Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vermont Scouts denied July 4th vendor permit and withdraw

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

  • #61
    For all you conspirators out there, did any of you check up on the OA? They weren't doing any "rain" dancing out there, were they? I would check that out first before we start blaming the weather for the problem, it had to have been the Scouts.

    Stosh

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by jblake47 View Post
      For all you conspirators out there, did any of you check up on the OA? They weren't doing any "rain" dancing out there, were they? I would check that out first before we start blaming the weather for the problem, it had to have been the Scouts. Stosh
      From what I learned as a boy (active arrowmen or devout native Americans, please correct me), we weren't to perform actual rain dances because they were a sacred ritual, and to do so would be offensive.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by NJCubScouter View Post
        Does anyone else besides me think it is significant that the council did not actually ban the Scouts from doing anything? They asked the local unit leaders to discuss the subject, and instead the Scouts withdrew from the event entirely. That does not seem like the best way to have dealt with the issue. .
        I think it is very significant that the town council did not require every vendor to appear before it and be interrogated. Discuss the subject? And then we'll ban you if you don't see things our way - else why even have the inquisition?

        Then to get in a snit because the town slaves - in council's mind - dare refuse their clean-up "duties" just because they were slapped in the face. Is expected community service or required community service really in the spirit of doing things for others

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by King Ding Dong View Post
          The US Government doesn't punish beliefs. It enforces laws.

          Really? Then it must be bad luck that only conservative groups filing for 501(C)(4) status were stalled and targeted for ridiculous levels of scrutiny .
          "Mrs. Lerner, were you trying to sway an election?
          "Nope. I'm retiring so I don't have to answer congressional questions. And I plead the 5th. And by the way, my computer crashed with no back-up so you can't see my eMails for 2 years..."


          Comment


          • #65
            Government corruption isn't limited to third world tyrants.......

            Stosh

            Comment


            • #66
              The Town Council can deny permits for whatever endeavor for whatever reason they like. The citizens of the town can then judge what kind of a Council they elected and then UN-elect them the next time round, as they see fit.
              In the mean time, as in just about every democracy, they probably have the Council they deserve.

              Were it my Troop, I would favor giving the water away, (donations accepted). and cleaning up the streets as the good turn the town deserves, being the Troop is/are good citizens.

              Comment


              • #67
                The Town Council can deny permits for whatever endeavor for whatever reason they like.

                No, they can't.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by JoeBob View Post
                  Really? Then it must be bad luck that only conservative groups filing for 501(C)(4) status were stalled and targeted for ridiculous levels of scrutiny .
                  Spoken like a true conservative. Who cares if this isn't true? We are going to repeat it anyway! After all, facts have a well known liberal bias.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    OT, but I wondered about that myself. So NPR and the IRS agents who testified in 2014 were incorrect. Facts are facts. Lets hear your facts and sources.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Rick_in_CA View Post

                      Who cares if this isn't true? We are going to repeat it anyway! After all, facts have a well known liberal bias.
                      What is not true?
                      The IRS has apologized for their targeting - blamed it on 'rogue agents in the Cincinnati office'.
                      http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...ction/2149939/

                      You believe that Lois Lerner losing her eMail was incompetence and not malice? Awfully convenient isn't it?
                      I might even buy that it was an accidental loss of data that businesses are legally required to keep and backup.
                      But when you tell me that SIX other IRS employees who were in communication with Lerner about targeting conservatives ALSO had unfortunate hard drive crashes and loss of backup tapes.........
                      "But it's not just Lerner's e-mails that are missing. The IRS has told the House Ways and Means Committee that six other employees who had communicated with Lerner also had hard-drive crashes. They include Nikole Flax, the chief of staff to the acting commissioner and Michelle Eldridge, an IRS spokeswoman, and four agents working on exempt organization cases."
                      http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...ails/10695507/

                      I'm just not willing to pretend to be that stupid.
                      But you can choose otherwise!

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        CNN May 15, 2013

                        (CNN)
                        -- Lax oversight at the Internal Revenue Service allowed for the singling out of some conservative groups, resulting in lengthy delays in the processing of their applications for federal tax-exempt status, according to a report by the agency's inspector genera released Tuesday.

                        The report found that for more than 18 months beginning in early 2010 the IRS developed and followed a faulty policy to determine whether the applicants were engaged in political activities, which would disqualify the groups from receiving tax-exempt status.

                        "The IRS used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status based upon their names or policy positions instead of indications of potential political campaign intervention," according to the report.
                        President Barack Obama called the report findings "intolerable and inexcusable."

                        "The federal government must conduct itself in a way that's worthy of the public's trust, and that's especially true for the IRS. The IRS must apply the law in a fair and impartial way, and its employees must act with utmost integrity. This report shows that some of its employees failed that test," the president said in a statement released late Tuesday. Obama said he has directed U.S. Secretary of Treasury Jack Lew "to hold those responsible for these failures accountable."

                        IRS officials, according to the report, did not consult anyone beyond the agency about the development of the additional screening criteria. They believed that the criteria they came up with was a screening shortcut meant to help with the influx of applications, the report said.
                        The agency's top watchdog found that the criteria used to flag potential political applications resulted in substantial delays and the request of unnecessary information from the groups.

