Tea Party and political extremism.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
The head of the IRS when this happened was a Bush appointee. [/quote]

What are we in, year 5 of Obama’s presidency? Will anything ever be his fault?[/quote]

DBCooper is correct on this point, but Obama has not replaced him. This type of appointee is not a political type appointee though. We all know that when you average the government employees they tend to lean a little left of center, unlike the average American that leans a little right of center.

The IRS targeted these Conservative Groups no doubt about it. We will see how far up it goes.[/quote]

I just think it’s funny Bush is even mentioned. I don’t think this issue should fall on Obama either, it’s just funny is all. [/quote]

I just mentioned Bush because people seem to be saying this is Obama’s fault. If we are going to point fingers at someone bureaucratically distant from the issue (quite a leap to go from lower- to mid-level IRS employees to the President) why not blame the guy who put the head of the IRS when this happened into the top spot in the first place?

Anyone who actually understands the way our extremely bureaucratized gov’t works knows that Obama probably had no clue this was going on, nor should he have, really. Worrying about what lower- and mid-level IRS employees are doing is SO FAR from his responsibilities and mind that it simply reeks of ignorance to point fingers at him. NO President would be expected to be on top of something like this. But because it’s Tea Partiers being targeted all of a sudden now it must be something that Obama is behind. When people constantly live with a victimization complex it’s pretty easy to find yourself the victim of what you fear, even if that means distorting the reality of the situation and jumping to far away conclusions.

Not lumping you in with that crowd, by the way.

http://www.sfgate.com/business/technology/article/Gov-t-obtains-wide-AP-phone-records-in-probe-4512003.php

Here’s another issue that’s brewing now. If Bush had been responsible for these phone record seizures, or if they had simply happened on his watch, liberals would be flipping the fuck out while conservatives do and say everything they can to point out that when it comes to protecting the country and the identities of the agents who are risking their lives to keep us safe, it is imperative to take some admittedly extreme measures to do so. The ends justify the means, in other words.

But now that this story is out, I can guarantee you that conservatives will be all over this shit, even though it’s really nothing more than yet another byproduct of the Patriot Act and yet another erosion of our freedoms that started under a Republican administration. I’m not defending the Obama administration’s actions at all here. I think that what has been going on is atrocious and one of the reasons I did not vote for him in 2008 or 2012 and will be voting for Rand Paul or someone far removed from the Bush set or the Obama administration in 2016.

But the point I am trying to make is that all of this righteous indignation about the actions of the Obama administration is completely hypocritical, given where a lot of it is coming from. I’m sure that many of the Congressmen/women and Senators who looked the other way when we were torturing suspects in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib will fly off the handle about this latest transgression from Obama, as I’m sure that many who decried said torture will be in Obama’s corner on this one. I’m sure that many of the people who didn’t seem to care that Bush essentially either lied or was completely duped about the WMD issue in Iraq and sent 4500 Americans to their wasted, unnecessary deaths are the same who are waving their arms about like some half-mad spastic about this whole Benghazi thing.

There is simply no intellectual or moral consistency anymore in the national dialogue on these matters or in this forum. It sickens me, quite frankly. Atrocious behavior seems to only be wrong when the other side does it, and all that attitude does is serve to turn Americans against one another at a time when we should be pulling together to help each other out. It takes a fucking psycho blowing up the finish line of a major marathon to unite us as a country, and that only lasts for about a week until we start pointing fingers at the other sides regarding the handling of the investigation and so forth. It’s sad, it really is.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
The head of the IRS when this happened was a Bush appointee. [/quote]

What are we in, year 5 of Obama’s presidency? Will anything ever be his fault?[/quote]

DBCooper is correct on this point, but Obama has not replaced him. This type of appointee is not a political type appointee though. We all know that when you average the government employees they tend to lean a little left of center, unlike the average American that leans a little right of center.

The IRS targeted these Conservative Groups no doubt about it. We will see how far up it goes.[/quote]

I just think it’s funny Bush is even mentioned. I don’t think this issue should fall on Obama either, it’s just funny is all. [/quote]

I just mentioned Bush because people seem to be saying this is Obama’s fault. If we are going to point fingers at someone bureaucratically distant from the issue (quite a leap to go from lower- to mid-level IRS employees to the President) why not blame the guy who put the head of the IRS when this happened into the top spot in the first place?

