The video, in my previous post, mentioned two letters that were sent with return addresses in DC. Are they among the letters from 8 Democrat senators who demanded that the IRS go after conservative groups?
Karl Rove is linking congressional Democrats to the IRS scandal, saying that the agency was just doing what some on the Hill wanted.
“The administration is blaming this on low-level bureaucrats in Cincinnati and that turned out not to be true. We know people at the [IRS central headquarters] in Washington were involved. But we are missing something else. Remember, they were doing what people on Capitol Hill wanted them to do,” Rove said on Fox News on Tuesday.
Last week, the IRS apologized for unfairly targeting conservative groups — including tea party organizations — that were seeking nonprofit status.
Rove said that Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) all deserve scrutiny for signing a letter that urged the IRS to bolster their scrutiny of certain “political” groups, as ABC News noted on Tuesday. (emphasis mine)
“In 2010, Max Baucus… wrote a letter to the director of the IRS saying,’Go investigate these kinds of groups.’ We had Chuck Schumer, who has been stirring this around for a number of years, by 2012 he goes out and gives a similar tough letter to the head of the IRS saying, ‘Look at these groups,’ and [he] gets six others to sign the letter,” Rove said, naming the senators above that signed the letter.
Rove continued: “Maybe the low-level bureaucrats aren’t so low level and maybe they were influenced by Democrats in the Congress saying take on these groups or else you will face the consequences in front of us.”
In a Tuesday letter to President Barack Obama, Franklin Graham charged that the two N.C. charities he leads were also targeted by the IRS for political reasons.
Graham, who heads both the Charlotte-based Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Boone-based Samaritan’s Purse, said in his letter that an IRS agent visited both organizations last October to conduct a review for the tax year ending in 2010.
This attention from the IRS came the same year the BGEA purchased full-page newspaper ads addressed to voters, Graham pointed out. In April, the group urged N.C. voters to approve a proposed constitutional amendment reaffirming the state ban on same-sex marriage. Then, during last fall’s presidential campaign, another BGEA ad encouraged voters to cast their ballots “for candidates who base their decisions on biblical principles.”
Given the recent revelations about the IRS targeting conservative organizations with “Tea Party” and “Patriot” in their titles, Graham said in his letter that he now believes the IRS’ reviews of the BGEA and Samaritan’s Purse were part of the same effort to target conservative groups.
After the November election, the Graham-led charities were notified that the IRS had affirmed their tax-exempt status. But, before then, Graham said the organizations had to spend “precious resources” – money contributed by donors for ministry purposes – “servicing the IRS agents in our offices.”
In his letter to the Democratic president, Graham, who has talked up GOP candidates in recent years, said: “I am bringing this to your attention because I believe that someone in the (Obama) administration was targeting and attempting to intimidate us. This is morally wrong and unethical – indeed some would call it ‘unAmerican.’ ”
Graham was traveling overseas Tuesday and was not available for comment.
A White House spokeswoman had no immediate comment.
Grahams organization sounds like it is political along with religious to me. All organizations claiming tax exemption should be investigated. Some of them misrepresent their agenda to save taxes. Today's news said something about the liberal organizations that evaded scrutiny. Investigate them all. I'm sure that if I asked for tax exempt status I would be investigated regardless of my political leaning.
Grahams organization sounds like it is political along with religious to me. All organizations claiming tax exemption should be investigated. Some of them misrepresent their agenda to save taxes. Today's news said something about the liberal organizations that evaded scrutiny. Investigate them all. I'm sure that if I asked for tax exempt status I would be investigated regardless of my political leaning.
You are right. But something tells me that if Mr. Sharpton or Jackson got investigated and their exemption was denied, there would be another million man march on DC, so that will never happen. So let's just go after the "Quite Conservatives".
Originally posted by texasfiero: The video, in my previous post, mentioned two letters that were sent with return addresses in DC. Are they among the letters from 8 Democrat senators who demanded that the IRS go after conservative groups?
To add fuel to outrage fire, ... lest we forget, ... this started just after Nobama's brazen and unprecedented attack on the Justices of the Supreme Court, during a the 2010 State of the Union address, berating the United States Supreme Court justices, while they were sitting on the front row in Congress, saying that they were wrong in their ruling of the "Citizens United" case.
