General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums70% say at the targeting by the Internal Revenue Service of tea party and other conservative groups
that were applying for tax exempt status was unacceptable.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/19/have-new-controversies-hurt-obama-has-gop-overreacted/?hpt=hp_t1
Really, are 70% of people polled are that stupid not to realize nor fully understand just what the Tea Party groups are trying to do to this country under the auspices of a 501(c)4 tax exempt status?
Now that is what I would consider as "unacceptable"
librechik
(30,676 posts)media have presented this as an exceptional targeting, when in fact all 501 c 4 groups which seemed they might ave a polical aspect were "targeted."
However, only one of the "targeted" groups lost their tax exempt status. A liberal group.
No one got hurt, no one was hindered. Yet this is somehow the biggest scandal since Watergate.
In fact, I like the IRS scrutiny on 501cs, and do not mind that liberal groups get scrutiny too.
Whoever is disturbed by this incident has been severely misinformed by media which have NOT told the full story, but just focused on their own misconceptions to advance the anti-liberal agenda.
SlimJimmy
(3,182 posts)That time frame encompassed two election cycles. I'd say it made quite a difference to these groups. And it would make quite a difference to progressive groups should they ever be targeted this way.
librechik
(30,676 posts)besides, what a scam! who on earth believes The Tea Party is an apolitical social action group?
They have Party in the name!
However, they seem to have convinced somebody in the evil IRS that they deserved exemption, because they eventually got it.
This is a big tantrum being thrown over nothing because Repubs are angry they lost the election, and refuse to be collegial with the rest of the nation, which won the election. They are always full of tricks to throw a wrench into the Democratic Agenda--they don't believe in democracy. They want to be the One Ruling Party, like always.
SlimJimmy
(3,182 posts)was unacceptable as were some of the questions being asked. The law prohibits the IRS from asking about donors or membership, yet it happened. I have serious issues with the IRS actions in this case. You should too. If it were progressive groups being specifically targeted, I'll wager that your attitude would be quite different.
I'm really finding this "Well, it was rethugs, so it's okay" attitude on DU quite disturbing.
librechik
(30,676 posts)and in fact only a Democratic Women's group was denied 501c4 status.
And no, I am not mad. This is a new category that agents are inexperienced in handling, and it was a good thing that the protocol slowed things down. Kinks were bound to appear, and they did.
But if some group with the word Party in their name are throwing down over being scrutinized for a possible political affiliation, all I can do is say please, pull the other leg.
SlimJimmy
(3,182 posts)target liberal groups. Yet key words *were* used to target conservative groups. That's the problem, and it's also what you don't seem to have a problem with.
librechik
(30,676 posts)You are stuck on Fox talking points.
SlimJimmy
(3,182 posts)just lame. But with that said, let me ask you a question: How many progressive groups have "tea party" or "patriot" in their names? If that's not specific targeting, then I don't what is. You can hide your head in the sand because this was directed against conservative groups, but I'd rather call foul before progressive groups are targeted. I'd rather be on the unbiased side of this argument. I'd rather be on the right side of history here. You can do what you want.
SlimJimmy
(3,182 posts)group over another is acceptable. If *all* groups applying were scrutinized to the same extent, then I wouldn't have an issue with it.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Really, are 70% of people polled are that stupid not to realize nor fully understand just what the Tea Party groups are trying to do to this country under the auspices of a 501(c)4 tax exempt status? "
...fake scandals, wait until even more information comes out...massive Republican FAIL, from the OP link:
Nate Silver's Statistical Analysis - Sends IRS Critiques To "The Fainting Couch"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022866334
The Only Scandal Regarding the IRS is How EVERY Tea Party Group Obtained 501(C)(4) Status
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022867025
Doctored Benghazi e-mails rankle Dem lawmaker
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022864633
Rex
(65,616 posts)This scandal is only alive in the minds of the RWing.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)that in the future under a Republican administration liberal and progressive groups may face the same treatment.
I hate to say this but eventually in the future it is possible that a Republican will be in the White House and Republicans will hold the majority in one, if not both, houses of Congress.
Obviously I feel it's great if the referees unfairly penalize the opponents of my favorite football team and the Steelers win. However I get really upset when they unfairly penalize my Steelers. The best outcome is actually when the referees are entirely fair and the better team wins.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)Most of the mushy middle of voters (those who don't decide how to vote until the weekend before an election) can't relate to the Benghazi or AP scandals, because they're not overseas diplomats or reporters, but they are taxpayers, and can understand just enough to fear the IRS scandal.
This one's got legs, and the President is going to have to do way more than would normally be necessary to put the genie of fear back into the bottle. The Repukes are batshit crazy on Benghazi, only their base gets energized about it, but when the IRS is involved, there's an opportunity.
siligut
(12,272 posts)The Tea Party is an anti-tax political group and their applications for charity status is a tax dodge. Mitt Romney probably had something to do with this scam.
surrealAmerican
(11,364 posts)It means they are getting their "information" from the main-stream media, which, unfortunately, is not an unbiased source.
Few Americans, smart or otherwise, care enough, or have time enough, to look further.