PDA

View Full Version : IRS ADMITS TARGETING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS


Pages : [1] 2 3

Pony Boy
05-10-2013, 05:21 PM
IRS ADMITS TARGETING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS


WASHINGTON (AP) — The Internal Revenue Service apologized Friday for what it acknowledged was "inappropriate" targeting of conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status. About 75 groups were inappropriately targeted.

IRS agents singled out dozens of organizations for additional reviews because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their exemption applications, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups. In some cases, groups were asked for lists of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.

Lerner acknowledged it was wrong for the agency to target groups based on political affiliation.

"That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That's not how we go about selecting cases for further review," Lerner said at a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association.

"The IRS would like to apologize for that," she added.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/irs-apologizes-targeting-conservative-groups

nyuk nyuk
05-10-2013, 05:25 PM
It's ok when libs do it, don't worry.

Insensitive? It's political persecution and abuse of executive power.

Pony Boy
05-10-2013, 05:26 PM
IRS officials claimed that there was no political bias behind the targeting of these conservative groups, but they failed to produce any examples of similar targeting of groups with non-conservative-sounding names............:rofl: :rofl:

nyuk nyuk
05-10-2013, 05:27 PM
No heads will roll.

Requiem
05-10-2013, 05:59 PM
This thread does not have potential.

nyuk nyuk
05-10-2013, 06:15 PM
Req, we thank you showing here and adding your non-partisan moral concern to this situation.

Requiem
05-10-2013, 06:17 PM
Today was a good day.

nyuk nyuk
05-10-2013, 06:22 PM
Look buddy, you're supposed to have me on ignore!

http://i40.tinypic.com/16bhguq.png

Rohirrim
05-10-2013, 06:33 PM
ALL CAPS! I'M OUTRAGED!

Nothing "conservative" about these Right Wing groups, BTW. :puff:

orinjkrush
05-10-2013, 06:54 PM
it is OUTRAGEOUS that the IRS or any government agency "targets" any group, unless they consider it a "clear and present danger". oops. what? oh, yeah, those domestic terrorists that the left is so afraid of.

W*GS
05-10-2013, 06:55 PM
Just another excuse for the hard right to fantasize that they're victims.

nyuk nyuk
05-10-2013, 07:21 PM
Just another excuse for the hard right to fantasize that they're victims.

So if the right are targeted and the feds admit they target them for political reasons, it's a mere "fantasy" that they're victims.

Is that poop or IQ?

Dr. Broncenstein
05-10-2013, 09:51 PM
Not at all surprsed that the progressive boot lickers are okay with this.

barryr
05-11-2013, 07:09 AM
Not at all surprsed that the progressive boot lickers are okay with this.

Neither am I, the liberal hypocrites. It was them that under Bush and the Patriot Act crapping their pants, telling any and everyone how innocent people would be targeted unfairly and illegally in their minds. Of course now that Obama is president, it isn't such a bad thing anymore. Now the IRS admits to targeting people for political reasons and it's ok. The hypocrisy has gotten to the point of such foolishness that even trying to debate any issue with a liberal is beyond a lost cause. If they will tell you 2 and 2 is 5 when it suits their politics, there is no reason to spend much time with them. They are dead set in their thinking and if they have to distort or as usual, apply their double standards so they can be "right", then they will and do every day, all day. This is why talk radio doesn't work for liberals since hearing what they say and do just makes them sound so incredibly stupid, even to other liberals.

Pony Boy
05-11-2013, 07:27 AM
This thread does not have potential.

Quoted from the little man that has no potential. Please get back with us when you are living any part of the American Dream.

houghtam
05-11-2013, 07:31 AM
Neither am I, the liberal hypocrites. It was them that under Bush and the Patriot Act crapping their pants, telling any and everyone how innocent people would be targeted unfairly and illegally in their minds. Of course now that Obama is president, it isn't such a bad thing anymore. Now the IRS admits to targeting people for political reasons and it's ok. The hypocrisy has gotten to the point of such foolishness that even trying to debate any issue with a liberal is beyond a lost cause. If they will tell you 2 and 2 is 5 when it suits their politics, there is no reason to spend much time with them. They are dead set in their thinking and if they have to distort or as usual, apply their double standards so they can be "right", then they will and do every day, all day. This is why talk radio doesn't work for liberals since hearing what they say and do just makes them sound so incredibly stupid, even to other liberals.

What does passing legislation the encroaches on civil liberties have to do with the IRS illegally targeting one group over another?

Nice try, captain false equivalence.

Do an investigation, see where it leads, just like anything else...oh except our decision to go to war in Iraq. Because heaven forbid we acknowledge the truth about that.

ant1999e
05-11-2013, 09:12 AM
There it is, Iraq war. He's on a roll.

houghtam
05-11-2013, 09:35 AM
There it is, Iraq war. He's on a roll.

One false equivalence deserves another, don't you think?

nyuk nyuk
05-11-2013, 11:05 AM
Quoted from the little man that has no potential. Please get back with us when you are living any part of the American Dream.

LMAO! Ouch!

nyuk nyuk
05-11-2013, 11:06 AM
Neither am I, the liberal hypocrites. It was them that under Bush and the Patriot Act crapping their pants, telling any and everyone how innocent people would be targeted unfairly and illegally in their minds. Of course now that Obama is president, it isn't such a bad thing anymore. Now the IRS admits to targeting people for political reasons and it's ok. The hypocrisy has gotten to the point of such foolishness that even trying to debate any issue with a liberal is beyond a lost cause. If they will tell you 2 and 2 is 5 when it suits their politics, there is no reason to spend much time with them. They are dead set in their thinking and if they have to distort or as usual, apply their double standards so they can be "right", then they will and do every day, all day. This is why talk radio doesn't work for liberals since hearing what they say and do just makes them sound so incredibly stupid, even to other liberals.

Add drone deaths and military suicides to this list.

Yikes!

ant1999e
05-13-2013, 09:48 AM
BARACK OBAMA
IRS Mess

The Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups is outrageous. Those who did this should be fired immediately. That’s obvious.

It continues a slovenly week for Barack Obama. The President has been very proud of the absence of scandal in his Administration, and rightly so. The inability of his opponents to find any significant corruption in the historic $800 billion stimulus package was a real achievement, given the speed of the payout. None of his top aides have been caught up in taking bribes while in office — although their race through the revolving door into lucrative private-sector positions is well beyond nauseating.

As in most presidencies, there have been an awful lot of political hacks populating the midreaches of this Administration. In the Obama instance, these have shown an anachronistic, pre-Clinton liberal bias when it comes to the rules and regulations governing many of our safety-net programs, like Social Security disability. And now they have violated one of the more sacred rules of our democracy: you do not use the tax code to punish your opponents.

Lois G. Lerner, the IRS official who oversees tax-exempt groups, said the ‘absolutely inappropriate’ actions by ‘frontline people’ were not driven by partisan motives.

Does anyone actually believe this?

Yet again, we have an example of Democrats simply not managing the government properly and with discipline. This is just poisonous at a time of skepticism about the efficacy of government. And the President should know this: the absence of scandal is not the presence of competence. His unwillingness to concentrate — and I mean concentrate obsessively — on making sure that government is managed efficiently will be part of his legacy.

Previous Presidents, including great ones like Roosevelt, have used the IRS against their enemies. But I don’t think Obama ever wanted to be on the same page as Richard Nixon. In this specific case, he now is.



Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/11/irs-mess/#ixzz2TBjTIv00

Smiling Assassin27
05-13-2013, 10:36 AM
This crap happens with a Republican president targeting a Code Pink, Think Progress, or ACLU and you'd be shoveling pieces of media heads for weeks from all the xplosions.

Obama claims the IRS is 'independent', which is bull crap. It's under the Treasury Department which his, of course, under the Executive. So the IRS went rogue and Obama found out about this in the news on Friday? That's either one big pack of lies or the greatest case for incompetence that's worthy of impeachment for dereliction of duties. For a guy who claimed to be transparent and 'different' in his politics, he's sure turning out to be the same.

Pony Boy
05-13-2013, 10:47 AM
IRS targeted groups that criticized the government, IG report says

At various points over the past two years, Internal Revenue Service officials targeted nonprofit groups that criticized the government and sought to educate Americans about the U.S. Constitution, according to documents in an audit conducted by the agency’s inspector general.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/05/12/irs-targeted-groups-that-criticized-the-government-ig-report-says/

BroncoBeavis
05-13-2013, 11:06 AM
What does passing legislation the encroaches on civil liberties have to do with the IRS illegally targeting one group over another?

Nice try, captain false equivalence.

Joining an organization in support of your political beliefs is a civil liberty. The equivalence is pretty solid.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 11:57 AM
Chicago style politics! Anyone with a brain knew what we were in for. Obamas style is that he is King and can do whatever he wants. He feels the law doesn't apply to him.

houghtam
05-13-2013, 01:16 PM
And the guy who masterminded it all was....

<drumroll>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Shulman

A Bush appointee!

Good luck, Repugs. You're either going to have to prove that the White House directed this guy to do it, or they were able to get it done without his knowledge...

Or more likely, it was a group of low-level political thugs with a bone to pick, and there is no WH connection whatsoever.</drumroll>

BroncoBeavis
05-13-2013, 01:24 PM
And the guy who masterminded it all was....

It's so cute how you guys like to pretend that the masterminding begins and ends in sub-cabinet level mid-management.

There's no way this level of stuff went on without cabinet officials (or even the President) knowing about it.

Rohirrim
05-13-2013, 01:36 PM
Establishment Republicans dislike the Tea Party fringe nutjobs even more than the Dems do. :puff:

Rigs11
05-13-2013, 01:44 PM
Boneheaded move by the IRS. There should be hearings on this.just remember righties that OTHER things can get done in congress. the problem with the GOP is that they will use this to distract from everything else and will not get a damn thing done.Also when conservatives and teabaggers cry and moan and bitch about taxes, perhaps they should be subject to a little more scrunity.

houghtam
05-13-2013, 01:47 PM
It's so cute how you guys like to pretend that the masterminding begins and ends in sub-cabinet level mid-management.

There's no way this level of stuff went on without cabinet officials (or even the President) knowing about it.

That was kind of my point. I highly doubt this guy, who was appointed by Bush, was the mastermind, or even complicit. I also doubt if he knew about it, he would be denying it now. The only reason is that he didn't know. So how is it the IRS Commissioner didn't know about it, but the Treasury Dept. (or White House Uhh) did?

It's another instance of inventing a conspiracy and trying to jam that square block through the round hole of logic.

Pony Boy
05-13-2013, 01:56 PM
And the guy who masterminded it all was....

<drumroll>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Shulman

A Bush appointee!

Good luck, Repugs. You're either going to have to prove that the White House directed this guy to do it, or they were able to get it done without his knowledge...

Or more likely, it was a group of low-level political thugs with a bone to pick, and there is no WH connection whatsoever.</drumroll>


Nice deflection ......

houghtam
05-13-2013, 01:57 PM
Nice deflection ......