He then during the State of the Union Address urged Congress to pass a bill which reversed the decision. Here is what Obama said in layman's terms, folks... "To hell with what the Supreme Court ruled. I disagree with it, and I'm encouraging the House and Senate to write bills to find a way to bypass the ruling, or at least find a loophole around it." Then eight dumbocratic Senators write the IRS demanding something be done, ? Let's not also forget that at the time, ObamaCare was in progress of being debated and was facing tough times, even though the Dumbs had both houses of Congress and the Presidency. It was having a hard time ! With great help from the Tea Party movement, regular citizens. hey HAD to be SILENCED ! Do the DUMBS believe that they that they should be the "thought police", the "free speech police" ? Is it really that "if you don't agree with us we need to shut you up" ?
[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 05-15-2013).]
It is said "Bush lied, people died" in concert with attacking another country. I submit "Obama lied, freedom died" in concert with attacking his own citizens.
Best suggestion I have heard is that congress need to parade the people targeted one by one and have them tell their stories. Nothing like putting faces on these stories.
As a side note, heard the IRS softball team is named the Cheetahs, how fitting.
Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) pointed out in her press conference today that former IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman was appointed under George W. Bush, and that the agency is seen to most people as "three scary initials."
"Has anybody mentioned that the director who left, and therefore we have now an acting director, was a Bush appointee? And that Miller was a career... these were not Obama appointees. But it happened on their watch."
Pelosi was being asked a question on whether President Obama had done enough with the resignation of the acting commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Steven T. Miller.
Steve Miller was appointed acting commissioner November 9th of 2012, when the Bush appointee stepped down.
Pelosi also said the IRS was "three scary initals to most people", "not because they think that they did anything wrong, but because they are just worried they won't be treated fairly. These people were not treated fairly. That was wrong and somebody must be held accountable."
Originally posted by dennis_6: Pelosi was being asked a question on whether President Obama had done enough with the resignation of the acting commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Steven T. Miller. "Has anybody mentioned that the director who left, and therefore we have now an acting director, was a Bush appointee? And that Miller was a career... these were not Obama appointees. But it happened on their watch."
So, Pelosi does not answer the question. (Never mind that she falsely states the IRS shenanigans happened on the Bush watch.) Yesterday, Obama was asked if anybody in the White House knew about the IRS shenanigans.
quote
Nobama "I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the [inspector general] report before the I.G. report had been leaked" to the press".
So, Nobama did not answer the question.
[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 05-17-2013).]
I actually hope he stay s in office to finish his term out. Why? Because if he steps down, crazy Uncle Joe steps in. As bad as Obama is, unless both POTUS and VP step down in unison, Biden would be sooooo much worse.
I actually hope he stay s in office to finish his term out. Why? Because if he steps down, crazy Uncle Joe steps in. As bad as Obama is, unless both POTUS and VP step down in unison, Biden would be sooooo much worse.
I disagree, Laughing Joe Biden is ten times the man Obama is. Really, nothing mush would happen till the next election and we would have hours of funny gaffs to amuse ourselves with. Plus, maybe he would repeal Obama care in an attempt to win the seat for real himself.
On a side note, he would not automatically become president anyways.
Yeah, Obama said he didn't know about the "report." He said nothing about whether he knew about the practice or not. Translation, "I didn't know I'd gotten caught."
Honestly, if anyone still support Obama after all this - America is lost and it's not Obama's fault, it's the people's.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
As long as people just blindly believe whatever the TV tells them to, he'll stay and we'll have Hillary in 2016. So many people seem to be just too busy watching The Voice or Dancing With The Stars to be bothered with the goings on in Washington that WILL effect their lives. What would happen if Congress just votes in a 90% income tax on Monday? Unfortunately, there'd be too many people saying "Oh well, those wacky politicians. What're ya gonna do? Hahahaha." That is, until they realize they can't pay the bills with only keeping 10% of what they work for. As long as we continue to vote these yahoos into office and keep them there, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
If only we could get Bush back again! The economy is recovering too fast.
