IRS apologizes for targeting conservative groups

[02Ram54]

Sure harm was done. Your statement shows a lack of knowledge about non profits and how the IRS operates. Resources were used that could have been spent on their mission. Grants may have been missed, donors may not have provided support that they otherwise might have.

In 2010 money was flowing into Tea Party "non-profits" like manna from heaven. You can speculate that they might have lost dollars, but I think that's going to pretty hard to back up.

 

In fact, I can't think of better street cred for a Tea Party group than to tout to their donors that they're being targeted by the IRS. You can't buy that kind of advertising.

[LIPTON BASH]

In 2010 money was flowing into Tea Party "non-profits" like manna from heaven. You can speculate that they might have lost dollars, but I think that's going to pretty hard to back up.

 

In fact, I can't think of better street cred for a Tea Party group than to tout to their donors that they're being targeted by the IRS. You can't buy that kind of advertising.

 

What does the amount of money have to do with targeting people of specific ideology? Come on my man. The IRS set stricter guidelines and larger burden of proof on a specific ideology. Its the equivilant of racial profiling in politics except no crime had been committed.

[02Ram54]

What does the amount of money have to do with targeting people of specific ideology? Come on my man. The IRS set stricter guidelines and larger burden of proof on a specific ideology. Its the equivilant of racial profiling in politics except no crime had been committed.

I am specifically debating the point that the delay in and of itself was manifestly harmful. That is all. I have been vocal from the get-go that not only was this exceptionally boneheaded but pretty obviously spilled over from the Land of Unethical and into the Kingdom of the Seriously Wrong.

 

I also can't let your comment slide. In most cases of racial profiling, the person being profiled has also not committed a crime.

 

In fact, I am personally willing to state this: the ratio of political "non-profit" 501©4 groups (left and right!) that deserve not only higher scrutiny but outright denial of tax exempt status because their primary purpose is political advocacy with an undisclosed donor list is much greater than, say, the percentage of young black men who are committing a crime at any given moment or the percentage of Latinos who are undocumented. In that way, it isn't like racial profiling, because it would actually be useful. I'm not for targeting groups with "Tea Party" in their application--it should be open season on ALL of these organizations.

[LIPTON BASH]

I am specifically debating the point that the delay in and of itself was manifestly harmful. That is all. I have been vocal from the get-go that not only was this exceptionally boneheaded but pretty obviously spilled over from the Land of Unethical and into the Kingdom of the Seriously Wrong.

 

I also can't let your comment slide. In most cases of racial profiling, the person being profiled has also not committed a crime.

 

In fact, I am personally willing to state this: the ratio of political "non-profit" 501©4 groups (left and right!) that deserve not only higher scrutiny but outright denial of tax exempt status because their primary purpose is political advocacy with an undisclosed donor list is much greater than, say, the percentage of young black men who are committing a crime at any given moment or the percentage of Latinos who are undocumented. In that way, it isn't like racial profiling, because it would actually be useful. I'm not for targeting groups with "Tea Party" in their application--it should be open season on ALL of these organizations.

 

You may not agree with the current law based off supreme court ruling but the law is the law. But even if I were to agree with you am I to believe that tea party groups are anymore guilty than the many on the left who do the exact same thing with different ideology. If the IRS had enacted a policy scrutinising all ideology this would be a minor issue.

 

But your other point even if true does not make one profiling greater than the other.

[02Ram54]

You may not agree with the current law based off supreme court ruling but the law is the law. But even if I were to agree with you am I to believe that tea party groups are anymore guilty than the many on the left who do the exact same thing with different ideology. If the IRS had enacted a policy scrutinising all ideology this would be a minor issue.

 

But your other point even if true does not make one profiling greater than the other.

The law is still the law is actually the aphorism on my side- even after Citizens United, 501©4 groups are still forbidden from electioneering being their primary purpose.

[LIPTON BASH]

The law is still the law is actually the aphorism on my side- even after Citizens United, 501©4 groups are still forbidden from electioneering being their primary purpose.