Clearly logic is not your strong point.

BroncoBeavis
05-13-2013, 01:58 PM
That was kind of my point. I highly doubt this guy, who was appointed by Bush, was the mastermind, or even complicit. I also doubt if he knew about it, he would be denying it now. The only reason is that he didn't know. So how is it the IRS Commissioner didn't know about it, but the Treasury Dept. (or White House Uhh) did?

It's another instance of inventing a conspiracy and trying to jam that square block through the round hole of logic.

One, at this level of government, being appointed by a President does not make you a loyalist to that President. Looks like he served in administrative capacities going all the way back to the Clinton Administration.

And two, at these levels of government, you survive and excel by doing what you're told. There's no way he didn't know. But since this is a career-ending level of allegation, he'll deny knowing anything until he has little other choice.

houghtam
05-13-2013, 02:04 PM
One, at this level of government, being appointed by a President does not make you a loyalist to that President. Looks like he served in administrative capacities going all the way back to the Clinton Administration.

And two, at these levels of government, you survive and excel by doing what you're told. There's no way he didn't know. But since this is a career-ending level of allegation, he'll deny knowing anything until he has little other choice.

Or, like I said, it was some low-level thugs with a bone to pick.

That's what's going to come of this investigation, you watch.

And then all of you will kick and scream about how this was a big coverup and those guys just took the fall for their hero Obama.

BroncoBeavis
05-13-2013, 02:14 PM
Or, like I said, it was some low-level thugs with a bone to pick.

That's what's going to come of this investigation, you watch.

And then all of you will kick and scream about how this was a big coverup and those guys just took the fall for their hero Obama.

It's already beyond that question...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/11/irs-tea-party_n_3260286.html?ir=Politics

Senior Internal Revenue Service officials knew agents were targeting tea party groups as early as 2011, according to a draft of an inspector general's report obtained by The Associated Press that seemingly contradicts public statements by the IRS commissioner.

Now the question becomes what kind of career bureaucrat would stick his neck out to drive a project like this if the administrative environment weren't at least friendly to the idea (if not demanding it directly)

houghtam
05-13-2013, 02:32 PM
It's already beyond that question...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/11/irs-tea-party_n_3260286.html?ir=Politics



Now the question becomes what kind of career bureaucrat would stick his neck out to drive a project like this if the administrative environment weren't at least friendly to the idea (if not demanding it directly)

It's a legit question, but like I said, let there be an investigation, and let it lead where it leads. My greater point is that, just like Benghazi, Boston and on and on, you righties are consistently inventing answers before there are any. It's all a desperate attempt to associate a popular president (and an even more popular presidential candidate) with something unseemly, so you can somehow reverse the electoral direction this country is taking. It's no different than Voter ID laws or swiftboating. You think that somehow if you paint X as a bad guy, early and often, that regardless of what the facts uncover, there will be residual public resentment which will in turn influence the polls.

When all the facts are known and it turns out that neither Clinton nor Obama were at fault for any of these things, do you think the Darrell Issas and Jeff Sessionses and Ted Cruzes and Rand Pauls and John Boehners of the world will apologize? No. Will the talking heads drop it? No. And finally, will any of you conservatives EVER admit there's no there there? No. Two years from now when the 2014 election comes up, every single one of you is going to post as if Obama or Clinton masterminded it all.

BroncoBeavis
05-13-2013, 02:46 PM
It's a legit question, but like I said, let there be an investigation, and let it lead where it leads. My greater point is that, just like Benghazi, Boston and on and on, you righties are consistently inventing answers before there are any. It's all a desperate attempt to associate a popular president (and an even more popular presidential candidate) with something unseemly, so you can somehow reverse the electoral direction this country is taking. It's no different than Voter ID laws or swiftboating. You think that somehow if you paint X as a bad guy, early and often, that regardless of what the facts uncover, there will be residual public resentment which will in turn influence the polls.

When all the facts are known and it turns out that neither Clinton nor Obama were at fault for any of these things, do you think the Darrell Issas and Jeff Sessionses and Ted Cruzes and Rand Pauls and John Boehners of the world will apologize? No. Will the talking heads drop it? No. And finally, will any of you conservatives EVER admit there's no there there? No. Two years from now when the 2014 election comes up, every single one of you is going to post as if Obama or Clinton masterminded it all.

I don't think I'd have much of anything to say about Boston, at least as far as high-level administration is concerned. Many things were botched between many different agencies, but stopping shape-shifting threats before they happen is a tough business. And it's run by tons of different people with different perspectives and things get lost in the middle.

Benghazi and this are of a different breed. Incompetence (or in the case of the IRS, likely maliciousness) at the highest levels, covered up by criminal (or near-criminal) lies told both to the American public and to those charged with investigating those accountable.

Together you start to get a sense that this is a purely end-justifies-the-means administration in a very Nixonian sense, which is a real danger in a civil-liberties based society. At the very least you can no longer take a White House denial on any charge to mean much of anything. And that's something they can never earn back.

BroncoBeavis
05-13-2013, 03:23 PM
Holy crap. Talk about a bad couple of weeks.

http://www.ap.org/Images/Letter-to-Eric-Holder_tcm28-12896.pdf

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 04:03 PM
We sold guns to the cartels and some agents got murdered with them.....but nothing to see here. We gave away 100's of millions to companies of people who supported us and they all went bankrupt but it wasn't dirty at all trust us. We lied about Benghazzi but it was only some talking points no big deal. So we left out Al Queda did it and blamed it on a video. The IRS is crawling up the asses of conservative groups and we are all liberals but logically it was Bush's fault!

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 10:22 PM
Wow the IRS scandal is blowing up. Now its being reported by the Washington Post it went all the way the heads of the IRS in Washington DC. Also it now looks like the IRS in Orange County CA was doing the same thing.

What a bush league move by the IRS. The media smells blood in the water with all these scadals breaking off. It's going to be interesting to see it all play out.

B-Large
05-14-2013, 07:36 AM
Neither am I, the liberal hypocrites. It was them that under Bush and the Patriot Act crapping their pants, telling any and everyone how innocent people would be targeted unfairly and illegally in their minds. Of course now that Obama is president, it isn't such a bad thing anymore. Now the IRS admits to targeting people for political reasons and it's ok. The hypocrisy has gotten to the point of such foolishness that even trying to debate any issue with a liberal is beyond a lost cause. If they will tell you 2 and 2 is 5 when it suits their politics, there is no reason to spend much time with them. They are dead set in their thinking and if they have to distort or as usual, apply their double standards so they can be "right", then they will and do every day, all day. This is why talk radio doesn't work for liberals since hearing what they say and do just makes them sound so incredibly stupid, even to other liberals.

Who is suddenly OK with the Patriot Act? The single largest expansion of government power and infringement of individual liberties in recent memory, that Patriot Act?

houghtam
05-14-2013, 08:09 AM
Who is suddenly OK with the Patriot Act? The single largest expansion of government power and infringement of individual liberties in recent memory, that Patriot Act?

I'm glad a conservative brought that up.

If I'd said anything Pony Boy would be in here again with his "Blame Bush" meme.

Rohirrim
05-14-2013, 08:55 AM
We should overturn Citizens United and throw out the whole idea of these 501c4s. I don't blame the IRS for scrutinizing them. They need to scrutinize all of them. The whole idea is just more political slime and the selling of government.

BroncoBeavis
05-14-2013, 09:08 AM
We should overturn Citizens United and throw out the whole idea of these 501c4s. I don't blame the IRS for scrutinizing them. They need to scrutinize all of them. The whole idea is just more political slime and the selling of government.

Just wait 'til Obamacare hands 'em our personal health information. Just imagine all the Govtastic possibilities.

Smiling Assassin27
05-14-2013, 09:11 AM
..and if you think this bullcrap is limited to the IRS, try the EPA:

Conservative groups seeking information from the Environmental Protection Agency have been routinely hindered by fees normally waived for media and watchdog groups, while fees for more than 90 percent of requests from green groups were waived, according to requests reviewed by the Conservative Enterprise Institute.

CEI reviewed Freedom of Information Act requests sent between January 2012 and this spring from several environmental groups friendly to the EPA’s mission, and several conservative groups, to see how equally the agency applies its fee waiver policy for media and watchdog groups. Government agencies are supposed to waive fees for groups disseminating information for public benefit.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2529609#.UZJSKh5eV72.twitter

Smiling Assassin27
05-14-2013, 09:31 AM
Is there any guarantee that the IRS would not deny someone health care to Americans based on their beliefs?

BroncoBeavis
05-14-2013, 09:39 AM
Is there any guarantee that the IRS would not deny someone health care to Americans based on their beliefs?

Well at some point there's going to have to be some kind of audit process to make sure our current coverage is up to regulatory snuff. But I'm sure that will be easy, transparent, and just like all things IRS. LOL

ant1999e
05-14-2013, 09:48 AM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8XKBqcIEOXM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

peacepipe
05-14-2013, 10:01 AM
..and if you think this bullcrap is limited to the IRS, try the EPA:



http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2529609#.UZJSKh5eV72.twitter

Koch brother institution,CEI,isn't exactly a unbiased group,far from actually. They have a vested interest in going after the EPA.

Rohirrim
05-14-2013, 10:09 AM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8XKBqcIEOXM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

:rofl:

Stewart nails it again.

B-Large
05-14-2013, 11:45 AM
Liberal Federal Bias...

cutthemdown
05-14-2013, 11:56 AM
..and if you think this bullcrap is limited to the IRS, try the EPA:



http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2529609#.UZJSKh5eV72.twitter

Chicago style politics!

TonyR
05-14-2013, 01:35 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/14/wonkbook-five-questions-on-the-irs-mess/

BroncoBeavis
05-14-2013, 01:44 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/14/wonkbook-five-questions-on-the-irs-mess/

Ezra Klein? I smell bull**** already.

3) Did the IRS higher-ups act appropriately? Right now, much of the reporting indicates that IRS higher-ups shut this down pretty much as soon as they heard about it.

Poor Ezra. The facts are already beyond his cheerleading...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/13/irs-tea-party-media_n_3269698.html

At least one senior IRS official knew the agency was targeting tea party groups with what the agency later called "troubling questions" for months before it stopped. And when the IRS finally did change course, it did so in response to mounting public scrutiny in the press, documents show.

Anywho, Klein's maybe a half-step down or so from Sully as far as credibility on anything like this situation. :)

Rigs11
05-14-2013, 02:49 PM
Teabagger groups hold rallies and denounce taxes, then they apply for tax exempt status and are surprised about the additional scrutiny?:rofl:

Taco John
05-14-2013, 03:01 PM
This really shows just how dysfunctional income taxes are. In a way, I'm glad this happened, because it will light the fuse for either a flat tax or a pure consumption tax system.

Of course, dismantling the IRS won't be easy - but then, handing over the entire medical system to the insurance lobby wasn't easy either, and Obama managed to do it. A president with a motivated base can get things done.

