Dem Congressman takes apart tea party whiner

[JohnL.Burke]

Wasn't factually wrong at all.

Teabaggers tried to cheat the IRS.

The IRS slammed them like a ton of bricks.

Then they said, "Oh, gee, we should have handled you more courteously (but you still aren't getting your tax dodge".)

But not to worry, you guys can STILL claim you lost in 2012 because the IRS kept Teabaggers from bringing the truth to the voters, not because you nominated a weird plutocrat who thought he was wearing magic underwear and disrespected half the electorate.

Thank you for your opinion but I would still rather focus on the facts. The IRS ADMITTED to wrongfully targeting conservative groups. The debate is if rather the IRS targeted conservative groups because the IRS wanted to tap down political opposition or is the IRS just incompetent? Either way, the IRS really needs to be fixed. Unfortunately, as we see on this very thread, the far left has no problem justifying the IRS's corruption or incompetence as long as it is politically convenient.

The IRS isn't incompetent. They've been given a thankless task and got caught in a political whirlwind.

First off Citizen's United opened the floodgates for every plutocrat with an agenda to fund it anonymously. Which is why there was a plethora of newly formed "Freedom" this and "Patriot" that.

Given how vastly under funded and under staffed the IRS is, they went with using that sort of filter to check on these groups.

And Lois Lerner, a Bush appointee, said so. Which of course sparked impeachment minded Republicans to go on yet another witch hunt.

By the way, according to Federal Law, all these groups are illegal.

But of course the law isn't your concern.

It's the impeachment thing that sparks your interest.

LOL! Lois Lerner said she made a mistake because the IRS was under staffed. Why didn't you say so to begin with! That changes everything! I'm assuming she said this before she took the fifth? I'm not talking about impeachment. I'm talking about finding out what exactly happened. I would be saying the same thing if Bush were president. I said the same thing when Nixon was president. My opinion comes from a principle, not a hyper partisan hypocritical double standard buttressed by nonsensical talking points and vacuum sealed half-truths floating in a quantum state of stupid.

 

[emilynghiem]

They weren't enforcing the law. The IRS admitted that they had made a "mistake". Don't let facts be the enemy of your bias.

They should be.

I agree. The IRS should be enforcing the law as opposed to creating different standards for different political groups.

Seriously, John. Since the IRS apparently can't be trusted to be nonpartisan, and since it isn't set up under the Constitution with natural check and balances with other branches of govt,
what do you think of the idea of having separating IRS systems per party to police their own members to fund their own programs? wouldn't THAT give them incentive to run it accurately since their own success and agenda is on the line?

Why not reserve the federal govt and funding for just things "all people agree with anyway" so there is no motivation to cheat.

Why not save all the rest of the hassle to localized representation where if people don't agree, they can fund their own programs separately.

What do you think of that? capping federal income tax at 10% and making the rest optional to invest in programs of choice per party, by lending or by investing where citizens are rewarded for creating solutions? if it's all private then there is no competition from hostile groups that have their own systems, so there is no reason to attack or cheat your own.

Can't political parties operate like religious organizations that build their own schools, hospitals, etc and serve the public by voluntary funding and participation? Why not?

 

[Dot Com]

did you watch the facts presented in my OP video emily?

 

[JoeB131]

They weren't enforcing the law. The IRS admitted that they had made a "mistake". Don't let facts be the enemy of your bias.

They should be.

I agree. The IRS should be enforcing the law as opposed to creating different standards for different political groups.

And the TSA should submit 90 year old grandmothers to the same search protocols that they apply to young middle eastern men.

Right.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

They should be.

I agree. The IRS should be enforcing the law as opposed to creating different standards for different political groups.

And the TSA should submit 90 year old grandmothers to the same search protocols that they apply to young middle eastern men.

Right.

I'm not sure what your point is. You want to work for the TSA so you can search your grandmother? What?

 

[JohnL.Burke]

They should be.

I agree. The IRS should be enforcing the law as opposed to creating different standards for different political groups.

