversight agency, the pain of payment is not reduced. The establishment of such an agency to collect revenues of such unusual size (RUS's) is also a predictable outcome.

        Is this government agency used as a political tool? It is possible that any agency of any government can be manipulated for evil or good by those in charge of it. Some may create evil by attempting to create good. Outcomes do not always come from intentions.

        It is also possible that a political tool may simply happen, without guidance from above or foreknowledge of intent to wield it as a weapon.

        It is my experience that collectors of taxers and dodgers as well should be investigated thoroughly so to ensure the people's money is accounted for dutifully and with all diligence.


        • DigitalScout
          DigitalScout commented
          Editing a comment
          I thought it was clever.

        • Huzzar
          Huzzar commented
          Editing a comment
          Love the way NJblahblah thinks he speaks for everyone else.

        • moosetracker
          moosetracker commented
          Editing a comment
          Sorry NJ.. If ThomasJefferson was constantly writing in the pretend hand of the real TJ, I would agree with you that that would get tedious. But, one small comment or done very sparsely, and just let it roll off as amusing.

      • #6
        There should be no tax-exemptions. Period.


        • #7
          The 501c4 tax exempt is suppose to be exclusively used for social welfare. Political parties are not social welfare.. The scandal comes in the fact that the IRS GAVE the tax exempt status to them after researching them. It is also a scandal that they gave tax exempt to Democratic parties also after researching them or not. Bottom line no one was denied the Tax exempt status, and that is where the scandal lies. IRS should follow the wording of the rules and laws placed around what qualifies for the 501c4 tax exempt status.. Since they don't the country has lost out in a lot of needed tax collection money that should have been collected.

          After that it is just normal Republicans crying "Wolf" by trying to tie the actions of low level employees to being the fault of the President.. Some Republicans are starting to wake up and warn others against this hysterical belly-aching which ends up making them look worse and Democrats look better in the long run.. Some Republicans just are too wrapped up in their obsession with trying to find something (anything) to impeach Obama with and refuse to listen. This would really be entertaining to watch, if it weren't for the fact they waste so much time on it, and in the meantime can't focus on trying to fix the economy and put people back to work.


          • #8
            In the Navy, it is "tradition" that the one with his hands on the helm steering the ship is one of the lowest ranking sailors, and the Officer of the Deck issuing orders is a junior officer. If the ship runs aground, the Captain gets fired, even if he was in his bed asleep at the time. The charge is "loss of confidence in his/her ability to command". The Captain is accountable for whatever happens on his ship, whether he knew about it or not. He doesn't get to go to the Board of Inquiry and say, "i had no knowledge of what the minions were doing". It's his job to know, or to establish the "command climate" to ensure that the right things happen, even in the absence of a direct order. The POTUS is rapidly "losing the confidence" of his superiors, WE THE PEOPLE, and needs to be relieved of command. We do not accept the juvenile excuse of Holder, Lew, Geithner, Hillary and others, of "we had no idea", and "what difference does it make". It makes a LOT of difference. And for you to characterize this as "hysterical belly aching" is, quite frankly, insulting and infuriating. I agree, we need to fix the economy and put people back to work...and the first step is to get rid of the corrupt thugs occupying the White House.


            • Kahuna
              Kahuna commented
              Editing a comment
              Well said.

          • #9
            Sorry, we are not in the navy.. If we were we would have turned over a new president every month whether it be a Republican or a Democrat. But basically you did get your blood with the forced resignation of the head of the IRS.. Look at it this way, if the ship goes down, the captain gets the boot, but not the Admiral of the fleet. If a bank clerk is in on a bank heist, maybe the head of that bank would be in hot water, but not the Head of the entire corporation..

            Fact is the POTUS has never had the confidence of the diehards of the Republican party, They are just scratching their heads as to why the rest of the country doesn't see it their way.. No corrupt thugs in the White house, just a black president and Democrat to boot, that makes you spit with fury.. So keep on spitting, and not concentrating on what you should be, and keep making yourselves look petty and unable to concentrate on the real issues, while the Democrats continue to look like they are willing to concentrate on the real issues, yet are shackled with Republican incompetence.. In four years we will again have another Democrat in the White House, at least he won't be black but it may be a women.. What say you then???