BroncoBeavis
05-14-2013, 03:01 PM
Teabagger groups hold rallies and denounce taxes, then they apply for tax exempt status and are surprised about the additional scrutiny?:rofl:

Lolz. Here's a fun list of stuff the IRS just HAD TA KNOW to do their jobs...

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/weirdest-irs-questions-tea-party-views-donors-etymology-123547841.html

"Provide a list of all issues that are important to your organization. Indicate your position regarding each issue."
"Please explain in detail the derivation of your organization's name." (in a letter to the Ohio-based 1851 Center for Constitutional Law)
"Please explain in detail your organization's involvement with the Tea Party."
"Provide details regarding your relationship with Justin Binik-Thomas." (a Cincinnati-area Tea-Party activist)
"Provide information regarding the Butler County Teen Age Republicans and your relationship."
"Submit the following information relating to your past and present directors, officers, and key employees: a) Provide a resume for each."
"The names of the donors, contributors, and grantors. … The amounts of each of the donations, contributions, and grants and the dates you received them."
"The names of persons from your organization and the amount of time they spent on the event or program." (for events)
"Provide copies of the handbills you distributed at your monthly meetings."
"Fully describe your youth outreach program with the local school."
"Please provide copies of all your current web pages, including your Blog posts. Please provide copies of all of your newsletters, bulletins, flyers, newsletters or any other media or literature you have disseminated to your members or others. Please provide copies of stories and articles that have been published about you."
"Are you on Facebook or other social networking sites? If yes, provide copies of these pages."

With plenty more following in the article.

Rigs11
05-14-2013, 03:04 PM
Lolz. Here's a fun list of stuff the IRS just HAD TA KNOW to do their jobs...

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/weirdest-irs-questions-tea-party-views-donors-etymology-123547841.html



With plenty more following in the article.

outrageous! that's super secret teabag stuff:)

Pick Six
05-14-2013, 03:11 PM
This really shows just how dysfunctional income taxes are. In a way, I'm glad this happened, because it will light the fuse for either a flat tax or a pure consumption tax system.

Of course, dismantling the IRS won't be easy - but then, handing over the entire medical system to the insurance lobby wasn't easy either, and Obama managed to do it. A president with a motivated base can get things done.

One instance is reducing the size and scope of government, putting people out of jobs. The other instance is growing the government bureaucracy. The two instances don't equate. I don't see the IRS going away, anytime soon...

bronco militia
05-14-2013, 03:18 PM
This really shows just how dysfunctional income taxes are. In a way, I'm glad this happened, because it will light the fuse for either a flat tax or a pure consumption tax system.

Of course, dismantling the IRS won't be easy - but then, handing over the entire medical system to the insurance lobby wasn't easy either, and Obama managed to do it. A president with a motivated base can get things done.

dismantle the IRS? Who's going to run Obama Care and what are they going to do with all the guns and ammo?

TonyR
05-14-2013, 04:28 PM
Ezra Klein? I smell bull**** already.


Well at least unlike many you follow up your ad hominem with an actual argument. You found something that contradicted one of Klein's points and assumed what you found to be true and Klein's point false. Trouble is, even if you're right, you only addressed one of his points. How about the others? Or did you conveniently ignore those that might shoot holes in what you want to believe about this story?

BroncoBeavis
05-14-2013, 04:53 PM
Well at least unlike many you follow up your ad hominem with an actual argument. You found something that contradicted one of Klein's points and assumed what you found to be true and Klein's point false. Trouble is, even if you're right, you only addressed one of his points. How about the others? Or did you conveniently ignore those that might shoot holes in what you want to believe about this story?

I could go further, but it's all typical Ezra bull****. He numbered it for us.

On question 1 he frames the "core issue" as whether the IRS really did anything all that inappropriate. I think that issue is already settled, especially considering the IRS is on record admitting it was.

On question 2, he marks as crucial that most of the abuse came from the "Cincinnati office" and insinuates that since most of the abuse came from one office, this could establish that the scandal begins and ends there. Only problem... The Cincinnati office is specifically tasked with handling these political non-profit applications. The federal government directs them there. Therefore, the scandal related to those applications cannot simply be brushed off by geographic isolation.

Point 3, as already indicated, is just bull****. Journolist Ezra is playing willfully ignorant.

And his last couple questions aren't really unanswered questions, just worrying about the investigative and reactive politics of it all.

At the end of the day there's nothing useful there. As is usually the case with Mr. Klein

Taco John
05-14-2013, 05:03 PM
One instance is reducing the size and scope of government, putting people out of jobs. The other instance is growing the government bureaucracy. The two instances don't equate. I don't see the IRS going away, anytime soon...

Who knows if it ever will. What I do know is that a lot of Republicans are going to get elected in 2014 firing red meat missiles straight into its brick walls. Where that leads, who can guess. But my gut tells me that the answer isn't "nowhere."

The conservatives just got their dance card for 2014 and 2016 with their base. The IRS just became a central issue of the next two election cycles. Most might not recognize it yet because we haven't been through the drip,drip,drip of the investigation, but a fuse has been lit here. This isn't a one cycle news story. This is the kind of news story that changes the game.

peacepipe
05-14-2013, 05:09 PM
Who knows if it ever will. What I do know is that a lot of Republicans are going to get elected in 2014 firing red meat missiles straight into its brick walls. Where that leads, who can guess. But my gut tells me that the answer isn't "nowhere."

The conservatives just got their dance card for 2014 and 2016 with their base. The IRS just became the central issue of the next two election cycles.

This isn't going to have the legs you think it will. Besides the conservative base isn't lg enough to carry a presidential election.

Taco John
05-14-2013, 05:26 PM
This isn't going to have the legs you think it will. Besides the conservative base isn't lg enough to carry a presidential election.

:rofl:

peacepipe
05-14-2013, 05:39 PM
:rofl:

My bad,I must have missed something with the last 2 presidential elections.

Pony Boy
05-14-2013, 05:41 PM
This thread does not have potential.

Tell me, do you ever get tired of being wrong ...........

Taco John
05-14-2013, 05:43 PM
My bad,I must have missed something with the last 2 presidential elections.

Wow. You use a miniscule sample size to come up with some pretty far out there conclusions.

houghtam
05-14-2013, 05:48 PM
Wow. You use a miniscule sample size to come up with some pretty far out there conclusions.

He does kind of have a point, though I wouldn't use presidential elections to prove it.

They tried to bury Hillary Clinton's chances with Whitewater. The public completely forgot about it. I wouldn't be so quick to think there is going to be some huge public outcry from this, Benghazi, or the AP thing, though. Americans' memories are short.

The point about the presidential elections is valid too, but not really relevant to this particular case. The Republicans are going to have a hard time meeting the changing demographics with only rage on their side.

cutthemdown
05-14-2013, 05:56 PM
Yep Obama crushed Hilliary because when she said he wasn't from Kenya she said after, "As Far As I Know". Then he attacked her for it. People who think the dems themselves won't use this against Hilliary in primary are kidding themselves. I don't think she would win it anymore. Not like other liberals don't want to be President. Hell Hilliary got turned on when she was supposed to be "the One".

Arkie
05-14-2013, 06:02 PM
There will always be two constantly changing parties representing roughly half the population.

houghtam
05-14-2013, 06:11 PM
Yep Obama crushed Hilliary because when she said he wasn't from Kenya she said after, "As Far As I Know". Then he attacked her for it. People who think the dems themselves won't use this against Hilliary in primary are kidding themselves. I don't think she would win it anymore. Not like other liberals don't want to be President. Hell Hilliary got turned on when she was supposed to be "the One".

And that's what you get for listening to the echo chamber.

Obama's victory over Clinton was not a surprise to anyone who follows politics, particularly anyone with liberal leanings.

Pony Boy
05-14-2013, 06:16 PM
This really shows just how dysfunctional income taxes are. In a way, I'm glad this happened, because it will light the fuse for either a flat tax or a pure consumption tax system.

Of course, dismantling the IRS won't be easy - but then, handing over the entire medical system to the insurance lobby wasn't easy either, and Obama managed to do it. A president with a motivated base can get things done.

This IRS scandal will certainly add more fuel to the fire when it comes to funding the 16K plus IRS jobs needed to run the AFA. I see republican opportunities to make BO jump through hoops to get the money he will need to fund IRS expansion.

DenverBrit
05-14-2013, 07:17 PM
If only they had targeted rationally in a bi-partisan manner.

So many suspect political 'non-profits,' so little time.

barryr
05-14-2013, 07:51 PM
If Bush was the president and the IRS was targeting liberal groups, this story would be on the front page of the NY Times for at least a month, among other liberal news sources.

houghtam
05-14-2013, 07:59 PM
If Bush was the president and the IRS was targeting liberal groups, this story would be on the front page of the NY Times for at least a month, among other liberal news sources.

It was on msnbc and CNN all day yesterday and today.

You really ought to get out more. And if your answer is "I'm not going to watch that liberal garbage!" then, well, you don't really get to make claims about what is and isn't covered by something you don't watch, do you?

errand
05-14-2013, 08:04 PM
Teabagger groups hold rallies and denounce taxes, then they apply for tax exempt status and are surprised about the additional scrutiny?:rofl:

you're not very bright.....

Tea Party groups don't think we should be taxed to high heaven which would make them applying to be tax exempt logical....

Now liberal groups who think we should be paying more and more taxes but apply for tax exemption so they don't have to pay them is what is laughable.

errand
05-14-2013, 08:13 PM
My bad,I must have missed something with the last 2 presidential elections.


Yes you did...the Republicans didn't have conservatives running for president. That and this -

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR3LGtPMIsoIsEieyyl-BUoF8xtzbMcwIuD1dzcx1eVrL_-4UxF

Fedaykin
05-14-2013, 10:14 PM
As usual, a lot of bellyaching backed up by ignorance.

This issue is over requests for additional information from groups applying for a tax exempt status that specifically excludes political groups, like the Tea Party an affiliate political groups.

It's not at all inappropriate for these groups claiming affiliation with a political organization to be asked to provide additional information before being granted this particular tax exempt status. It's ridiculous to say otherwise.

If your job is to screen out inappropriate applications for tax exempt status that only non-political social welfare organizations are eligible for, who are you more likely to want more information from: Saint Jude's Orphanage or the Richmond Tea Party?

The only way we'll be able to tell if anything was actually targeting "conservative" groups as a form of political attack would be for us to see the list of applications and know what the standard procedure (if any) there is for choosing which to follow up on.

Fedaykin
05-14-2013, 10:18 PM
Lolz. Here's a fun list of stuff the IRS just HAD TA KNOW to do their jobs...

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/weirdest-irs-questions-tea-party-views-donors-etymology-123547841.html



With plenty more following in the article.

None of that seems weird when you're asking someone to clarify whether or not they are an organization that engages in political action -- which is what they were being asked to clarify.