Seriously, John. Since the IRS apparently can't be trusted to be nonpartisan, and since it isn't set up under the Constitution with natural check and balances with other branches of govt,
what do you think of the idea of having separating IRS systems per party to police their own members to fund their own programs? wouldn't THAT give them incentive to run it accurately since their own success and agenda is on the line?

Why not reserve the federal govt and funding for just things "all people agree with anyway" so there is no motivation to cheat.

Why not save all the rest of the hassle to localized representation where if people don't agree, they can fund their own programs separately.

What do you think of that? capping federal income tax at 10% and making the rest optional to invest in programs of choice per party, by lending or by investing where citizens are rewarded for creating solutions? if it's all private then there is no competition from hostile groups that have their own systems, so there is no reason to attack or cheat your own.

Can't political parties operate like religious organizations that build their own schools, hospitals, etc and serve the public by voluntary funding and participation? Why not?

That's a lot to take in. I'm going to have to think about your proposals for a bit. I'm all for changing the status quo though. It's obvious that something has to change.

 

[JoeB131]

I agree. The IRS should be enforcing the law as opposed to creating different standards for different political groups.

And the TSA should submit 90 year old grandmothers to the same search protocols that they apply to young middle eastern men.

Right.

I'm not sure what your point is. You want to work for the TSA so you can search your grandmother? What?

Well, if you don't get the point, explaining it to you doesn't help.

Okay, who's more likely to be a terrorist on a plane. A middle eastern guy or a 90 year old grandma?

Who's more likely to try to defraud the IRS by claiming to be a social welfare agency?

A group with a name like "Tea Party Patriots for LIberty".

the primary cause of this problem were all these fucking teabaggers trying to hide where their money was coming from by claiming to be social welfare agencies. They could have filed as 527 groups, but that would have required complete disclosure.

"Waaaaah, The IRS wouldn't let us commit obvious fraud!"

 

[Dot Com]

And the TSA should submit 90 year old grandmothers to the same search protocols that they apply to young middle eastern men.

Right.

I'm not sure what your point is. You want to work for the TSA so you can search your grandmother? What?

Well, if you don't get the point, explaining it to you doesn't help.

Okay, who's more likely to be a terrorist on a plane. A middle eastern guy or a 90 year old grandma?

Who's more likely to try to defraud the IRS by claiming to be a social welfare agency?

A group with a name like "Tea Party Patriots for LIberty".

the primary cause of this problem were all these fucking teabaggers trying to hide where their money was coming from by claiming to be social welfare agencies. They could have filed as 527 groups, but that would have required complete disclosure.

"Waaaaah, The IRS wouldn't let us commit obvious fraud!"

^ that

EVERY schoolchild knew what was going on YET the USNB Righties are righteously indignant lol

 

[JohnL.Burke]

And the TSA should submit 90 year old grandmothers to the same search protocols that they apply to young middle eastern men.

Right.

I'm not sure what your point is. You want to work for the TSA so you can search your grandmother? What?

Well, if you don't get the point, explaining it to you doesn't help.

Okay, who's more likely to be a terrorist on a plane. A middle eastern guy or a 90 year old grandma?

Who's more likely to try to defraud the IRS by claiming to be a social welfare agency?

A group with a name like "Tea Party Patriots for LIberty".

the primary cause of this problem were all these fucking teabaggers trying to hide where their money was coming from by claiming to be social welfare agencies. They could have filed as 527 groups, but that would have required complete disclosure.

"Waaaaah, The IRS wouldn't let us commit obvious fraud!"

I'm getting the sense that you don't like the Tea Party? Of course there is no evidence to suggest that anything you said is true. However, your real bias shows you want the IRS to treat groups with political agendas differently. You don't mind corruption as long as it's the kind of corruption you agree with. You live in a world where Mother Teresa is a ghoul and domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers are political heroes so I'm not surprised at your reaction. I AM surprised at you blatant honesty though. Most far left reactionary extremists pretend to support the rule of law while espousing fascistic principles as they hide in the folds of Orwellian doublespeak . That's why I like you. You don't pretend that the IRS shouldn't be used as a political strong arm. You support the notion because your bias demands it. You admit it. You seem proud of it. You want to hump it like a rabid dog on a severed leg.