Anyone who actually understands the way our extremely bureaucratized gov’t works knows that Obama probably had no clue this was going on, nor should he have, really. Worrying about what lower- and mid-level IRS employees are doing is SO FAR from his responsibilities and mind that it simply reeks of ignorance to point fingers at him. NO President would be expected to be on top of something like this. But because it’s Tea Partiers being targeted all of a sudden now it must be something that Obama is behind. When people constantly live with a victimization complex it’s pretty easy to find yourself the victim of what you fear, even if that means distorting the reality of the situation and jumping to far away conclusions.[/quote]

Excellent post, DB.

Mufasa

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
http://www.sfgate.com/business/technology/article/Gov-t-obtains-wide-AP-phone-records-in-probe-4512003.php

Here’s another issue that’s brewing now. If Bush had been responsible for these phone record seizures, or if they had simply happened on his watch, liberals would be flipping the fuck out while conservatives do and say everything they can to point out that when it comes to protecting the country and the identities of the agents who are risking their lives to keep us safe, it is imperative to take some admittedly extreme measures to do so. The ends justify the means, in other words.

But now that this story is out, I can guarantee you that conservatives will be all over this shit, even though it’s really nothing more than yet another byproduct of the Patriot Act and yet another erosion of our freedoms that started under a Republican administration. I’m not defending the Obama administration’s actions at all here. I think that what has been going on is atrocious and one of the reasons I did not vote for him in 2008 or 2012 and will be voting for Rand Paul or someone far removed from the Bush set or the Obama administration in 2016.

But the point I am trying to make is that all of this righteous indignation about the actions of the Obama administration is completely hypocritical, given where a lot of it is coming from. I’m sure that many of the Congressmen/women and Senators who looked the other way when we were torturing suspects in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib will fly off the handle about this latest transgression from Obama, as I’m sure that many who decried said torture will be in Obama’s corner on this one. I’m sure that many of the people who didn’t seem to care that Bush essentially either lied or was completely duped about the WMD issue in Iraq and sent 4500 Americans to their wasted, unnecessary deaths are the same who are waving their arms about like some half-mad spastic about this whole Benghazi thing.

There is simply no intellectual or moral consistency anymore in the national dialogue on these matters or in this forum. It sickens me, quite frankly. Atrocious behavior seems to only be wrong when the other side does it, and all that attitude does is serve to turn Americans against one another at a time when we should be pulling together to help each other out. It takes a fucking psycho blowing up the finish line of a major marathon to unite us as a country, and that only lasts for about a week until we start pointing fingers at the other sides regarding the handling of the investigation and so forth. It’s sad, it really is.[/quote]

Another excellent post.

Mufasa

DB Coop,

I have to disagree, the argument sounds like someone blaming their failures on their parents. I also don’t believe that this incident came from some low-level person at the IRS, because doing this would have to come from someone personally invested in Obama and him winning.

We are now in the 5th year of the Obama administration, this is (and has been) his show.

Lois Lerner is the lead bullshitter in this and should be canned.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
DB Coop,

I have to disagree, the argument sounds like someone blaming their failures on their parents. I also don’t believe that this incident came from some low-level person at the IRS, because doing this would have to come from someone personally invested in Obama and him winning.

We are now in the 5th year of the Obama administration, this is (and has been) his show.

Lois Lerner is the lead bullshitter in this and should be canned. [/quote]

The head of the IRS when this happened was a Bush appointee. Do you really think that if Obama was involved or ordered this or whatever, that a Bush appointee would risk not only his career but maybe even jail time for him? Of course not. There is no way that guy would risk everything for Obama. If Obama had ordered this, or someone from his administration had done so, the head of the IRS probably would have blown the whistle back in 2012 during the election season. Can you imagine the MONUMENTAL blow to the Democratic campaign that a revelation like that would have been?

No, it simply isn’t realistic to think that Obama was behind this. It really isn’t that realistic to think that the head of the IRS at the time was behind it either. Also, there is no indication that this came from the extreme upper echelon of the IRS to begin with. If there is a more layered, jumbled and insulated bureaucracy in our federal govt than the IRS, I haven’t heard of it. More than likely, this was simply a case of people within the IRS acting on their own without the approval or knowledge of the head of the IRS, let alone the President.

When people have this sinister, conspiratorial view of Obama, warranted or otherwise, these sorts of things become blown out of proportion and get chalked up as another conspiracy to keep everyone down and so forth.