            Your guys have twisted and turned Benghazi to the point that we all can see nothing is there but wishful thinking.. Oh, yes there was some oversight problems, you got your blood there two as 4 state department officials were relieved of their duties. But attacks on Embassies have happened before, they will happen again, and the PONTUS is not removed from his job because he is too far removed from the daily decision making.. But, also Stevenson had a hand in his own fate for not wanting extra security. Republicans also played a part for decreasing funds for securities (can we remove all who voted for that)?

            But then none of that is important.. What matters are the talking points, let’s continue to beat that dead horse.. Your Republicans friends tried to leak lies about what was in the emails going back & forth to make it "seem" like someone in the WH did say something that at least approved of changes made to them.. They had egg on their faces when the email then were made public to show how much the Republicans were lying with false innuendos. Egg on your face, because you have picked the carcass clean and have nothing, just like Bush and his promised “Weapons of Mass Destruction”, or the supposed “Fast & Furious” scandal.. You Republicans go to such length to try to find something and come up empty handed, which only goes to proving that your Democrat nemesis’s are lily white.. You end up looking foolish and petty.

            The AP bugging was upsetting to the news reporters who you wonder why they aren’t more upset with Obama over. Fact is, the bugging is perfectly legal thank to a past President by the name of Bush.. Same reason they could tap your phone or read your email.. Just takes someone in the FBI or homeland security thinking, just thinking they have a reason to do so..

            Now Republicans are trying to say it is all Obama’s fault about the IRS.. Listen to Bill O’Reilly or Charles Krauthammer (your news guys) who are telling you that you are overplaying your hand and making gross speculations..

            Your “We the People” are nothing but a bunch of over zealous teaparty people who are in your own bubble.. The rest of the “We the People” are either Democrats still in support of the PONTUS, or the average person who never has seen anyone in Washington (Republican or Democrat) as perfect, but figures the will bumble and stumble their way to some solution. But, if they look at a President who is trying to find solutions to the imperfections that will always be there because we are human, and the Republicans that just want to cry “Wolf” at every little flaw, and over hype it to the point that is insane.. You get the ‘We the People” who feel that they will take the imperfections of this White house over the insanity of the Republicans…

            Who has a loss of confidence? The Republicans.. You can see it in all the polls, they are about as popular as doggie doo.. Except for Chris Christie and the few sane ones left in your party who know how to disagree in a bi-partisan way without looking insanely obsessed in wanting to cut off their nose to spite their face.

            Continue with your witch hunt, it only hurts your credibility and continues to prove to the Nation of the PONTUS innocence in being the kingpin of the actions of low level employees, of which he in some fashion has some oversight of in the number of millions of people..


            • #10
              That was no "forced resignation". He was "acting"...a temporary appointment that was set to expire by law anyway. Just more smoke and mirrors. Your response is typical, "you're obviously a racist for criticising Obama and Bush was just as bad."...sad. Really sad. We are focusing on what we should be...the sanctity of the Constitution and the rights of the people to be free of governmental abuse of power.


              • #11
                I'm a racist for criticizing Obama & Bush was just as bad??? What !!! That makes no sense at all.. I'm not a racist at all, because I will whole heartedly admit that Bush was 1000 times worse..

                Government abuse of power is not Bush lying to the American people about Weapons of mas destruction, so that he could get the war HE wanted, but there wasn't any reason to have it unless you made up false claims?? Government abuse of power is not writing laws that allow the government to tap and spy on anyone the deem a reason to?? Government abuse of power is holding people without a trial, and torturing them??