 

[freedombecki]

I'm not sure what your point is. You want to work for the TSA so you can search your grandmother? What?

Well, if you don't get the point, explaining it to you doesn't help.

Okay, who's more likely to be a terrorist on a plane. A middle eastern guy or a 90 year old grandma?

Who's more likely to try to defraud the IRS by claiming to be a social welfare agency?

A group with a name like "Tea Party Patriots for LIberty".

the primary cause of this problem were all these fucking teabaggers trying to hide where their money was coming from by claiming to be social welfare agencies. They could have filed as 527 groups, but that would have required complete disclosure.

"Waaaaah, The IRS wouldn't let us commit obvious fraud!"

^ that

EVERY schoolchild knew what was going on YET the USNB Righties are righteously indignant lol

Too bad everybody knows Islamic jihadists have declared war on the USA except Dottie. *sigh*

Dottie, we're in the odd state of being objects of an undeclared war by people who do not like us much. In fact, if you ever defended the USA while in some circles over there, they'd burn a Christian church right after they beheaded you for an appetizer. We don't like it, but that's the way it is. Some of our nation's best warriors know this all too well, and those here who think a light hand will magically work against the threats leveled against our nation are mistaken. Any yielding is never met with any reciprocity except being considered so weak, a larger threat will be exacted next making more and more repugnant demands.

Weakening our military is Obama's biggest mistake. Men and women with military minds that are not misled by trifles know why. They've been there, experienced the treachery first-hand, know good people who died while being deceived into thinking the truce was truth. The truth is truce means cracking the door on more genocide against Americans, Israelis, and anybody who happens to be looking through the crack, namely American troops.

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but the comparison of a 90-year-old grandma with one who is likely to sympathize with the jihad declared privately on the other side of this planet that threatens every American over there made me bring it up. My apologies.

 

[freedombecki]

They should be.

I agree. The IRS should be enforcing the law as opposed to creating different standards for different political groups.

Seriously, John. Since the IRS apparently can't be trusted to be nonpartisan, and since it isn't set up under the Constitution with natural check and balances with other branches of govt,
what do you think of the idea of having separating IRS systems per party to police their own members to fund their own programs? wouldn't THAT give them incentive to run it accurately since their own success and agenda is on the line?

Why not reserve the federal govt and funding for just things "all people agree with anyway" so there is no motivation to cheat.

Why not save all the rest of the hassle to localized representation where if people don't agree, they can fund their own programs separately.

What do you think of that? capping federal income tax at 10% and making the rest optional to invest in programs of choice per party, by lending or by investing where citizens are rewarded for creating solutions? if it's all private then there is no competition from hostile groups that have their own systems, so there is no reason to attack or cheat your own.

Can't political parties operate like religious organizations that build their own schools, hospitals, etc and serve the public by voluntary funding and participation? Why not?

You raise some good points!

Unfortunately, it could further divide America by economic bracket and engender a series of incivilities, wouldn't you think? (Although it's a creative and imaginative approach to our nation's current state of divisiveness which we need). The founders gave us a system of government that promoted business to sustain individuals, with the government out of people's way. Businesses divided along social lines, and partisans began targeting their political opponents' supporters. We're in an advanced state of that right now. More divisions would put one party in control of all communications and the other in control of military and wealth. If one side goes into full throttle communist state, heads will roll, and the opposite party will be their targets. I'm sorry we're allowing other nations to divide us by becoming indebted to them. I wish I were wrong, and that we could resolve our issues as a unit of one. The first division would be followed by many others until a state of chaos would exist. We need to define government as a republic with many different states or as a strong central government that kills all opponents. Communism is a guarantee that half the population will go down, starting with business movers and shakers. Limiting wealth should also be followed with limiting social progressivism. Eliminating wealth would kill all social progressivism, and eliminating social progressivism would result in child hunger. We need to strike a balance, try harder to get along together, and reacquaint ourselves with priorities of the Republic according to the Constitution without showing favoritism based on this nation's fundamental needs, not those in which we have no and desire no control over. We don't even require our children to learn a foreign language. Could we possibly be more arrogant in the world? It could be the reason we are unpopular overseas. We cannot communicate, and we teach our children to do likewise by not requiring each high school to deliver children who know at least one language per populated continent/ island group. Desirable languages not available in many schools could be: based on population (or not):