Are you guys seriously thinking that it's way out of line to question whether or not a group called XXX Tea Party is a political group?

cutthemdown
05-14-2013, 11:09 PM
Yes its way out of line to single out conservative groups with the intent of keeping them from forming a non profit. IRS is supposed to be non partisan. Not surprised though Fed says nothing to see here move along. He tows the liberal party line.

Taco John
05-15-2013, 12:16 AM
He does kind of have a point, though I wouldn't use presidential elections to prove it.

They tried to bury Hillary Clinton's chances with Whitewater. The public completely forgot about it. I wouldn't be so quick to think there is going to be some huge public outcry from this, Benghazi, or the AP thing, though. Americans' memories are short.

The point about the presidential elections is valid too, but not really relevant to this particular case. The Republicans are going to have a hard time meeting the changing demographics with only rage on their side.


This next 8 months are going to make careers. The media machine is ramping into full overdrive right now. The thirst for information on these three scandals is driving the press into full throttle mode. I can only guess that you aren't following the news too closely right now if you don't think this is going to be a huge story. We're not even seeing the tip of the iceberg on this yet.

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 02:03 AM
I have no faith in a holder justice dept getting to the bottom of anything that would hurt Obama or the democrats. This needs an outside investigator for both benghazzigate and IRSGATE. Our govt is more corrupt then ever. We have Chicago gangsters running the show.

Taco John
05-15-2013, 04:03 AM
Hear me now and believe me later: the Republicans, and Tea Party will both make significant gains together in the Senate in 2014 due to the IRS scandal. You don't have to believe me now, just remember when it happens that you heard it here: this is a game changer.

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 05:16 AM
None of that seems weird when you're asking someone to clarify whether or not they are an organization that engages in political action -- which is what they were being asked to clarify.


Are you guys seriously thinking that it's way out of line to question whether or not a group called XXX Tea Party is a political group?

Its clear that you don't understand the main purposes of a 501c4 like Rove's Crossroads or Moveon.org. And to the idea that it was just some sort of misunderstanding of mission...
http://www.freep.com/usatoday/article/2158831

houghtam
05-15-2013, 06:32 AM
Hear me now and believe me later: the Republicans, and Tea Party will both make significant gains together in the Senate in 2014 due to the IRS scandal. You don't have to believe me now, just remember when it happens that you heard it here: this is a game changer.

Care to tell us where the gains are going to be made? That will at least put a little weight behind your claim.

This is hardly a bold prediction. As peace already pointed out, the Democrats have 21 seats up for reelection. It was already going to be tough for the Democrats to hold on to the Senate. For reference, 14 Republican seats were up in the 74 midterm after Watergate, and the Democrats only gained 5 seats total.

I predict the Democrats will only lose 3-4 total seats in 2014 Senate races.

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 06:58 AM
Biggest problem is for Dems to get anything done they need to break the Repub fillibuster ability and it's not going happen.

Outside of immigration what big legislation will repubs go along with?

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 07:03 AM
Mark Begich of Alaska, Max Baucus of Montana, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey is an obvious candidate to retire. He'll be 90 by November 2014. And Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia will be 77 by the midterms.


I think dems lose all 8 of these seats, and defend most, if not all of the other 12.

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 07:08 AM
Looking at the repub seats up I don't see anything they will lose. Just not states the liberal message doing well right now IMO.

So the Senate could very well go to the repubs and it would be the dems fillibustering everything. That would be awesome and so much fun. Or Obama breaking the veto out!

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 07:08 AM
Which repubs having to defend a seat do you see as vulnerable Houghtam?

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 07:31 AM
Which repubs having to defend a seat do you see as vulnerable Houghtam?

Maine Susan Collins.

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 07:34 AM
If Bush was the president and the IRS was targeting liberal groups, this story would be on the front page of the NY Times for at least a month, among other liberal news sources.

Funny you say that,in 2004 the IRS under gwbs targeted liberal groups & a church. Naacp. Not a peep from the media.

Requiem
05-15-2013, 07:51 AM
Hear me now and believe me later: the Republicans, and Tea Party will both make significant gains together in the Senate in 2014 due to the IRS scandal. You don't have to believe me now, just remember when it happens that you heard it here: this is a game changer.

Which has more to do with the Democrats having to "defend" more seats than any of these issues. As stated many times, Americans don't have a long-term attention span when it comes to politics. Benghazi will likely be used as an attack line because it has substance behind it. The phone-tapping and this IRS stuff? Give me a break. Go walk outside and ask twenty random people about these stories and they would have no idea what you are talking about. Secondly, the "leading" party (in this case the Democrats, with Obama in office and owning the Senate) traditionally, if not almost always, lose seats in a midterm election. It is just a historical trend.

I'm a little less optimistic than Houghtam is on the Democrats retaining seats in the Senate. I think anywhere between 5 and 7 seat gain is realistic, but I cannot say more or make estimates until I know who all is exactly running. A lot of things are still variable at this time.

Requiem
05-15-2013, 08:05 AM
Potentially Vulnerable Democratic Senate Seats:

Al Franken, MN -- MN is a pretty liberal state, but Franken isn't very popular and barely won last time around. Should be within the margin of error.

Tim Johnson, SD -- Long-time Senator will be retiring this year primarily due to health reasons. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin will not be running for the Democrats. Former (R) Governor of SD Mike Rounds will be running, and the only other Democrat to announce a bid is former Tom Daschle staffer Rick Weiland. Although the Democrats have had success in this very conservative state, I think Rounds will win on name-basis if the Democrats cannot field a better candidate.

Mark Begich, AK -- He barely won last time around even with the Ted Stevens controversy. Polling right now has Begich ahead slightly, but within the margin of error without a name even being fielded by Republicans. I think the Democrats lose this seat unless the GOP trots out a real loser.

Jeff Merkley, OR -- won in a squeaker back in 2008. Polling right now indicates it will be another close race, even with Oregon being a more liberal state. I think this is one they can hang on to, but I cannot say how popular Merkley is there. Advantage right now (small) to the incumbent.

Mary Landrieu, LA -- I don't think Mary Landrieu gets out of this one as a winner. Just my gut instinct. Know nothing about Louisiana politics, other than the fact that is a traditionally conservative state.

Kay Hagan, NC -- North Carolina's demographics and economic changes are making the state a little bit more liberal, but I definitely think this is a state the Republicans can recapture in 2014.

I think all the Northeastern States with races are safe for Democrats, the exception could be New Hampshire. Max Baucus is pretty popular in Montana, but I'd throw that in as a wildcard race as well.

As far as vulnerable Republican senate seats, Kentucky (McConnell) and Maine (Collins) would be the Democrats best bets to try and steal a state. Other than that, nowhere.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 08:46 AM
Mark Begich of Alaska, Max Baucus of Montana, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey is an obvious candidate to retire. He'll be 90 by November 2014. And Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia will be 77 by the midterms.


I think dems lose all 8 of these seats, and defend most, if not all of the other 12.

They lose Alaska for sure...the others are not as clear as you think.

Baucus was a DINO, but he also won 73% of the vote last time. The vote will be much closer than 73%, but not in the bag for R by a long shot.

Hagan got 53% last time, and current polling shows her up by 10 or more against most candidates. A lot of time left for things to change. Unfortunately memories fade.

South Dakota will be interesting as well. Tim Johnson with 63% of the vote last time, but will not run for re-election.

Louisiana is probably the next most likely to fall to R IMO. Landrieu only had 52% like Hagan, and is up by 10+ against potential opponents, but Louisiana is a much more conservative state than North Carolina.

In Arkansas, Mark Pryor ran unopposed last time and got 80% of the vote. Republicans are going to have their work cut out for them in a state which otherwise should have been an easy win...don't count out the importance of the ground game, on which the R's will have to make huge strides.

I only see one sure loss to R's here. Now obviously I highly doubt they defend all their seats, but like Req and peace said, history shows they were going to lose a few anyway. A lot will change over the next 18 months, but the IRS thing? Req's right. It's going on right now and your average voter (you know, one who doesn't frequent political message boards everyday) doesn't have a clue about it...nor do they care.

I see a 3-4 seat gain for Republicans. Anything more is really optimistic for the Republicans, based on history, polling and past electoral performance.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 08:51 AM
Potentially Vulnerable Democratic Senate Seats:

Al Franken, MN -- MN is a pretty liberal state, but Franken isn't very popular and barely won last time around. Should be within the margin of error.

Tim Johnson, SD -- Long-time Senator will be retiring this year primarily due to health reasons. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin will not be running for the Democrats. Former (R) Governor of SD Mike Rounds will be running, and the only other Democrat to announce a bid is former Tom Daschle staffer Rick Weiland. Although the Democrats have had success in this very conservative state, I think Rounds will win on name-basis if the Democrats cannot field a better candidate.

Mark Begich, AK -- He barely won last time around even with the Ted Stevens controversy. Polling right now has Begich ahead slightly, but within the margin of error without a name even being fielded by Republicans. I think the Democrats lose this seat unless the GOP trots out a real loser.

Jeff Merkley, OR -- won in a squeaker back in 2008. Polling right now indicates it will be another close race, even with Oregon being a more liberal state. I think this is one they can hang on to, but I cannot say how popular Merkley is there. Advantage right now (small) to the incumbent.

Mary Landrieu, LA -- I don't think Mary Landrieu gets out of this one as a winner. Just my gut instinct. Know nothing about Louisiana politics, other than the fact that is a traditionally conservative state.

Kay Hagan, NC -- North Carolina's demographics and economic changes are making the state a little bit more liberal, but I definitely think this is a state the Republicans can recapture in 2014.

I think all the Northeastern States with races are safe for Democrats, the exception could be New Hampshire. Max Baucus is pretty popular in Montana, but I'd throw that in as a wildcard race as well.

As far as vulnerable Republican senate seats, Kentucky (McConnell) and Maine (Collins) would be the Democrats best bets to try and steal a state. Other than that, nowhere.

I think you're dead wrong about Franken. He has a 52% favorable rating, which isn't bad, and he has a track record of not grandstanding...he's basically the anti-John McCain. He rarely accepts requests for national interviews, and almost always accepts requests for interviews with his constituents. Regardlesss of how people might "feel" about how he performs, there's definitely not a whole lot of momentum to go against him.

I don't think Oregon is in play, either.

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 08:52 AM
Didn't Baucus say he was retiring?

houghtam
05-15-2013, 08:55 AM
Didn't Baucus say he was retiring?

Yes, which is why his being a DINO is important. He will bleed several percentage points over to the R side, so it will all depend on who is running. Polling currently shows both likely candidates losing to Baucus by ~10 points, and he's not even running.

Requiem
05-15-2013, 09:21 AM
I think you're dead wrong about Franken. He has a 52% favorable rating, which isn't bad, and he has a track record of not grandstanding...he's basically the anti-John McCain. He rarely accepts requests for national interviews, and almost always accepts requests for interviews with his constituents. Regardlesss of how people might "feel" about how he performs, there's definitely not a whole lot of momentum to go against him.

I don't think Oregon is in play, either.