 

Ignore the part that there are plenty on the left that fit your definition ? The issue we are discussing has nothing to do with your point even if I think its false. The point is IRS chose to enforce this point based in ideology which in my mind is bordering if not criminal .

[02Ram54]

Ignore the part that there are plenty on the left that fit your definition ? The issue we are discussing has nothing to do with your point even if I think its false. The point is IRS chose to enforce this point based in ideology which in my mind is bordering if not criminal .

Ignore it? I BROUGHT IT UP.

 

In fact, I am personally willing to state this: the ratio of political "non-profit" 501©4 groups (left and right!) that deserve not only higher scrutiny but outright denial of tax exempt status because their primary purpose is political advocacy with an undisclosed donor list is much greater than, say, the percentage of young black men who are committing a crime at any given moment or the percentage of Latinos who are undocumented. In that way, it isn't like racial profiling, because it would actually be useful. I'm not for targeting groups with "Tea Party" in their application--it should be open season on ALL of these organizations.

 

You can think my point is false, but you are wrong. While they are now allowed to spend money on federal races, 501©4 groups are expressly not allowed to make that electoral goal their primary purpose or be formed for that reason. That's why they have to pretend they exist to raise community awareness about an issue. That and the privilege of keeping donors secret is what differentiates them from PACs.

[statman]

Steve Miller is a liar about what? He was not even in charge at the time all of this nonsense took place. I still say abolish the IRS and see how all the poachers can survive. Without the IRS where does all of the money come from for the freeloader programs?

 

Mr. Miller was Deputy Commissioner of the IRS at the time of the wrong doing, so he should be and is accountable. Again, if you do not work for the IRS you have no idea how little our upper management really knows about the everyday happenings within our organization. Am I making excuses? No, but this is why I believe that it was not politically motivated at the highest levels of the organization. My guess it was a lower level wrong doing. Ultimately, it does not matter what I say here, because most of you won't believe it anyway.

[Bluegrasscard]

Interesting how so far only the Cincinnati office has been subject to scrutiny. Also interesting how this is in Ohio, THE state needed in 2012.

 

VJ fingerprints on this one.

 

[Dlbdonn]

Interesting how so far only the Cincinnati office has been subject to scrutiny. Also interesting how this is in Ohio, THE state needed in 2012.

 

VJ fingerprints on this one.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]39940[/ATTACH]

And you personally have proof of this or is this just speculation ?

[2 Humped Camel]

Interesting how so far only the Cincinnati office has been subject to scrutiny. Also interesting how this is in Ohio, THE state needed in 2012.

 

VJ fingerprints on this one.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]39940[/ATTACH]

 

Actually Obama won by such a large margin he could have lost Ohio and still had 44 electoral votes to spare. :hilarious:

[75center]

In 2010 money was flowing into Tea Party "non-profits" like manna from heaven. You can speculate that they might have lost dollars, but I think that's going to pretty hard to back up.

 

In fact, I can't think of better street cred for a Tea Party group than to tout to their donors that they're being targeted by the IRS. You can't buy that kind of advertising.

 

As I said, you obviously lack experience in the non profit sector and dealing with the IRS.

[75center]

?Very Frightening?: Prominent Catholic Prof. Claims IRS Audited Her After Speaking Out Against Obama and Demanded to Know Who Was Paying Her | TheBlaze.com

 

It doesn't stop there. Wow.

 

Yes, that is frightening and perhaps should be looked into even more so than the targeting of the conservative non profit applications. It raises the question of how much more is out there?

[jericho]

Interesting how so far only the Cincinnati office has been subject to scrutiny. Also interesting how this is in Ohio, THE state needed in 2012.

 

VJ fingerprints on this one.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]39940[/ATTACH]

 

She is just another DUCK like Obama. Not suprised she is a cut throat.

[Dlbdonn]

She is just another DUCK like Obama. Not suprised she is a cut throat.

The country needs more cut throats lik her

r