I’ve done TONS of research into the history of the CIA and the JFK assassination (I’ve literally read more than a hundred books on the subject and probably thousands of pages of declassified memos and other such documents that have been released after FOIA requests) and this sort of attitude is extremely prevalent amongst the less credible “authorities” on the subject, in particular those who think that the assassination was the result of some Mafia/CIA/anti-Castro Cuban/FBI/Secret Service coalition. What I’m seeing now with this whole IRS thing, along with the Benghazi issue, is the same sort of phenomenon playing out, but over a FAR less important issue.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Atrocious behavior seems to only be wrong when the other side does it, and all that attitude does is serve to turn Americans against one another at a time when we should be pulling together to help each other out. It takes a fucking psycho blowing up the finish line of a major marathon to unite us as a country, and that only lasts for about a week until we start pointing fingers at the other sides regarding the handling of the investigation and so forth. It’s sad, it really is.[/quote]

+9001 internets-excellent post.

I would actually hypothesize that a more objective population would also go a long way in enacting the necessary change in government to prevent these scandals, but that’s a topic for another thread.

DB,

I understand that Obama personally probably did not authorize this, or even know about it.

But these actions caused groups to wait and were unable to campaign and get out their vote because of these actions.

Rather funny how, in 2010, the Tea Party was highly influential in the election outcome, and out of nowhere, a story investigating them comes out ?

Now here comes the rub…this is really the cover story isn’t it ?

This whole maneuver was meant to stall the Tea Party, and make them as ineffective as possible. This was not meant to kill, it was meant to wound, making it easier to cover up. A great back up plan to any possible charges is tax evasion, the government ALWAYS uses this when they fail on original charges.

As far as conspiracies against Obama, you make it sound like all the fuckery associated with Benghazi (and now this) came out of thin air ?

Public Relations lesson #1 - Slow everything down, and let things cool off. Stall and slowly give out tidbits of information, until finally so much time goes by and makes the incident moot. You saw this with Jay Carney, “Oh Benghazi, that was a long time ago.”

Public Relations lesson #2 - Always decry the incident, but never make reference to it being illegal. Notice how Obama says shit like “this is unacceptable”, then shuffle off and hope it falls by the way side.

Public relations lesson #3 - Always put the person in charge in a position where they cannot be fired.

This is some of the best, grade A, gift-wrapped, served with a white glove bullshit from “the most transparent administration ever.”

Maximus,

If Obama didn’t authorize it or even know about it, who do you think did? Was it someone else in his administration?

Highly unlikely. No one else in his administration who would be likely to do so would have any authority upon which the IRS would act on. Who would make that call? The Secretary of State? The Secretary of the Treasury? His campaign manager? His press secretary? There is simply no way at all that a call like that gets made without some sort of paper/email trail, none of which has materialized to that effect.

What would you do if you were a mid or low-level IRS employee who was just told by someone claiming to represent the administration’s wishes to dig deeper into Tea Party groups? Wouldn’t you report it to someone else in the IRS? Of course. You might ask around, you might report it, you might look deeper into who it was who told you to do this in the first place, since it’s basically an action that would put your career at risk. But whatever you did, there would be a trail of some sort, and the fact that it’s now public would be an opportunity to step up, save your job and say, “I was acting at the behest of the President of the United States.”

And if someone in the administration went to the IRS head without Obama’s knowledge, that too would get exposed far earlier than it did. I’m going to go out on a limb and assume that the Bush-appointed head of the IRS would ask around a bit, at the very least, if someone from the Obama administration told him to essentially perform an action that would put his career in serious jeopardy. Just like I mentioned that he would be far more likely to blow the whistle on the whole thing if he knew Obama was behind such a request, he would also blow the whistle if ANYONE in his administration made the same request.

The simple theory is always the most likely, not this convoluted conspiracy to bury a minority element of the GOP.

The Tea Party is a group that, in a general sense, has railed against taxes of virtually any and all kinds. So of course the IRS is going to look a little deeper into their activities when they apply for tax-exempt status. The simple answer is that the IRS was simply doing its due diligence by looking further into the legitimacy of the tax-exempt status of a group that, generally speaking, has been against taxes from the word “go”.