Well, 52% favorability isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The key to this match-up is who they run against him. They always have a good ground game (GOP), and outside a few college towns (Moorhead, Duluth, Mankato, etc.) and Minneapolis/St. Paul -- the state has a lot of red to it. The demographic that helped push Franken through last time are likely going to be absent from this mid-term (younger voters, college kids, etc.) this time around. This is also one of the trends (like the one mentioned prior) you see in elections.

Minnesota is pretty much "purple." The state has always had polarizing figures as representatives. Jesse Ventura, Michelle Bachmann, Al Franken, etc. They go for loonies and crazies. It isn't a stable political arena and is becoming the Midwestern bastion of state sponsored welfare. I'm willing to bet that this seat is held on to, but it is definitely up for grabs.

I think SD, AK, LA are sure-fire gains for the GOP. I've seen Hagan up anywhere from 10 points at her high, to within the margin of error on others. I don't expect her to get the same sort of push she did back in 2008 when Obama carried the state, which undoubtedly helped her in the polls because people likely just voted down the ticket. That was a coat tail effect for sure. So as of now, I'll keep my 5-7 estimation.

As for Oregon, Merkley probably wins, but it won't be a cakewalk. He has been fundraising for a while now because he know the Republican friendly SuperPAC's are going to do all they can to go after him. I think Udall (D-CO) is up for re-election too and that could be a squeaker as well. The Republicans will have to pick and choose which places they want to invest the most money in. If I were them, I'd dump little money into SD, AK and LA -- and focus the resources on OR, MT, MN, CO and NC.

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 09:38 AM
Yes, which is why his being a DINO is important. He will bleed several percentage points over to the R side, so it will all depend on who is running. Polling currently shows both likely candidates losing to Baucus by ~10 points, and he's not even running.

Montana has a dem governor,their last governor was also dem. It just so happens that the last dem gov was popular & is considering running to replace baucus. Brian scwietzer is his name. He runs and it's looking good for Montana staying blue.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 09:41 AM
Well, 52% favorability isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The key to this match-up is who they run against him. They always have a good ground game (GOP), and outside a few college towns (Moorhead, Duluth, Mankato, etc.) and Minneapolis/St. Paul -- the state has a lot of red to it. The demographic that helped push Franken through last time are likely going to be absent from this mid-term (younger voters, college kids, etc.) this time around. This is also one of the trends (like the one mentioned prior) you see in elections.

Minnesota is pretty much "purple." The state has always had polarizing figures as representatives. Jesse Ventura, Michelle Bachmann, Al Franken, etc. They go for loonies and crazies. It isn't a stable political arena and is becoming the Midwestern bastion of state sponsored welfare. I'm willing to bet that this seat is held on to, but it is definitely up for grabs.

I think SD, AK, LA are sure-fire gains for the GOP. I've seen Hagan up anywhere from 10 points at her high, to within the margin of error on others. I don't expect her to get the same sort of push she did back in 2008 when Obama carried the state, which undoubtedly helped her in the polls because people likely just voted down the ticket. That was a coat tail effect for sure. So as of now, I'll keep my 5-7 estimation.

As for Oregon, Merkley probably wins, but it won't be a cakewalk. He has been fundraising for a while now because he know the Republican friendly SuperPAC's are going to do all they can to go after him. I think Udall (D-CO) is up for re-election too and that could be a squeaker as well. The Republicans will have to pick and choose which places they want to invest the most money in. If I were them, I'd dump little money into SD, AK and LA -- and focus the resources on OR, MT, MN, CO and NC.

It's less about favorability and more about inertia. There is no real reason to unseat the incumbent in this case. No public mandate, no outcry. Incumbents are historically very difficult to get rid of, regardless of party............................

...........................Which is why Merkley only barely squeaked by last time in Oregon. If I were a betting man, I would put lots of money on a Democratic incumbent in the "blue as the day is long" state of Oregon.

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 09:45 AM
This next 8 months are going to make careers. The media machine is ramping into full overdrive right now. The thirst for information on these three scandals is driving the press into full throttle mode. I can only guess that you aren't following the news too closely right now if you don't think this is going to be a huge story. We're not even seeing the tip of the iceberg on this yet.

You're right, the media is in a feeding frenzy especially when the Feds single out one of their own to investigate. They will not only look under the rug they will remove the floor looking for dirt.

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 09:55 AM
None of that seems weird when you're asking someone to clarify whether or not they are an organization that engages in political action -- which is what they were being asked to clarify.


Are you guys seriously thinking that it's way out of line to question whether or not a group called XXX Tea Party is a political group?

Apparently the IRS thinks it's out of line ..........come on Fradykat get your head out

Requiem
05-15-2013, 10:15 AM
It's less about favorability and more about inertia. There is no real reason to unseat the incumbent in this case. No public mandate, no outcry. Incumbents are historically very difficult to get rid of, regardless of party............................

...........................Which is why Merkley only barely squeaked by last time in Oregon. If I were a betting man, I would put lots of money on a Democratic incumbent in the "blue as the day is long" state of Oregon.

I'm not saying there is a reason in Franken's case, just that Minnesota has an unstable and ambiguous voting history with an easily swayed electorate. And I agree with you that Merkley will likely win out. Either way, I think these races will be within the MOE.

Fedaykin
05-15-2013, 11:02 AM
Its clear that you don't understand the main purposes of a 501c4 like Rove's Crossroads or Moveon.org. And to the idea that it was just some sort of misunderstanding of mission...
http://www.freep.com/usatoday/article/2158831

501c4 are not supposed to be engaging in political functions for the majority of their effort, and definitely NOT in a partisan manner. The NRA engages in

Moveon.org and Crossroads supposedly fit into this category (I would not agree that either of those organizations are not primarily political and are not partisan) but that's beside the point.

That's why those organizations that were claiming/implying association with a political party were being asked to clarify what their organization was about.

The only on here not understanding what's going on, once again, is you.

Fedaykin
05-15-2013, 11:04 AM
Apparently the IRS thinks it's out of line ..........come on Fradykat get your head out

There's that famed conservative maturity, shining through!

Of course, if you were not incapable of reading comprehension you'd understand that I'm talking about the queries themselves, not the manner in which the set of queries was decided upon.

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 11:21 AM
There's that famed conservative maturity, shining through!

Of course, if you were not incapable of reading comprehension you'd understand that I'm talking about the queries themselves, not the manner in which the set of queries was decided upon.

Again, pull your head out ...... The name of an organization should not trigger anything, all groups applying for tax exempt status should be treated the same or be subject to a random check, not based on a name of the organization.

So according to your logic any passenger on a commercial airline that wears a turban should be single out for a full body cavity search.

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 11:26 AM
501c4 are not supposed to be engaging in political functions for the majority of their effort, and definitely NOT in a partisan manner. The NRA engages in

Moveon.org and Crossroads supposedly fit into this category (I would not agree that either of those organizations are not primarily political and are not partisan) but that's beside the point.

That's why those organizations that were claiming/implying association with a political party were being asked to clarify what their organization was about.

The only on here not understanding what's going on, once again, is you.

I'm not saying there isn't grey area in the way those tax exemptions have been issued and utilized. It's always been a very sketchy area of campaign finance and political spending.

But all that is a red herring. The IRS didn't simply change its standards of what constituted "too political." It started holding one (green light) standard for friends of the administration and another (minefield) standard for potential enemies, with a generous helping of big-brotheresque information gathering about donors (violating the whole purpose of a 501c4), ideas, influences, contacts... just about everything you could imagine. And then the applications mostly just went to IRS purgatory, whilst the progressive applications processed like clockwork.

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 11:37 AM
IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo

WASHINGTON -- In February 2010, the Champaign Tea Party in Illinois received approval of its tax-exempt status from the IRS in 90 days, no questions asked.

That was the month before the Internal Revenue Service started singling out Tea Party groups for special treatment. There wouldn't be another Tea Party application approved for 27 months.

In that time, the IRS approved perhaps dozens of applications from similar liberal and progressive groups

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/14/irs-tea-party-progressive-groups/2158831/

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 11:45 AM
There's that famed conservative maturity, shining through!

Of course, if you were not incapable of reading comprehension you'd understand that I'm talking about the queries themselves, not the manner in which the set of queries was decided upon.

The Internal Revenue Service asked tea party groups to see donor rolls.

It asked for printouts of Facebook posts And it asked what books people were reading.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/the-irs-wants-you-to-share-everything-91378.html

houghtam
05-15-2013, 11:45 AM
The IRS isn't going anywhere, and there isn't going to be any huge political fallout from this like some people are sitting at home fapping about.

If anything, it's going to be used as a jumping off point for both sides to re-introduce campaign finance reform into the discussion. There is plenty of support on either side of the aisle for this, and if the Republicans were smart, they wouldn't focus on trying to tie this to individual Senate races, because the details will largely be forgotten about. Rather, they'd be better off introducing and taking the lead on bi-partisan legislation to reform the system, and then benefit from the goodwill that creates, which translates into votes.

Smear campaigns rarely work over the long-term, but reform is something everyone likes to get behind, D or R, and something every politician likes to take credit for, D or R.

DenverBrit
05-15-2013, 12:15 PM
The Economist take. (highlights)

The IRS errs
May 13th 2013, 20:02 by E.M. | WASHINGTON, DC


WHAT bigger gaffe could the Internal Revenue Service commit than to single out groups that criticised the government for greater scrutiny? Republicans, naturally enough, are outraged by the revelation that America’s taxmen consciously and explicitly did so, picking on the applications for charitable status from tea-party chapters and other right-leaning campaign outfits.

Happily, the Obama administration does not seem to have been involved in this idiocy at all, although with its usual defensiveness, it took some time to condemn it strongly.

In all the huffing and puffing, however, two bigger scandals are being ignored. The first is the frequent abuse of America’s system of regulation of political campaigns, which the IRS, for all its incompetence, was rightly seeking to investigate.

The applications the IRS handled so ill-advisedly were for a particular tax status—501(c)(4), in the jargon—that has become a common means to avoid these restrictions..........Clever lawyers spotted a loophole in all this: a group that had no discernible purpose other than promoting a particular political viewpoint could still register as a 501(c)(4), as long as it was careful to spend at least half its money on campaigns that were not explicitly tied to an election.


The fact that the IRS has not found a way to stop this kind of thing is an indicator of the second scandal: the willful neglect of the taxman by politicians from both parties. The agency has 10% fewer employees than it did three years ago. Its budget has been cut three years running. It has not had a director since November. Starving the IRS is popular with voters of all stripes, but it leads to diminished revenues and thus extra debt for all Americans to bear. If those complaining about the agency’s conduct want better results, they will have to pay for them.

(comments about 501(c)(4) including one supporting Obama here.)
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/05/republicans-and-taxes

NorCalBronco7
05-15-2013, 12:27 PM
What the hell is that noise on CSPN for the Justice Department oversight committee where Eric Holder is being questioned? I watch CSPN from time to time but Ive never heard these annoying beeps or whatever they are. Kinda sounds like morris code.