Top 100 Languages by Population

Rank, Language, Name Primary Country, Population

1 CHINESE, MANDARIN... China... 885,000,000
.
2 SPANISH Spain 332,000,000
.
3 ENGLISH United Kingdom 322,000,000
.
4 BENGALI Bangladesh 189,000,000
.
5 HINDI India 182,000,000
.
6 PORTUGUESE Portugal 170,000,000
.
7 RUSSIAN Russia 170,000,000
.
8 JAPANESE Japan 125,000,000
.
9 GERMAN, STANDARD Germany 98,000,000
.
10 CHINESE, WU China 77,175,000
.
11 JAVANESE Indonesia, Java, Bali 75,500,800
.
12 KOREAN Korea, South 75,000,000
.
13 FRENCH France 72,000,000
.
14 VIETNAMESE Viet Nam 67,662,000
.
15 TELUGU India 66,350,000
.
16 CHINESE, YUE China 66,000,000
.
17 MARATHI India 64,783,000
.
18 TAMIL India 63,075,000
.
19 TURKISH Turkey 59,000,000
.
20 URDU Pakistan 58,000,000

*others, based on an update of this 1996 study, Top 100 Languages by Population

* Ethnologue Statistical Study by Language Size (389 (or nearly 6%) of the world’s languages have at least one million speakers and account for 94% of the world’s population)

One of the requirements of leadership is correct usage and understanding of language. It's just that simple. America, we are flunking by failure to communicate.

 

[Dot Com]

Well, if you don't get the point, explaining it to you doesn't help.

Okay, who's more likely to be a terrorist on a plane. A middle eastern guy or a 90 year old grandma?

Who's more likely to try to defraud the IRS by claiming to be a social welfare agency?

A group with a name like "Tea Party Patriots for LIberty".

the primary cause of this problem were all these fucking teabaggers trying to hide where their money was coming from by claiming to be social welfare agencies. They could have filed as 527 groups, but that would have required complete disclosure.

"Waaaaah, The IRS wouldn't let us commit obvious fraud!"

^ that

EVERY schoolchild knew what was going on YET the USNB Righties are righteously indignant lol

Too bad everybody knows Islamic jihadists have declared war on the USA except Dottie. *sigh*

Dottie, we're in the odd state of being objects of an undeclared war by people who do not like us much. In fact, if you ever defended the USA while in some circles over there, they'd burn a Christian church right after they beheaded you for an appetizer. We don't like it, but that's the way it is. Some of our nation's best warriors know this all too well, and those here who think a light hand will magically work against the threats leveled against our nation are mistaken. Any yielding is never met with any reciprocity except being considered so weak, a larger threat will be exacted next making more and more repugnant demands.

Weakening our military is Obama's biggest mistake. Men and women with military minds that are not misled by trifles know why. They've been there, experienced the treachery first-hand, know good people who died while being deceived into thinking the truce was truth. The truth is truce means cracking the door on more genocide against Americans, Israelis, and anybody who happens to be looking through the crack, namely American troops.

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but the comparison of a 90-year-old grandma with one who is likely to sympathize with the jihad declared privately on the other side of this planet that threatens every American over there made me bring it up. My apologies.

ummm..... I'm a vet who served over in the Gulf prior to 43's zany/ill-concieved war/s freedombecki while you were sitting stateside drinking your mint julip. Why do you keep forgetting this. Is it because I'm NOT a rw, kool aid- drinking, historical revisionist like..... well..... you?

I was an "American troop" you ditzy broad For the last time, PLEASE stop talking about the military when you haven't served & only know what you know "second/third hand". I served & I don't appreciate your arm chair observations &/or suggestions. [MENTION=29697]freedombecki[/MENTION] .