THAT is what is going on here. Sure, it looks convenient, but guess who else wasn’t thrilled about the Tea Party? The old-school, entrenched Republicans who stood to lose from their upward trajectory as well. It’s no secret that the GOP was completely out of touch with reality when it came to Romney’s chances of winning the election; many of the top wizards were shocked that he lost and lost so decisively. It isn’t out of the realm of likelihood at all that perhaps if anyone ordered this investigation it was people within the GOP who were against the Tea Party faction and blindly assumed that they could win without their added support or that their added support brought unwanted attention to the GOP at a critical time.

There’s nothing conspiratorial about that either, at least not to the extent that your theory goes. I think it’s FAR more likely that a party that made some pretty colossal mistakes down the stretch and has already shown to be less-than thrilled with the Tea Party minority within its ranks simply blew this one as well, and that’s assuming that there was a political motivation at all. It’s a far more plausible scenario than someone or some group within Obama’s administration going behind the President’s back and ordering the IRS to conduct an unethical investigation under the false pretense that the President is backing it. It’s even less plausible that the President himself was directly or knowingly behind it. It IS plausible that certain people within the IRS simply looked further into the tax status of groups that have publicly and vocally expressed opposition to taxes and the IRS in specific.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
http://www.sfgate.com/business/technology/article/Gov-t-obtains-wide-AP-phone-records-in-probe-4512003.php

Here’s another issue that’s brewing now. If Bush had been responsible for these phone record seizures, or if they had simply happened on his watch, liberals would be flipping the fuck out while conservatives do and say everything they can to point out that when it comes to protecting the country and the identities of the agents who are risking their lives to keep us safe, it is imperative to take some admittedly extreme measures to do so. The ends justify the means, in other words.

But now that this story is out, I can guarantee you that conservatives will be all over this shit, even though it’s really nothing more than yet another byproduct of the Patriot Act and yet another erosion of our freedoms that started under a Republican administration. I’m not defending the Obama administration’s actions at all here. I think that what has been going on is atrocious and one of the reasons I did not vote for him in 2008 or 2012 and will be voting for Rand Paul or someone far removed from the Bush set or the Obama administration in 2016.

But the point I am trying to make is that all of this righteous indignation about the actions of the Obama administration is completely hypocritical, given where a lot of it is coming from. I’m sure that many of the Congressmen/women and Senators who looked the other way when we were torturing suspects in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib will fly off the handle about this latest transgression from Obama, as I’m sure that many who decried said torture will be in Obama’s corner on this one. I’m sure that many of the people who didn’t seem to care that Bush essentially either lied or was completely duped about the WMD issue in Iraq and sent 4500 Americans to their wasted, unnecessary deaths are the same who are waving their arms about like some half-mad spastic about this whole Benghazi thing.

There is simply no intellectual or moral consistency anymore in the national dialogue on these matters or in this forum. It sickens me, quite frankly. Atrocious behavior seems to only be wrong when the other side does it, and all that attitude does is serve to turn Americans against one another at a time when we should be pulling together to help each other out. It takes a fucking psycho blowing up the finish line of a major marathon to unite us as a country, and that only lasts for about a week until we start pointing fingers at the other sides regarding the handling of the investigation and so forth. It’s sad, it really is.[/quote]

What the…

This is about the IRS targeting conservative groups.

Anyways, as I posted in the other thread dealing with the subject, it appears the IRS leaked confidential documents from these targeted conservative groups.

Ruh-roh.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
The head of the IRS when this happened was a Bush appointee. [/quote]

What are we in, year 5 of Obama’s presidency? Will anything ever be his fault?[/quote]

DBCooper is correct on this point, but Obama has not replaced him. This type of appointee is not a political type appointee though. We all know that when you average the government employees they tend to lean a little left of center, unlike the average American that leans a little right of center.

The IRS targeted these Conservative Groups no doubt about it. We will see how far up it goes.[/quote]

I just think it’s funny Bush is even mentioned. I don’t think this issue should fall on Obama either, it’s just funny is all. [/quote]

I just mentioned Bush because people seem to be saying this is Obama’s fault. If we are going to point fingers at someone bureaucratically distant from the issue (quite a leap to go from lower- to mid-level IRS employees to the President) why not blame the guy who put the head of the IRS when this happened into the top spot in the first place?

Anyone who actually understands the way our extremely bureaucratized gov’t works knows that Obama probably had no clue this was going on, nor should he have, really. Worrying about what lower- and mid-level IRS employees are doing is SO FAR from his responsibilities and mind that it simply reeks of ignorance to point fingers at him. NO President would be expected to be on top of something like this. But because it’s Tea Partiers being targeted all of a sudden now it must be something that Obama is behind. When people constantly live with a victimization complex it’s pretty easy to find yourself the victim of what you fear, even if that means distorting the reality of the situation and jumping to far away conclusions.