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 12:58 PM
Pony, beavis and the rest of the righties..where was the outrage?

Bush Used the IRS, FBI, CIA and Secret Service to Go After Opponents -- Where Was the Fox and GOP Outrage?

As your kindergarten teacher probably told you, two wrongs do not make a right. But the discrepancy in reactions to wrongs does, indeed, show how Washington so often serves the interests of the political right.

That's one of the big -- if deliberately ignored -- takeaways from the reaction to news that the Internal Revenue Service allegedly targeting conservative organizations for extra scrutiny in their larger review of political groups' tax exempt status. In the last few days, the allegations have generated a wave of national headlines, a congressional investigation, federal legislation and ever-louder calls for impeachment.

Considering the gravity of the allegations against the Obama IRS from the Treasury Department's inspector general, congressional scrutiny is certainly warranted. However, there's just one problem: most of the lawmakers and pundits today decrying the use of public resources against a White House's political opponents had little -- if anything -- to say about equally troubling revelations about the Bush administration's deployment of public resources against its opponents. In fact, conservatives said so little back then that Fox News apparently doesn't even know (or is pretending not to know) the Bush administration used the IRS in the same way the Obama administration allegedly did.

And here's the even more incredible thing: the Bush cabal didn't just use the IRS for its political hackery -- it mounted a full-scale government-wide assault on its enemies, marshaling disparate agencies in its smear efforts.

Bush's use of the IRS was but one part of that larger assault. As my Salon colleague Alex Seitz-Wald notes today in greater detail, in 2005, Bush's IRS began what became an extensive two-year investigation into a Pasadena church after an orator dared to speak out against President Bush's Iraq War. Not coincidentally, the Los Angeles Times reports that the church targeted just so happened to be "one of Southern California's largest and most liberal congregations." That IRS church audit came a year after it launched a near-identical attack on the NAACP after the civil rights organization criticized various Bush administration policies.

That is not where the story ends, however. The Bush administration's crusade against its enemies moved from the IRS into the Secret Service.

Under the Republican president, that law enforcement agency was repeatedly deployed to physically block suspected antiwar activists from attending public presidential events. As the San Francisco Chronicle reported, the scheme eventually targeted some peaceful antiwar activists for arrest for the alleged crime of "holding up small handwritten protest signs outside the designated zone" of free speech (yes, the Bush White House cemented the precedent that the right to dissent is no longer a fundamental right, but is instead only allowed in certain "free speech zones"). Ultimately, in a case dealing with a man who was arrested for simply telling Vice President Dick Cheney that his "policies on Iraq are disgusting," the Republican-dominated Supreme Court upheld the Bush administration's use of "retaliatory arrests" against the administration's ideological critics.

Then, in 2010, we learned that Bush's targeting operation was also operating inside the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Recounting findings from the Justice Department's Inspector General, the Washington Post reported that "the FBI improperly investigated some left-leaning U.S. advocacy groups after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks ... citing cases in which agents put activists on terrorist watch lists even though they were planning nonviolent civil disobedience."

A year later, we learned that along with the IRS, Secret Service and FBI, the Bush administration may have also been using the Central Intelligence Agency against its political enemies. As the New York Times reported, "A former Central Intelligence Agency officer who was a top counterterrorism official during the administration of President George W. Bush, said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information" on prominent Iraq War critic Juan Cole. That story had an eerie similarity to the Bush administration's effort to out CIA operative Valerie Plame as retribution for her husband's criticism of that same war.

Unlike the noisy outrage that met today's allegations of IRS misconduct under President Obama, these earlier -- and well-documented -- revelations of systemic IRS, Secret Service, FBI and CIA misconduct were met with a collective shrug of the shoulders in Washington. Sure, a few newspapers wrote about them, and a few Democratic lawmakers tried to raise questions about the Bush administration's actions, but compared to today's sound and fury over the IRS allegations, there was veritable silence. Indeed, as alluded to before, so little outrage was voiced about this kind of thing during the Bush years that a Fox News' headline this week summarizing a Karl Rove interview blared: "What if IRS Under President Bush targeted liberal groups?" -- as if that never actually happened...even though it most certainly did.

What explains this obvious double standard in the reactions to Bush era and Obama era misconduct? Partisanship, expectations and ideological bias.

In terms of partisanship, Republicans now screaming bloody murder over the IRS allegations clearly don't care about the principles of equal protection, nonpartisan public services or impartial governance. We know this because most of them had nothing to say about the Bush administration's actions against the GOP's ideological opponents. In the context of that record, the GOP is really saying it is outraged when government resources are aimed at its friends, but more than happy to have those resources aimed at its enemies.

That context, though, hasn't been publicly referenced by most Democrats. Indeed, other than Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), most Democratic lawmakers have not dared to mention that the problem of politicized government goes back many years.

That gets to expectations and ideological bias -- simply put, the expectation in a Washington where both parties and most media outlets tilt to the right is that conservative groups should never be treated the same way liberal groups so often are. Why? Because conservative causes (say, the anti-tax movement) tend to be aligned with the interests of the transpartisan moneyed establishment while liberal causes (say, the anti-war movement) tend to be at odds with those interests.

Thus, when conservative groups happen to be treated like liberal groups, the Washington Outrage Machine turns the noise up to 11 -- even though when liberal groups were targeted, that Outrage Machine remained dormant. And with today's national press corps reoriented around amplifying -- rather than challenging -- power, this double standard is then predictably reflected in a corresponding discrepancy in coverage.

Taken together, the lesson should be straightforward: according to Washington, politicized government is perfectly fine when it is punishing liberal forces that challenge the status quo, but totally outrageous when it is targeting conservative groups that preserve the status quo.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Bush-Used-the-IRS-FBI-CI-by-David-Sirota-130514-490.html

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 01:22 PM
Pony, beavis and the rest of the righties..where was the outrage?

Bush Used the IRS, FBI, CIA and Secret Service to Go After Opponents -- Where Was the Fox and GOP Outrage?

As your kindergarten teacher probably told you, two wrongs do not make a right. But the discrepancy in reactions to wrongs does, indeed, show how Washington so often serves the interests of the political right.

That's one of the big -- if deliberately ignored -- takeaways from the reaction to news that the Internal Revenue Service allegedly targeting conservative organizations for extra scrutiny in their larger review of political groups' tax exempt status. In the last few days, the allegations have generated a wave of national headlines, a congressional investigation, federal legislation and ever-louder calls for impeachment.

Considering the gravity of the allegations against the Obama IRS from the Treasury Department's inspector general, congressional scrutiny is certainly warranted. However, there's just one problem: most of the lawmakers and pundits today decrying the use of public resources against a White House's political opponents had little -- if anything -- to say about equally troubling revelations about the Bush administration's deployment of public resources against its opponents. In fact, conservatives said so little back then that Fox News apparently doesn't even know (or is pretending not to know) the Bush administration used the IRS in the same way the Obama administration allegedly did.

And here's the even more incredible thing: the Bush cabal didn't just use the IRS for its political hackery -- it mounted a full-scale government-wide assault on its enemies, marshaling disparate agencies in its smear efforts.

Bush's use of the IRS was but one part of that larger assault. As my Salon colleague Alex Seitz-Wald notes today in greater detail, in 2005, Bush's IRS began what became an extensive two-year investigation into a Pasadena church after an orator dared to speak out against President Bush's Iraq War. Not coincidentally, the Los Angeles Times reports that the church targeted just so happened to be "one of Southern California's largest and most liberal congregations." That IRS church audit came a year after it launched a near-identical attack on the NAACP after the civil rights organization criticized various Bush administration policies.

That is not where the story ends, however. The Bush administration's crusade against its enemies moved from the IRS into the Secret Service.

Under the Republican president, that law enforcement agency was repeatedly deployed to physically block suspected antiwar activists from attending public presidential events. As the San Francisco Chronicle reported, the scheme eventually targeted some peaceful antiwar activists for arrest for the alleged crime of "holding up small handwritten protest signs outside the designated zone" of free speech (yes, the Bush White House cemented the precedent that the right to dissent is no longer a fundamental right, but is instead only allowed in certain "free speech zones"). Ultimately, in a case dealing with a man who was arrested for simply telling Vice President Dick Cheney that his "policies on Iraq are disgusting," the Republican-dominated Supreme Court upheld the Bush administration's use of "retaliatory arrests" against the administration's ideological critics.

Then, in 2010, we learned that Bush's targeting operation was also operating inside the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Recounting findings from the Justice Department's Inspector General, the Washington Post reported that "the FBI improperly investigated some left-leaning U.S. advocacy groups after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks ... citing cases in which agents put activists on terrorist watch lists even though they were planning nonviolent civil disobedience."

A year later, we learned that along with the IRS, Secret Service and FBI, the Bush administration may have also been using the Central Intelligence Agency against its political enemies. As the New York Times reported, "A former Central Intelligence Agency officer who was a top counterterrorism official during the administration of President George W. Bush, said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information" on prominent Iraq War critic Juan Cole. That story had an eerie similarity to the Bush administration's effort to out CIA operative Valerie Plame as retribution for her husband's criticism of that same war.

Unlike the noisy outrage that met today's allegations of IRS misconduct under President Obama, these earlier -- and well-documented -- revelations of systemic IRS, Secret Service, FBI and CIA misconduct were met with a collective shrug of the shoulders in Washington. Sure, a few newspapers wrote about them, and a few Democratic lawmakers tried to raise questions about the Bush administration's actions, but compared to today's sound and fury over the IRS allegations, there was veritable silence. Indeed, as alluded to before, so little outrage was voiced about this kind of thing during the Bush years that a Fox News' headline this week summarizing a Karl Rove interview blared: "What if IRS Under President Bush targeted liberal groups?" -- as if that never actually happened...even though it most certainly did.

What explains this obvious double standard in the reactions to Bush era and Obama era misconduct? Partisanship, expectations and ideological bias.

In terms of partisanship, Republicans now screaming bloody murder over the IRS allegations clearly don't care about the principles of equal protection, nonpartisan public services or impartial governance. We know this because most of them had nothing to say about the Bush administration's actions against the GOP's ideological opponents. In the context of that record, the GOP is really saying it is outraged when government resources are aimed at its friends, but more than happy to have those resources aimed at its enemies.

That context, though, hasn't been publicly referenced by most Democrats. Indeed, other than Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), most Democratic lawmakers have not dared to mention that the problem of politicized government goes back many years.

That gets to expectations and ideological bias -- simply put, the expectation in a Washington where both parties and most media outlets tilt to the right is that conservative groups should never be treated the same way liberal groups so often are. Why? Because conservative causes (say, the anti-tax movement) tend to be aligned with the interests of the transpartisan moneyed establishment while liberal causes (say, the anti-war movement) tend to be at odds with those interests.

Thus, when conservative groups happen to be treated like liberal groups, the Washington Outrage Machine turns the noise up to 11 -- even though when liberal groups were targeted, that Outrage Machine remained dormant. And with today's national press corps reoriented around amplifying -- rather than challenging -- power, this double standard is then predictably reflected in a corresponding discrepancy in coverage.