IOW's- SHOVE IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE MISSY!!!

 

[birddog]

^ that

EVERY schoolchild knew what was going on YET the USNB Righties are righteously indignant lol

Too bad everybody knows Islamic jihadists have declared war on the USA except Dottie. *sigh*

Dottie, we're in the odd state of being objects of an undeclared war by people who do not like us much. In fact, if you ever defended the USA while in some circles over there, they'd burn a Christian church right after they beheaded you for an appetizer. We don't like it, but that's the way it is. Some of our nation's best warriors know this all too well, and those here who think a light hand will magically work against the threats leveled against our nation are mistaken. Any yielding is never met with any reciprocity except being considered so weak, a larger threat will be exacted next making more and more repugnant demands.

Weakening our military is Obama's biggest mistake. Men and women with military minds that are not misled by trifles know why. They've been there, experienced the treachery first-hand, know good people who died while being deceived into thinking the truce was truth. The truth is truce means cracking the door on more genocide against Americans, Israelis, and anybody who happens to be looking through the crack, namely American troops.

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but the comparison of a 90-year-old grandma with one who is likely to sympathize with the jihad declared privately on the other side of this planet that threatens every American over there made me bring it up. My apologies.

ummm..... I'm a vet who served over in the Gulf prior to 43's zany/ill-concieved war/s freedombecki while you were sittiing stateside drinking your mint julip. Why do you keep forgetting this. Is it because I'm NOT a rw, kool aid- drinking, historical revisionist like..... well..... you?

I was an "American troop" you ditzy broad For the last time, PLEASE stop talking about the military when you haven't served & only know what you know "second/third hand". I served & I don't appreciate your arm chair observations &/or suggestions. [MENTION=29697]freedombecki[/MENTION] .

IOW's- SHOVE IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE MISSY!!!

First of all, thank you for your service.

Secondly, that obviously does not preclude you from being a Kool-Aid drinking, dumbass liberal who is wrong nearly all the time!

I also served, but that's beside the point.

Have a nice day.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I'm getting the sense that you don't like the Tea Party? Of course there is no evidence to suggest that anything you said is true. However, your real bias shows you want the IRS to treat groups with political agendas differently. You don't mind corruption as long as it's the kind of corruption you agree with. You live in a world where Mother Teresa is a ghoul and domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers are political heroes so I'm not surprised at your reaction. I AM surprised at you blatant honesty though. Most far left reactionary extremists pretend to support the rule of law while espousing fascistic principles as they hide in the folds of Orwellian doublespeak . That's why I like you. You don't pretend that the IRS shouldn't be used as a political strong arm. You support the notion because your bias demands it. You admit it. You seem proud of it. You want to hump it like a rabid dog on a severed leg.

Yeah, when you see "obvious fucking fraud", i expect people to investigate it.

These were not social welfare agencies. They claimed to be social welfare agencies. That's fraud.

The Corruption was the Teabaggers trying to hide where their money was coming from.

 

[JoeB131]

Well, if you don't get the point, explaining it to you doesn't help.

Okay, who's more likely to be a terrorist on a plane. A middle eastern guy or a 90 year old grandma?

Who's more likely to try to defraud the IRS by claiming to be a social welfare agency?

A group with a name like "Tea Party Patriots for LIberty".

the primary cause of this problem were all these fucking teabaggers trying to hide where their money was coming from by claiming to be social welfare agencies. They could have filed as 527 groups, but that would have required complete disclosure.

"Waaaaah, The IRS wouldn't let us commit obvious fraud!"

^ that

EVERY schoolchild knew what was going on YET the USNB Righties are righteously indignant lol

Too bad everybody knows Islamic jihadists have declared war on the USA except Dottie. *sigh*

Dottie, we're in the odd state of being objects of an undeclared war by people who do not like us much. In fact, if you ever defended the USA while in some circles over there, they'd burn a Christian church right after they beheaded you for an appetizer. We don't like it, but that's the way it is. Some of our nation's best warriors know this all too well, and those here who think a light hand will magically work against the threats leveled against our nation are mistaken. Any yielding is never met with any reciprocity except being considered so weak, a larger threat will be exacted next making more and more repugnant demands.