Not lumping you in with that crowd, by the way.[/quote]

I agree, I really doubt President Obama had any idea this was going on.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Bert, this isn’t about whether Obama himself ordered this but a rational man understands that the Obama ADMINISTRATION ordered it.[/quote]

Like I said earlier, I don’t think this was ordered by anyone within his administration either. I think what happened was some sort of abuse of the investigative power of the IRS that happened at their own behest, whether it was the independent decision of some people in the Cincinnati office designated for tax-exempt status investigations or the head of the IRS or somewhere in between.

I think it’s easy to point fingers and say that someone in Obama’s camp did this because he would have ostensibly benefited from such action. But keep in mind that if any of these groups were actively engaging in political campaigns or lobbying Congress and not simply promoting a particular issue without tying it to someone or some party’s campaign in 2012, they were in fact in violation of their tax-exempt status anyways.

While this IS an abuse of power that I condemn, there is another issue at hand here as well. The fact is that no one has the right to tax-exempt status in this country, especially not for political campaigning during a Presidential election. The reality is that these groups, if they were within the law regarding their tax exemption, likely would not have much of an impact on who won the Presidential election or Congressional races.

According to the IRS, regulation 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(3) provides that these groups can operate in an “educational” capacity, which includes educating the public about the benefits of voting, specific issues (provided that equal time is given toward educating about both sides of the issue), “presenting public discussion groups, forums, panels, lectures, or other similar programs.” This regulation specifically says that, as ruled in the Supreme Court decision American Campaign Academy v. Commissioner, partisan politics is not allowed within this sort of activity. For a group to primarily promote the agenda of one particular party over the other is a violation of this tax exemption.

If that doesn’t fit the bill for the Tea Party then I don’t know what does. Last I checked, there weren’t any Tea Party candidates with a (D) next to their name. So while this is still an abuse of IRS power that should not go unpunished, what is the net effect of this abuse at this point? The groups in question may have had some of their tax status delayed during the election season, but what sort of activity could they have legally been engaged in that might have altered the election results in the Presidential or Congressional races?

I think there is also a very bright silver lining to this cloud, potentially. The IRS has been loathe to seriously examine the requirements for and the way it hands out 501 (c)3 and 4 status for a long time now, and it’s something that has given rise to these super PACs which are drastically changing the nature of campaigns for the worse. Perhaps this issue leads to a larger discussion and a legit attempt at some much-needed reforms.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Damn, the cheerleading by Muf and Cornsprint is strong in this thread. Why don’t you boys drop your pom-poms, hitch up your suspenders and actually swing an axe of your own?

I disagree with Bert but at least he has the wherewithal to type out something more than “Excellent post” or “Eight million internet points, dooood!”[/quote]

To what end, Push?

To argue for the sake of arguing? Just to hear myself arguing? To prove myself “right”?

I’ve said over and over that it’s not my thing. Too often on “PWI” over the years, there has been a propensity to argue something, (despite being shown things to the contrary), just because it goes against someones tightly-held belief or their need to see a deep conspiracy with every breath the President takes.

I get it. It’s been going on since before the President took office. If the guy can’t be beat, we sure as hell are going to smear and destroy whatever accomplishment and/or legacy he may (or may not) have.

And I also get that the 2016 campaign has begun in ernest…even before Clinton has declared her candidacy (if she ever does).

Mufasa

On MSNBC of all places last night, they said that internal IRS e-mails showed that it was not just rogue “mid-level” managers…but was disclosed to top ranking IRS officials BEFORE they testified before congress that “the allegations are totally without merit.”

If MSNBC is saying this…somebody in the white house knew what was going on.

Not good.

Of course Matthews spent the next 20 min trying to figure out how the president could “flip the script” on the GOP.

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
On MSNBC of all places last night, they said that internal IRS e-mails showed that it was not just rogue “mid-level” managers…but was disclosed to top ranking IRS officials BEFORE they testified before congress that “the allegations are totally without merit.”

If MSNBC is saying this…somebody in the white house knew what was going on.

Not good.

Of course Matthews spent the next 20 min trying to figure out how the president could “flip the script” on the GOP.[/quote]

Oh, so now you trust the liberal media?