Taken together, the lesson should be straightforward: according to Washington, politicized government is perfectly fine when it is punishing liberal forces that challenge the status quo, but totally outrageous when it is targeting conservative groups that preserve the status quo.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Bush-Used-the-IRS-FBI-CI-by-David-Sirota-130514-490.html

Well at least you are predictable ..........

Requiem
05-15-2013, 01:27 PM
Lol. . .

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 01:27 PM
Well at least you are predictable ..........

Got nothing huh? figures..run along now and find another outrageous claim your whining party can cry about.

http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/user_photos/1170850/BoehnerJohnCrying_width_600x.jpeg

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 01:29 PM
Pony, beavis and the rest of the righties..where was the outrage?

Bush Used the IRS, FBI, CIA and Secret Service to Go After Opponents -- Where Was the Fox and GOP Outrage?

As your kindergarten teacher probably told you, two wrongs do not make a right. But the discrepancy in reactions to wrongs does, indeed, show how Washington so often serves the interests of the political right.

That's one of the big -- if deliberately ignored -- takeaways from the reaction to news that the Internal Revenue Service allegedly targeting conservative organizations for extra scrutiny in their larger review of political groups' tax exempt status. In the last few days, the allegations have generated a wave of national headlines, a congressional investigation, federal legislation and ever-louder calls for impeachment.

Considering the gravity of the allegations against the Obama IRS from the Treasury Department's inspector general, congressional scrutiny is certainly warranted. However, there's just one problem: most of the lawmakers and pundits today decrying the use of public resources against a White House's political opponents had little -- if anything -- to say about equally troubling revelations about the Bush administration's deployment of public resources against its opponents. In fact, conservatives said so little back then that Fox News apparently doesn't even know (or is pretending not to know) the Bush administration used the IRS in the same way the Obama administration allegedly did.

And here's the even more incredible thing: the Bush cabal didn't just use the IRS for its political hackery -- it mounted a full-scale government-wide assault on its enemies, marshaling disparate agencies in its smear efforts.

Bush's use of the IRS was but one part of that larger assault. As my Salon colleague Alex Seitz-Wald notes today in greater detail, in 2005, Bush's IRS began what became an extensive two-year investigation into a Pasadena church after an orator dared to speak out against President Bush's Iraq War. Not coincidentally, the Los Angeles Times reports that the church targeted just so happened to be "one of Southern California's largest and most liberal congregations." That IRS church audit came a year after it launched a near-identical attack on the NAACP after the civil rights organization criticized various Bush administration policies.

That is not where the story ends, however. The Bush administration's crusade against its enemies moved from the IRS into the Secret Service.

Under the Republican president, that law enforcement agency was repeatedly deployed to physically block suspected antiwar activists from attending public presidential events. As the San Francisco Chronicle reported, the scheme eventually targeted some peaceful antiwar activists for arrest for the alleged crime of "holding up small handwritten protest signs outside the designated zone" of free speech (yes, the Bush White House cemented the precedent that the right to dissent is no longer a fundamental right, but is instead only allowed in certain "free speech zones"). Ultimately, in a case dealing with a man who was arrested for simply telling Vice President Dick Cheney that his "policies on Iraq are disgusting," the Republican-dominated Supreme Court upheld the Bush administration's use of "retaliatory arrests" against the administration's ideological critics.

Then, in 2010, we learned that Bush's targeting operation was also operating inside the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Recounting findings from the Justice Department's Inspector General, the Washington Post reported that "the FBI improperly investigated some left-leaning U.S. advocacy groups after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks ... citing cases in which agents put activists on terrorist watch lists even though they were planning nonviolent civil disobedience."

A year later, we learned that along with the IRS, Secret Service and FBI, the Bush administration may have also been using the Central Intelligence Agency against its political enemies. As the New York Times reported, "A former Central Intelligence Agency officer who was a top counterterrorism official during the administration of President George W. Bush, said the White House at least twice asked intelligence officials to gather sensitive information" on prominent Iraq War critic Juan Cole. That story had an eerie similarity to the Bush administration's effort to out CIA operative Valerie Plame as retribution for her husband's criticism of that same war.

Unlike the noisy outrage that met today's allegations of IRS misconduct under President Obama, these earlier -- and well-documented -- revelations of systemic IRS, Secret Service, FBI and CIA misconduct were met with a collective shrug of the shoulders in Washington. Sure, a few newspapers wrote about them, and a few Democratic lawmakers tried to raise questions about the Bush administration's actions, but compared to today's sound and fury over the IRS allegations, there was veritable silence. Indeed, as alluded to before, so little outrage was voiced about this kind of thing during the Bush years that a Fox News' headline this week summarizing a Karl Rove interview blared: "What if IRS Under President Bush targeted liberal groups?" -- as if that never actually happened...even though it most certainly did.

What explains this obvious double standard in the reactions to Bush era and Obama era misconduct? Partisanship, expectations and ideological bias.

In terms of partisanship, Republicans now screaming bloody murder over the IRS allegations clearly don't care about the principles of equal protection, nonpartisan public services or impartial governance. We know this because most of them had nothing to say about the Bush administration's actions against the GOP's ideological opponents. In the context of that record, the GOP is really saying it is outraged when government resources are aimed at its friends, but more than happy to have those resources aimed at its enemies.

That context, though, hasn't been publicly referenced by most Democrats. Indeed, other than Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), most Democratic lawmakers have not dared to mention that the problem of politicized government goes back many years.

That gets to expectations and ideological bias -- simply put, the expectation in a Washington where both parties and most media outlets tilt to the right is that conservative groups should never be treated the same way liberal groups so often are. Why? Because conservative causes (say, the anti-tax movement) tend to be aligned with the interests of the transpartisan moneyed establishment while liberal causes (say, the anti-war movement) tend to be at odds with those interests.

Thus, when conservative groups happen to be treated like liberal groups, the Washington Outrage Machine turns the noise up to 11 -- even though when liberal groups were targeted, that Outrage Machine remained dormant. And with today's national press corps reoriented around amplifying -- rather than challenging -- power, this double standard is then predictably reflected in a corresponding discrepancy in coverage.

Taken together, the lesson should be straightforward: according to Washington, politicized government is perfectly fine when it is punishing liberal forces that challenge the status quo, but totally outrageous when it is targeting conservative groups that preserve the status quo.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Bush-Used-the-IRS-FBI-CI-by-David-Sirota-130514-490.html

Sirota's a serial exaggerationist, but even assuming everything he says is 100% true, how does that excuse the IRS's systematic exclusion of an entire political movement?

I could point out similar onesie-twosie stories to these from the Clinton administration as well. But then we'd further degenerate into what you're doing. Using the possibility of past wrongdoing to excuse the current (and far more widespread)

You do realize that your approach, left unchecked, would only lead to more and more brazen rounds of abuse next time.

For the record, I don't want my government involved in any of these kinds of things. The irony you're missing is that these are the same IRS hacks you guys are depending on to expand federal influence even further, even in effect becoming our neighborhood health police. The IRS shouldn't be monitoring speech at all to decide who does or doesn't get a cookie. It defies the meaning of the 1st amendment.

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 01:36 PM
Sirota's a serial exaggerationist, but even assuming everything he says is 100% true, how does that excuse the IRS's systematic exclusion of an entire political movement?

I could point out similar onesie-twosie stories to these from the Clinton administration as well. But then we'd further degenerate into what you're doing. Using the possibility of past wrongdoing to excuse the current (and far more widespread)

You do realize that your approach, left unchecked, would only lead to more and more brazen rounds of abuse next time.
For the record, I don't want my government involved in any of these kinds of things. The irony you're missing is that these are the same IRS hacks you guys are depending on to expand federal influence even further, even in effect becoming our neighborhood health police. The IRS shouldn't be monitoring speech at all to decide who does or doesn't get a cookie. It defies the meaning of the 1st amendment.

Ok, if you wanna go down that road, then the GOP should also hold hearings on bush using the FBI as well don't you think?

houghtam
05-15-2013, 01:46 PM
Sirota's a serial exaggerationist, but even assuming everything he says is 100% true, how does that excuse the IRS's systematic exclusion of an entire political movement?

I could point out similar onesie-twosie stories to these from the Clinton administration as well. But then we'd further degenerate into what you're doing. Using the possibility of past wrongdoing to excuse the current (and far more widespread)

You do realize that your approach, left unchecked, would only lead to more and more brazen rounds of abuse next time.

For the record, I don't want my government involved in any of these kinds of things. The irony you're missing is that these are the same IRS hacks you guys are depending on to expand federal influence even further, even in effect becoming our neighborhood health police. The IRS shouldn't be monitoring speech at all to decide who does or doesn't get a cookie. It defies the meaning of the 1st amendment.

Exactly. Which is why turning this into a R vs. D thing is the height of imbecility. Thinking this will have any effect on the elections is the height of imbecility.

If you were truly serious about your stance on the things I bolded, you wouldn't be participating in that argument, you would be discussing how best to reform the current system to shield from further abuses, regardless of party.

But look at your posts. You're one of the ringleaders in the fingerpointing. Methinks you don't actually believe the way you want us to think you do.

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 01:51 PM
Ok, if you wanna go down that road, then the GOP should also hold hearings on bush using the FBI as well don't you think?

Maybe. If it happened as described.

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 02:00 PM
If you were truly serious about your stance on the things I bolded, you wouldn't be participating in that argument, you would be discussing how best to reform the current system to shield from further abuses, regardless of party..

You kids are funny. One says we shouldn't comment at all until every fact is out on the table. The other says we should only talk about how to fix a problem we don't even fully understand yet because all the facts aren't out on the table.

I don't usually subscribe to the further-regulate-and-reform approach to this sort of thing. Government runs farthest amok when it is charged to do things it never should have been doing in the first place.

The mere fact that they have to ask "what kind of speech is tax exempt" is your first clue that something isn't quite right.

Requiem
05-15-2013, 02:07 PM
CNN is reporting that they have identified two "rogue" employees who began this adventure after the Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United.

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 02:11 PM
Mark my words,these so called "scandals" will amount to nothing but a political witch hunt.

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 02:15 PM
You kids are funny. One says we shouldn't comment at all until every fact is out on the table. The other says we should only talk about how to fix a problem we don't even fully understand yet because all the facts aren't out on the table.

I don't usually subscribe to the further-regulate-and-reform approach to this sort of thing. Government runs farthest amok when it is charged to do things it never should have been doing in the first place.

The mere fact that they have to ask "what kind of speech is tax exempt" is your first clue that something isn't quite right.

Oh please...the righties are calling for impeachemnt. Quit being a drama queen.

Smiling Assassin27
05-15-2013, 02:22 PM
This dude's a genius:

As directed, Ryun followed up with the IRS in April 2012, and was told that Media Trackers' application was still under review.