Weakening our military is Obama's biggest mistake. Men and women with military minds that are not misled by trifles know why. They've been there, experienced the treachery first-hand, know good people who died while being deceived into thinking the truce was truth. The truth is truce means cracking the door on more genocide against Americans, Israelis, and anybody who happens to be looking through the crack, namely American troops.

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but the comparison of a 90-year-old grandma with one who is likely to sympathize with the jihad declared privately on the other side of this planet that threatens every American over there made me bring it up. My apologies.

First, what does any of that have to do with the Teabaggers trying to defraud the IRS, which was the point of the discussion.

Second, the only reason why we have a problem with the Islamic world is we keep sticking our noses into their business instead of minding our own. It's like sticking your dick in a hornet's nest and complaining about getting stung.

 

[Dot Com]

^ that

EVERY schoolchild knew what was going on YET the USNB Righties are righteously indignant lol

Too bad everybody knows Islamic jihadists have declared war on the USA except Dottie. *sigh*

Dottie, we're in the odd state of being objects of an undeclared war by people who do not like us much. In fact, if you ever defended the USA while in some circles over there, they'd burn a Christian church right after they beheaded you for an appetizer. We don't like it, but that's the way it is. Some of our nation's best warriors know this all too well, and those here who think a light hand will magically work against the threats leveled against our nation are mistaken. Any yielding is never met with any reciprocity except being considered so weak, a larger threat will be exacted next making more and more repugnant demands.

Weakening our military is Obama's biggest mistake. Men and women with military minds that are not misled by trifles know why. They've been there, experienced the treachery first-hand, know good people who died while being deceived into thinking the truce was truth. The truth is truce means cracking the door on more genocide against Americans, Israelis, and anybody who happens to be looking through the crack, namely American troops.

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but the comparison of a 90-year-old grandma with one who is likely to sympathize with the jihad declared privately on the other side of this planet that threatens every American over there made me bring it up. My apologies.

First, what does any of that have to do with the Teabaggers trying to defraud the IRS, which was the point of the discussion.

Second, the only reason why we have a problem with the Islamic world is we keep sticking our noses into their business instead of minding our own. It's like sticking your dick in a hornet's nest and complaining about getting stung.

EXACTLY!!! Why is she inserting that into the discussion, her rw historical revisionism?

 

[freedombecki]

^ that

EVERY schoolchild knew what was going on YET the USNB Righties are righteously indignant lol

Too bad everybody knows Islamic jihadists have declared war on the USA except Dottie. *sigh*

Dottie, we're in the odd state of being objects of an undeclared war by people who do not like us much. In fact, if you ever defended the USA while in some circles over there, they'd burn a Christian church right after they beheaded you for an appetizer. We don't like it, but that's the way it is. Some of our nation's best warriors know this all too well, and those here who think a light hand will magically work against the threats leveled against our nation are mistaken. Any yielding is never met with any reciprocity except being considered so weak, a larger threat will be exacted next making more and more repugnant demands.

Weakening our military is Obama's biggest mistake. Men and women with military minds that are not misled by trifles know why. They've been there, experienced the treachery first-hand, know good people who died while being deceived into thinking the truce was truth. The truth is truce means cracking the door on more genocide against Americans, Israelis, and anybody who happens to be looking through the crack, namely American troops.

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but the comparison of a 90-year-old grandma with one who is likely to sympathize with the jihad declared privately on the other side of this planet that threatens every American over there made me bring it up. My apologies.

ummm..... I'm a vet who served over in the Gulf prior to 43's zany/ill-concieved war/s freedombecki while you were sitting stateside drinking your mint julip. Why do you keep forgetting this. Is it because I'm NOT a rw, kool aid- drinking, historical revisionist like..... well..... you?