Here's a crazy idea, how about holding Obama accountable for Obama's actions? Does "I'm not Bush" give him free reign to do whatever the F*** he wants? Apparently, so judging from your post.
If only we could get Bush back again! The economy is recovering too fast.
So what would you like to see then? Taxes even higher than they are now, and increasing even more? To what end? Once Congress has spent what they have, they'll just come back, say they don't have enough money, and ask for another tax increase. The economy isn't recovering as quickly as it should be BECAUSE of taxes. Not necessarily because they're too high. But because businesses have absolutely no idea what's going to happen with taxes over even the next six months. It costs money to hire an employee. So there's no sense in hiring someone if six months down the road, you're just going to have to lay them off because of the ever-increasing tax regulations. Until there's some stability in the tax code, the economy will continue to creep barely upwards or stall from time to time. And yes, let's bring Bush back so we can restart the clock of when everyone blames him for everything.
The economy isn't "recovering." The Fed is pumping $85 Billion per MONTH into the economy. It's like being unemployed and getting a new credit card every month. Sure, spending it up, stock prices are up. What happens when the Fed stops the gravy train? They can't keep it up forever. If they do, it will eventually cause inflation like Zimbabwe. If they do stop, that's when it all comes crashing down. We've traded one bubble for another. The Fed may be able to keep it up for a few more years - long enough for the next administration to come in just as the entire house of cards comes crashing down.
It's easy to live well with no job and a pocket full of credit cards. How do you pay the bill when it comes due? America's bill is coming due. Then what?
Thanks for your very gracious replys to my post. I have absolutely no belief that Obama or the democrats can or will fix our financial problems. Unlike some of you, I also have no confidence in the republican party either. In my opinion our system is broken and corrupt and I see no indication whatsoever that it is improving at all. It just seems to get worse and worse and there is no alternative system available that I can believe in. I believe that our system of government is the best in the world, but it is getting worse and worse every year. I want to be optimistic more than anything in the world, but I don't see good in the pipeline at this point and I don't see any indication that there will be. I'm sad.
That reply would have been much better than to throw a Bush bashing comment in there. I don't believe the fools in Washington know how to fix this mess or are unwilling to take the needed steps to do so, so as to protect their chance at re-election. If revenue is down and millions are unemployed, do something about the unemployment rate and the revenue will increase because now you have more people paying taxes. Don't just raise taxes on the few remaining people who're still working. Taking more and more money out of an already-struggling economy is NOT the answer. And don't anyone say anything about unemployment being down. While it is, one of the biggest reasons for that right now is because we have the lowest workforce participation numbers than we have in almost forty years. If you put everyone who gave up looking for work back into the pot, the UE numbers would be well back into the double digits. Also, more people are underemployed which, while it helps the UE numbers some, it doesn't do our country any good when you have PhD's bagging groceries. Bottom line, the economy still sucks because it's not something you can just throw money at and expect it to repair itself.
Yeah, I was sarcastic. It seems to me that there are way more people on here who bash Obama as though the republicans are the answer to fix things up. Any idea what the ratio of Obama bashers to Bush bashers is here? I just get tired of the posts bashing Obama, as though that's all we have to do is get rid of him and then everything will be ok. Bush sucked too!
The media doesn't care... unless this is a Republican who's doing these things, the Democrats get a free pass.
This is nothing more than the typical liberal mindset of "the end justifies the means..."
Because they believe that the goal is ultimately the correct one, they feel that everything that is within their power... right or wrong... is acceptable to reach that goal.
quote
Originally posted by dratts:
Yeah, I was sarcastic. It seems to me that there are way more people on here who bash Obama as though the republicans are the answer to fix things up. Any idea what the ratio of Obama bashers to Bush bashers is here? I just get tired of the posts bashing Obama, as though that's all we have to do is get rid of him and then everything will be ok. Bush sucked too!
Your conversion from hard-core liberal to moderate conservative is ALMOST there... just hang in a little bit longer, and you'll eventually let that "defend Democrats" wall down and realize the truth.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 05-19-2013).]
