When will the title of this thread be changed to: IRS targets Progressive & Tea Party groups regarding non-profit status?
Maybe they could just add it to the Benghazi thread and rename the new one the "Things The GOP House Leadership Worries About When Not Voting to Repeal Obamacare" thread
Is your head that far in the sand? http://www.dispatch.com/content/sto...28/progressive-groups-werent-scrutinized.html
You're going to bang this dead horse? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/05/us/politics/irs-scrutiny-went-beyond-the-political.html?hp&_r=2&
How dare they investigate Crossroads? http://www.newrepublic.com/article/...al-karl-roves-crossroads-gps-now-plays-victim To recap: the professional staff of one agency tasked with monitoring election spending by undisclosed donors found that Crossroads GPS had likely broken the rules, but this finding will go nowhere because the agency’s board is frozen in partisan gridlock. You might think that Crossroads GPS and its supporters would count their lucky stars and quietly go about their business of continuing to push into the gray area that allows groups like theirs to spend tens of millions of dollars from secret donors. /quote
Well here is a little tax relief. The IRS (under extreme political pressure) decided they aren't go to hit us up for the tax sins of our parents and grandparents. What kind of ********ed up tax system have you liberals brought down on us where this was even an issue?
One of the awesome ironies of this case is that it turned out to be nothing...well, not NOTHING, but it was not a partisan operation. It was just a controversy about how the IRS screens for impermissible tax status for political groups. Contrast that with the US attorney scandal under Bush, which REALLY WAS a partisan operation. I guess in the context of the Bush administration it was a small scandal, but if Obama had done the same thing in 2012 regarding absentee ballots, it would be the biggest scandal of his administration. Right? Has anything actually happened under Obama that tops that? Source/link? Because the story I saw was about the Social Security Administration, not the IRS. I'm assuming this is the same story you're talking about, but you're lying about it. But if I'm wrong and there's a separate story, I'm sure you'll provide a link. If not.... I wonder if VFish will admit he's wrong if he's wrong? That would be the mark of a non-troll. Who is taking bets?
And don't worry if you try to slip something through the IRS.. They don't have the manpower to catch it... http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...tting-audited-by-irs-lowest-in-years/7669319/
The advantage of starving the government until it's small enough to drown in a bathtub (copyright Grover Norquist).
"Mr. Smith, please sort out this 21,342 applications for tax exempted status by tomorrow morning.." "Let me see... Patriot, Tea, Occuppy..."
Dave, who really cares whether it was the SSA or the IRS? You do realize the two are closely intertwined. Much like the IRS is now entangled with our health care thanks to ObamaCare. <snark>Thankful there is no history of politicians abusing the powers of the IRS to punish opponents </snark>.
And Dave you're such a tool. Are you ever able to address an issue honestly? Who collects SS taxes? And who is responsible for withholding refunds? Here is a hint, it ain't the SSA.
Sorry, but the warranty was voided by your claim that I'm on your ignore list while you quickly respond to each of my posts. Rather than bloviate is there any chance you'll answer the actual questions? Who collects SS taxes? And who is responsible for withholding refunds? When the SSA wants to get money from 40 year old disputes who are they going to turn to?
Source/link? I'm sure you've been on ignore before, but everyone comes up for parole. Plus, the new (well, now it's not so new) software makes ignoring people a real pain. It's like Garfield Without Garfield, or that parody video of Full House which posits that the baby was just an hallucination by Bob Saget over the grief from missing his wife. Again with the irony. The story was about the Social Security Administration, not the IRS. I win, you lose.