                Now let's talk about states under Republican rule, the ones that are forcing Planned parenthood to close, the ones that have either outlawed Sharia law, or certain religions. Michigan who the courts said they had to put their Emergency takeover of towns and cities before they could enact it, So when it was voted down, they re-enacted the rule and continued to proceed with it. The ones that try to deny college students in their state the right to vote.. The ones that force doctors to preform unnecessary tests on females, the ones that put into law that Doctors must tell their patients that abortions lead to cancer which is pure nonsense, but Doctors must now under law lie to their patients..

                The sanctity of the Constitution for Republicans is only misinterpreting the meaning of the 2nd amendment, other then that, they will stomp all over every other right in the Constitution, and all over the rights of the people in under their rule.


                • packsaddle
                  packsaddle commented
                  Editing a comment
                  I slam Obama hard on the Patriot Act and on other things as well. However, since you just mentioned the 'gay' issue, try to remember that this thread was an evidently vain attempt to discuss something OTHER than the gay issue...namely the IRS. If THAT gravitates back to the membership policy then perhaps we should just forget all other topics until that decision has been made. Perhaps even after that. Beeeee DOOOOOMED!

                • AZMike
                  AZMike commented
                  Editing a comment
                  moosetracker: "Government abuse of power is not Bush lying to the American people about Weapons of mas destruction, so that he could get the war HE wanted, but there wasn't any reason to have it unless you made up false claims??"

                  Yeeaaaahhh, there was a lot of that "lying" going on before Bush , apparently...

                  “The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998.

                  “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

                  “Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline Albright, 1998

                  “Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

                  "“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998.

                  The best evidence we have now (based on Saddam's interrogator's testimony, which is very credible) was that Saddam mounted an intelligence operation to convince the west that he did have WMDs, while maintaining an ability to recreate the infrastructure to create them. He did this because he did not think the west was likely to conduct military strikes against Iraq (post Kuwait, which he considered a victory), but thought that Israel was very likely to, unless they thought Iraq had a WMD capability. He knew the Israelis relied upon and gave strong credence to American intel (well, the technological intel, at least), and believed if he could convince the U.S. he had WMDs, Israel would back off and the U.S. would not attack. Quite a miscalculation on his part, eh? He didn't count on the public mood post 9-11, when Saddam's historic support for terrorist organizations (such as the ANO) would come back to bite him from U.S. fears that he would be willing to give a WMD capability to terrorists.

                  There were a lot of people on both sides banging the drums of war before and after Dubya. But don't let me stop you from trying to re-write history.

                • dcsimmons
                  dcsimmons commented
                  Editing a comment
                  When I was over there in the 80s, and Saddam was our best buddy in the region, he and the Iranians were both throwing, or at least rumored to be throwing, chemical weapons at each other. About the same time the SOB put two exocets into the side of the U.S.S. Stark killing 40 sailors. We should have hunted the bastard down then instead of waiting for 20 years.

              • #12
                Sorry Packsaddle, You are correct about the post. Happy that I did not comment on the rest of the talking points.
                Thursday afternoon cannot come soon enough as I am worn out talking about the subject with my Pack


                • skeptic
                  skeptic commented
                  Editing a comment
                  Hopefully you mean concerned adults within the pack.

              • #13
                Is anyone disturbed by a senior IRS employee snapping during a conference call and wailing, "I'm not very good at math." That this was a female employee only adds to my disbelief. I mean, the only people who should be better at math than a tax authourity are rocket scientists and my CPA.


                • packsaddle
                  packsaddle commented
                  Editing a comment
                  A thing called 'The Peter Principle' comes to mind. It seems to explain most of what we know as 'administrators'. Their inflated salaries are an obscenity.

              • #14
                @ Moosetracker...I don't mind your opinions because they are yours and you have every right to give them based on the information you elect to read and hear. However, as someone who has first hand knowledge of two of the four "scandals" currently under investigation I can tell you that your information is far from accurate. If you knew what those investigating this know but are not allowed to share for legal reasons you would most certainly change your tune. MB had it right when he said Nixon is likely rolling in his grave for having suffered more having done less.


                • #15
                  I think Ms. Lerner might be in a world of hurt after yesterday's performance.