I was a hard core conservative first. For a short time I was a hard core liberal. At this time I take some from both parties. I don't like big government or regulations, but wealth is power and although I don't need anyones money, I don't want anyones money/power to be used against me. There is no easy answer. I've gained a new respect for you from some of your recent posts. We may not be as different as you think.
Yeah, I was sarcastic. It seems to me that there are way more people on here who bash Obama as though the republicans are the answer to fix things up. Any idea what the ratio of Obama bashers to Bush bashers is here? I just get tired of the posts bashing Obama, as though that's all we have to do is get rid of him and then everything will be ok. Bush sucked too!
(this is not solely directed at you...)
I get tired of all the posts that say whatever Obama does must be okay because he's not Bush. Bush sucked.... Bush was the worst president evar!!..... Bush destroyed the economy.... Bush kills babies.... Bush this.... Bush that...
Newsflash - Bush is gone. Right or wrong, better or worse, Obama is president now. His actions as president are either in the best interest of the nation or they aren't. It's amazing that some who said Bush was the worst ever and Obama is the savior of our nation use "well Bush did it" or "he's better than Bush" as their yardstick. They take the one they claim was the worst ever - and all Obama has to do is not suck quite as bad and he's a resounding success to them. Really?
If Bush started the fire and Obama threw gasoline on the flames, Obama certainly brought us "Change" but it wasn't helpful or constructive change.
If you want to know if Obama should be held accountable for these actions, just imagine George W. Bush's administration targeting Democrat groups with the IRS and see if you think it's a good thing or not.
We're into year 5 of Obama's presidency. At some point people need to start judging him on his own merits and not only comparing him to someone they themselves claim was the worst example ever. Don't you think you should set your sights a little bit higher than that?
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 05-19-2013).]
you'll eventually let that "defend Democrats" wall down.
That has always been such a weak way of excusing "out of hand" anything that differs from what one believes. "Your defending >insert prejudice here< which means you are ONE of them and therefore the enemy". Nice and tidy, no analytical thought, no individual belief, only "The Collective". One side is right, one side is wrong.
"Seeing the light" doesn't mean it's the RIGHT way near as much as it means "You are finally seeing things MY WAY.". Which just so happens to always seem to be portrayed as the right only way.
P.S. Not about you 82-T/A [At Work], just about the idea of how egocentric "finally coming around" is.
To me, "coming around" would mean not bashing one side or the other simply because they're one side of the other. It would be basing your decisions on your beliefs and that the side you chose truly represents your beliefs. There are some people who say they're hardcore Democrats because they always stand up for the worker. Then that person doesn't get a job because a Democratic politician used their influence to get their cousin into the job the person was after. Or there are some people who say they're Republican because Republicans are for fewer regulations. Then that person has to close up their business because their Republican representative just signed a bill doubling the red tape they have to go through for their business. Only to find out the real reason the politician signed the bill was to help out a constituent that would put most of their competition out of business and lead to a much bigger campaign contribution later on. The way I see it and it seems to solidify more and more daily, there is no Republican, there is no Democrat. There are only corrupt politicians who, once they're in office, want only to fatten their wallets and pursue their quest for more power.
To me, "coming around" would mean not bashing one side or the other simply because they're one side of the other. It would be basing your decisions on your beliefs and that the side you chose truly represents your beliefs. There are some people who say they're hardcore Democrats because they always stand up for the worker. Then that person doesn't get a job because a Democratic politician used their influence to get their cousin into the job the person was after. Or there are some people who say they're Republican because Republicans are for fewer regulations. Then that person has to close up their business because their Republican representative just signed a bill doubling the red tape they have to go through for their business. Only to find out the real reason the politician signed the bill was to hep out a constituent that would put most of their competition out of business and lead to a much bigger campaign contribution later on. The way I see it and it seems to solidify more and more daily, there is no Republican, there is no Democrat. There are only corrupt politicians who, once they're in office, want only to fatten their wallets and pursue their quest for more power.
Well said. I'm beginning to think human beings on the deepest of levels NEED enemies. Monsters, even.