                        Among the criteria used by IRS officials to flag applications was a "Be On the Look Out" list, or a BOLO, which was discontinued in 2012, according to the report. The criteria on the BOLO included:
                        -- Whether "Tea Party," "Patriots" or "9/12 Project" was referenced in the case file.
                        -- Whether the issues outlined in the application included government spending, government debt or taxes.
                        -- Whether there was advocating or lobbying to "make America a better place to live."
                        -- Whether a statement in the case file criticized how the country is being run.
                        -- Whether it advocated education about the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

                        The investigation by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration was initiated after congressional complaints began to surface in the media in 2012 that the IRS was targeting conservative groups and holding up applications.
                        . . .

                        The developments came hours after U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Justice Department had launched a criminal investigation into whether the IRS politically targeted some conservative groups.
                        I mean I thought I knew what was being said. All this hand-wringing and it turned out it was all a mirage?

                        I really do care about the truth. I have Merit Badge candidates to deal with and an obligation to guide them to accurate facts. Here I am between the Scylla of ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and CNN and the Charybdus of Fox and the radio ranters, and you tell me what was said about the IRS scandal is not true ? Where do I go now?
                        Last edited by TAHAWK; 07-07-2014, 04:36 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          I agree with JoeBob on the 'lost' email records. When I was still with the Feds, I ALWAYS worked under a requirement to save and archive ALL email communications that came over my computer, including the spam and personal stuff. I did, for as long as the internet existed, and I never 'lost' anything. I had a copy on my hard drive, a copy on the server drive, and a backup on tape or on an external drive. Those IRS people are either lying, or else they're apocalyptically stupid. Frankly, I suspect they are quite well-informed about how to use email, the archival capabilities, and perhaps how to eliminate the records if needed.
                          BTW, I checked and I happen to know that all these years later, that email archive of mine is still intact...I suspect they could dump the whole thing, however, and no one would care by now.

                          Incidentally, I also think Rosemary was lying about the erased tape sections in the Nixon tapes.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            On the one hand I find that our government couldn't be so corrupt or inept to lose vital information, on the other hand I find that our government could be so corrupt or inept to lose vital information.

                            What it boils down to is: did the emails really get lost? The answer lies in whether our our government corrupt or inept. I make allowances for gross ineptitude for our government officials, but this is so extreme, I gotta go with corrupt.

                            I find it strange that Obama takes a page right out of the Nixon handbook, but the media lets him have a pass.

                            Stosh

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Merlyn_LeRoy View Post
                              The Town Council can deny permits for whatever endeavor for whatever reason they like.

                              No, they can't.
                              Gwendolyn Hallsmith, candidate for mayor of Montpelier, explains Merlyn's point further:
                              http://www.vermonttoday.com/apps/pbc...9894/-1/blogs;

                              Lesson in civics

                              The latest controversy at City Hall is a good civics lesson, and what better time to learn it than the Fourth of July? Whether or not you agree with the Boy Scouts’ bigoted, discriminatory stance on homosexuals should be set aside for a moment, while we consider how cities should behave under the circumstances.

                              There has been a lot of blame being passed around, but the real culprits are a mayor and a City Council who do not appear to have even a rudimentary grasp of the policymaking process. When you accept the mantle of a local elected official, you need to be willing to set aside your private opinions on every subject, from Boy Scout leaders to public banks, and allow the legally mandated policymaking process to do its work.

                              Public officials are not supposed to shoot from the hip, as Thierry Guerlain did when he raised the issue of the Boy Scouts national policy in the context of a vendor permit application. Does the vendor permit policy (there is one, in fact) require the City Council to consider the national policies of all the organizations that apply? (It does not.) Has the City Council ever done that before? Why weren’t the Boy Scouts questioned on this issue last year? The year before?

                              Policies require that the City Council follow due process, post public discussions, and allow all sides to be heard. The mere fact that they tabled this hot button issue to the next meeting does not in itself constitute a properly warned policy discussion on whether applicants for vendor permits provide assurance that their company or organization has adequate civil rights policies on the books. If it’s going to apply to the Boy Scouts, it needs to apply to everyone.

                              Policies that apply to whole cities need the whole city involved in the discussion, individual council members’ opinions and sensibilities notwithstanding. This applies to the vendor permits, the master plan, the zoning, the personnel policies, all the legally adopted policies of the city government. When the process for policymaking is ignored, we sacrifice our essential democratic rights to the narrow ambitions of a few badly informed individuals. That’s not what my ancestors fought and died for after July 4, 1776. What about yours?

                              Gwendolyn Hallsmith

                              Montpelier


                              Responses on her facebook page, particulalry from the Town Clerk, would support Stosh's point about the town's next election. IMO, throw all the nuts out and ship them to the nearby Ben & Jerry's ice cream factory. Maybe a new flavor - Smoke on the Water?
                              https://www.facebook.com/pages/Gwend...03176393095852
                              Last edited by RememberSchiff; 07-08-2014, 08:22 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Limited government. Just dealing with the issue before you with out political posturing and grandstanding. Wow, what a concept.

                                Apparently this Hallsmith lady is running for mayor. I'd vote for her.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X