I was an "American troop" you ditzy broad For the last time, PLEASE stop talking about the military when you haven't served & only know what you know "second/third hand". I served & I don't appreciate your arm chair observations &/or suggestions. @freedombecki .

IOW's- SHOVE IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE MISSY!!!

Keep your pants on, Drama Comma. Weakening America's military is Obama's biggest mistake.

And he made it all by himself.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

[

I'm getting the sense that you don't like the Tea Party? Of course there is no evidence to suggest that anything you said is true. However, your real bias shows you want the IRS to treat groups with political agendas differently. You don't mind corruption as long as it's the kind of corruption you agree with. You live in a world where Mother Teresa is a ghoul and domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers are political heroes so I'm not surprised at your reaction. I AM surprised at you blatant honesty though. Most far left reactionary extremists pretend to support the rule of law while espousing fascistic principles as they hide in the folds of Orwellian doublespeak . That's why I like you. You don't pretend that the IRS shouldn't be used as a political strong arm. You support the notion because your bias demands it. You admit it. You seem proud of it. You want to hump it like a rabid dog on a severed leg.

Yeah, when you see "obvious fucking fraud", i expect people to investigate it.

These were not social welfare agencies. They claimed to be social welfare agencies. That's fraud.

The Corruption was the Teabaggers trying to hide where their money was coming from.

You're spinning like a top. Tea Party organizations applying under 501 (c)(4) status were treated differently than liberal organizations applying for the same status. They were singled out (according to the IRS) for special scrutiny. This scrutiny consisted of using a different procedure when it came to Tea Party and conservative organizations. A procedure that I have no doubt you agree with but is none the less illegal and unethical. When conservative groups are asked about donations when liberal groups aren't, well... this is what's known a corruption. Now Barrack Obama says it wasn't corruption that was at the root of the IRS illegality, Obama says boneheaded decisions were the cause. The same "boneheaded" decisions that you support and defend. Of course Obama also said that you could keep your doctor and insurance plan so I'm going to take Obama's appraisal about the IRS with a grain of salt.
Oh by the way, not one Tea Party organization applying for 501(c)(4) status has been brought up on charges of fraud. Your rationale for excusing fraud (as long as it's the right kind of fraud) seems to be based on some sort of emotional need fed by reactionary hyper-partisanship... not reality.

 

[JoeB131]

[
You're spinning like a top. Tea Party organizations applying under 501 (c)(4) status were treated differently than liberal organizations applying for the same status. They were singled out (according to the IRS) for special scrutiny. This scrutiny consisted of using a different procedure when it came to Tea Party and conservative organizations. A procedure that I have no doubt you agree with but is none the less illegal and unethical. When conservative groups are asked about donations when liberal groups aren't, well... this is what's known a corruption. Now Barrack Obama says it wasn't corruption that was at the root of the IRS illegality, Obama says boneheaded decisions were the cause. The same "boneheaded" decisions that you support and defend. Of course Obama also said that you could keep your doctor and insurance plan so I'm going to take Obama's appraisal about the IRS with a grain of salt.
Oh by the way, not one Tea Party organization applying for 501(c)(4) status has been brought up on charges of fraud. Your rationale for excusing fraud (as long as it's the right kind of fraud) seems to be based on some sort of emotional need fed by reactionary hyper-partisanship... not reality.

Um, yeah, they were treated to extra scrutiny because their claims were unbelievable.

When your answer to an uninsured man is "LET HIM DIE!!!!", it's really hard for any reasonable person to think you are a social welfare agency.

In fact, the Tea Party claiming to be Social Welfare is kind of like Jeff Dahmner trying to claim he's a Sous Chef. you'd really need to take such claims with a grain of salt.

Now, yeah, Obama is kind of a wuss and trying to just get along. Frankly, Hillary would have charged these fuckers with fraud and outed the Koch Brother's mistresses. Which is frankly, the only way we should deal with you people at this point.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Nobody claimed that conservative groups were targeted because their claims were unbelievable. That was certainly not the IRS's claims and they were the ones doing the targeting.
The rest of your rant is just incoherent.