Well said. I'm beginning to think human beings on the deepest of levels NEED enemies. Monsters, even.
The sustenance of righteousness?
I think you're too stuck in thought, rather than making decisions Boonie.
None of this has anything to do with the IRS, and while you certainly have every right granted to you from Cliff Pennock to talk about flowers and rainbows in here, the fact is... this is either an extreme case of ADD, or some sort of deflection.
The "coming around" I speak of is the overwhelming evidence that this Administration will do everything in it's power legally, or illegally, to get what it wants. People will so blindly defend this administration for any number of silly made-up reasons, but completely ignore the reality of the situation.
Sometimes, it takes an apposing viewpoint to see the reality of it. After seeing Obama basically do all the same things that Bush did, but 10 times worse, I realize how bad those things were that Bush did, that Obama is now doing x10. However, Obama's supporters don't seem to be able to see that.
I would hate to think that it would require another president (of the Republican variety) to do the exact same things, to make the people who currently defend it, now realize what they were supporting... but I don't think our country can take much more than that.
Not trying to be a dick here, but all of your posts are either deflection, or somehow defending Democrats. I don't know why, and don't really care... but the "I don't know any better, or hold any personal views" argument is kind of nonsense.
To me, "coming around" would mean not bashing one side or the other simply because they're one side of the other. It would be basing your decisions on your beliefs and that the side you chose truly represents your beliefs. There are some people who say they're hardcore Democrats because they always stand up for the worker. Then that person doesn't get a job because a Democratic politician used their influence to get their cousin into the job the person was after. Or there are some people who say they're Republican because Republicans are for fewer regulations. Then that person has to close up their business because their Republican representative just signed a bill doubling the red tape they have to go through for their business. Only to find out the real reason the politician signed the bill was to help out a constituent that would put most of their competition out of business and lead to a much bigger campaign contribution later on. The way I see it and it seems to solidify more and more daily, there is no Republican, there is no Democrat. There are only corrupt politicians who, once they're in office, want only to fatten their wallets and pursue their quest for more power.
To me, "coming around" would mean not bashing one side or the other simply because they're one side of the other. It would be basing your decisions on your beliefs and that the side you chose truly represents your beliefs. There are some people who say they're hardcore Democrats because they always stand up for the worker. Then that person doesn't get a job because a Democratic politician used their influence to get their cousin into the job the person was after. Or there are some people who say they're Republican because Republicans are for fewer regulations. Then that person has to close up their business because their Republican representative just signed a bill doubling the red tape they have to go through for their business. Only to find out the real reason the politician signed the bill was to help out a constituent that would put most of their competition out of business and lead to a much bigger campaign contribution later on. The way I see it and it seems to solidify more and more daily, there is no Republican, there is no Democrat. There are only corrupt politicians who, once they're in office, want only to fatten their wallets and pursue their quest for more power.
That's why we need term limits. I believe most people get into politics out of a desire to serve, but by the time they've been there for so long and gain power and prestige on the national stage, that has usually been corrupted by the power of their position. Politics wasn't supposed to be a career. It was supposed to be a term of service, like joining the Peace Corps. It was something you did for a few years and then you went back to your daily life and real career, whatever that may be.
The only way we'll ever get term limits is if the states convene a Constitutional Convention and pass an amendment. It's the one trump card that gives the States the final authority over the Federal government. It's never been done before, mainly because when Congress sees public opinion heading in that direction, they change their tune rather than be overruled by the States, but it's an option. It's also an option that the President has NO role in whatsoever.
[B]Originally posted by cliffw/B] Now President Obama has gotten the Richard Nixon question -- and he didn't sound too happy about it. Asked Thursday "how do you feel about comparisons by some of your critics of this week's scandals to those that happened under the Nixon administration?" Obama told reporters: "I'll let you guys engage in those comparisons." The president added: "You can go ahead and read the history I think and draw your own conclusions."
So, ... today, the Nobama regime trots out the new talking points man, david fluffer. He is asked on Face the Nation, if the Nixon/Nobama comparison was accurate. Fluffer said no. As the President said, ... you draw your own conclusion.
?
.
.