When September 2012 arrived with still no word from the IRS, Ryun determined that Media Trackers would likely never obtain standalone non-profit status, and he tried a new approach: Starting over. He applied for permanent non-profit status for a separate group called Greenhouse Solutions, a pre-existing organization that was reaching the end of its determination period.

The IRS approved Greenhouse Solutions' request for non-profit status in three weeks.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/conservative-activist-green-name-gets-irs-stamp-approval-193457897.html

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 02:39 PM
When the IRS targeted liberals


While few are defending the Internal Revenue Service for targeting some 300 conservative groups, there are two critical pieces of context missing from the conventional wisdom on the “scandal.” First, at least from what we know so far, the groups were not targeted in a political vendetta — but rather were executing a makeshift enforcement test (an ugly one, mind you) for IRS employees tasked with separating political groups not allowed to claim tax-exempt status, from bona fide social welfare organizations. Employees are given almost zero official guidance on how to do that, so they went after Tea Party groups because those seemed like they might be political. Keep in mind, the commissioner of the IRS at the time was a Bush appointee.

The second is that while this is the first time this kind of thing has become a national scandal, it’s not the first time such activity has occurred.

“I wish there was more GOP interest when I raised the same issue during the Bush administration, where they audited a progressive church in my district in what look liked a very selective way,” California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff said on MSNBC Monday. “I found only one Republican, [North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones], that would join me in calling for an investigation during the Bush administration. I’m glad now that the GOP has found interest in this issue and it ought to be a bipartisan concern.”The well-known church, All Saints Episcopal in Pasadena, became a bit of a cause célèbre on the left after the IRS threatened to revoke the church’s tax-exempt status over an anti-Iraq War sermon the Sunday before the 2004 election. “Jesus [would say], ‘Mr. President, your doctrine of preemptive war is a failed doctrine,’” rector George Regas said from the dais.The church, which said progressive activism was in its “DNA,” hired a powerful Washington lawyer and enlisted the help of Schiff, who met with the commissioner of the IRS twice and called for a Government Accountability Office investigation, saying the IRS audit violated the First Amendment and was unduly targeting a political opponent of the Bush administration. “My client is very concerned that the close coordination undertaken by the IRS allowed partisan political concerns to direct the course of the All Saints examination,” church attorney Marcus Owens, who is widely considered one of the country’s leading experts on this area of the law, said at the time. In 2007, the IRS closed the case, decreeing that the church violated rules preventing political intervention, but it did not revoke its nonprofit status.

And while All Saints came under the gun, conservative churches across the country were helping to mobilize voters for Bush with little oversight. In 2006, citing the precedent of All Saints, “a group of religious leaders accused the Internal Revenue Service yesterday of playing politics by ignoring its complaint that two large churches in Ohio are engaging in what it says are political activities, in violation of the tax code,” the New York Times reported at the time. The churches essentially campaigned for a Republican gubernatorial candidate, they alleged, and even flew him on one of their planes.

Meanwhile, Citizens for Ethics in Washington filed two ethics complaints against a church in Minnesota. “You know we can’t publicly endorse as a church and would not for any candidate, but I can tell you personally that I’m going to vote for Michele Bachmann,” pastor Mac Hammond of the Living Word Christian Center in Minnesota said in 2006 before welcoming her to the church. The IRS opened an audit into the church, but it went nowhere after the church appealed the audit on a technicality.

And it wasn’t just churches. In 2004, the IRS went after the NAACP, auditing the nation’s oldest civil rights group after its chairman criticized President Bush for being the first sitting president since Herbert Hoover not to address the organization. “They are saying if you criticize the president we are going to take your tax exemption away from you,” then-chairman Julian Bond said. “It’s pretty obvious that the complainant was someone who doesn’t believe George Bush should be criticized, and it’s obvious of their response that the IRS believes this, too.”In a letter to the IRS, Democratic Reps. Charles Rangel, Pete Stark and John Conyers wrote: “It is obvious that the timing of this IRS examination is nothing more than an effort to intimidate the members of the NAACP, and the communities the organization represents, in their get-out-the-vote effort nationwide.”

Then, in 2006, the Wall Street Journal broke the story of a how a little-known pressure group called Public Interest Watch — which received 97 percent of its funds from Exxon Mobile one year — managed to get the IRS to open an investigation into Greenpeace. Greenpeace had labeled Exxon Mobil the “No. 1 climate criminal.” The IRS acknowledged its audit was initiated by Public Interest Watch and threatened to revoke Greenpeace’s tax-exempt status, but closed the investigation three months later.

As the Journal reporter, Steve Stecklow, later said in an interview, “This comes against a backdrop where a number of conservative groups have been attacking nonprofits and NGOs over their tax-exempt status. There have been hearings on Capitol Hill. There have been a number of conservative groups in Washington who have been quite critical.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/when_the_irs_targeted_liberals/

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 02:43 PM
Hypocrisy,is something the right doesn't worry about.

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 02:44 PM
Check out the date righties:wave:


Democrats Were Targets in Inquiries, Panel Is Told
By PHILIP SHENON
Published: October 24, 2007

WASHINGTON, Oct. 23 — Richard L. Thornburgh, attorney general in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, charged Tuesday that political reasons motivated the Justice Department to open corruption investigations against Democrats in Mr. Thornburgh’s home state, Pennsylvania.

In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Mr. Thornburgh became the first former Republican attorney general to join with Democratic lawmakers to suggest that the Justice Department under Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales had singled out Democratic politicians for prosecution.
“The citizens of the United States must have confidence that the department is conducting itself in a fair and impartial manner without actual political influence or the appearance of political influence,” said Mr. Thornburgh, who is now in private practice. He is defending the former elected Democratic

His unusually harsh criticism of fellow Republicans was directed specifically at the United States attorney in Pittsburgh, Mary Beth Buchanan, who was director of the Executive Office of United States Attorneys, based in Washington, in 2004 and 2005. That office has come under scrutiny for its role in the dismissal of United States attorneys last year, in some cases for what appear to have been partisan reasons.

“It has been and remains the practice of the United States Attorney’s Office to investigate and prosecute individuals who violate federal law without regard to their political affiliation,” Ms. Buchanan said in a written statement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/washington/24prosecute.html?_r=1&

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 02:45 PM
Hypocrisy,is something the right doesn't worry about.

Yep.where is Barry? that guy loves to scream hypocrisy.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 02:46 PM
You kids are funny. One says we shouldn't comment at all until every fact is out on the table. The other says we should only talk about how to fix a problem we don't even fully understand yet because all the facts aren't out on the table.

I don't usually subscribe to the further-regulate-and-reform approach to this sort of thing. Government runs farthest amok when it is charged to do things it never should have been doing in the first place.

The mere fact that they have to ask "what kind of speech is tax exempt" is your first clue that something isn't quite right.

Please elaborate. What exactly is the government not supposed to be doing in this case? Offering tax exemptions? Or should they offer exemptions to any organization that applies for it? Or are you insinuating that the government has no business taxing at all?

I'm curious to hear your response. A direct response would be nice, but I will settle for one of your traditional skip-to-my-loo responses.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 02:51 PM
Yep.where is Barry? that guy loves to scream hypocrisy.

No doubt.

He'll be on here in a day or two after these posts have fallen back a few pages and he thinks everyone has forgotten about them. Then he'll come in here and make his usual claims, not responding directly to anyone and shouting loudly in the general direction of the right (but about the left, of course), as if none of it had already been pointed out.

It's his MO. He's one of those yippy dogs everyone in the neighborhood wants to step on, but the two neighbors on either side don't say anything about so they don't piss off the owner.

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 02:53 PM
CNN is reporting that they have identified two "rogue" employees who began this adventure after the Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United.

Right, we will never know who they are and they will voluntarily resign and receive 10 years severance pay with automatic pay raise adjustments and then be allowed to take full retirement with benefits for life.

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 02:56 PM
hey pony are you aoutraged about the abuse of government power during the bush years? A simple yes or no would suffice.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 02:57 PM
Right, we will never know who they are and they will voluntarily resign and receive 10 years severance pay with automatic pay raise adjustments and then be allowed to take full retirement with benefits for life.

Sounds a lot like Nixon.

Smiling Assassin27
05-15-2013, 03:07 PM
Ali Weinberg ‏@AliNBCNews 2m

Holder: "I haven't been treated with a lot of respect... this isn't a personal thing, but I am the Attorney General of the United States!"

That is frickin' priceless.

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 03:08 PM
Please elaborate. What exactly is the government not supposed to be doing in this case? Offering tax exemptions? Or should they offer exemptions to any organization that applies for it? Or are you insinuating that the government has no business taxing at all?

I'm curious to hear your response. A direct response would be nice, but I will settle for one of your traditional skip-to-my-loo responses.

Two separate questions. I personally don't believe the government should tax any non-profit.

But if it's deemed necessary to do so, it certainly shouldn't be based on some fluid government definition of community benefit. That's always in the eye of the beholder (and always subject to abuse) It would be better to tax all non-profits than it is to selectively subject some of them to some kind of political purity test.

You're either a for-profit, or you aren't. The rationale is really none of the government's business.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 03:16 PM
Two separate questions. I personally don't believe the government should tax any non-profit.

But if it's deemed necessary to do so, it certainly shouldn't be based on some fluid government definition of community benefit. That's always in the eye of the beholder (and always subject to abuse) It would be better to tax all non-profits than it is to selectively subject some of them to some kind of political purity test.

You're either a for-profit, or you aren't. The rationale is really none of the government's business.

I agree, and since it's nearly impossible to distinguish how non-profits use their money, and to keep them from accepting money they use in political activity, I say tax them all.

Tax the NAACP.

Tax PETA.

Tax all churches.

Tax, tax, tax. They're already politically active, and everyone knows it. The box is already opened. Might as well get the money while we can.

Smiling Assassin27
05-15-2013, 03:16 PM
President Barack Obama’s executive staff reviewed Watchdog’s news website in record numbers at precisely the moment when Internal Revenue Service visits to the same site spiked, Watchdog.org’s analytics show.

A similar report reveals that the Executive Office of the President and IRS were the source of a similar December traffic spike on the website of Watchdog.org, the online news network of the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity. (Updated: an earlier version of this incorrectly reported that traffic spiked in January.)

The White House has said that IRS reviews of conservative nonprofits were procedurally “inappropriate on the part of fairly low-level agents.

This new data suggests at least a coincidence of interests in Watchdog.

Man, the president's gonna be ticked when he watches the news and finds out about this.

http://watchdog.org/84833/white-house-irs-staff-showed-sudden-interest-in-watchdog-in-january/

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 03:18 PM
IRS official Lerner speedily approved exemption for Obama brother’s ‘charity’

Lois Lerner, the senior IRS official at the center of the decision to target tea party groups for burdensome tax scrutiny, signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a shady charity headed by the president’s half-brother that operated illegally for years.

According to the organization’s filings, Lerner approved the foundation’s tax status within a month of filing, an unprecedented timeline that stands in stark contrast to conservative organizations that have been waiting for more than three years, in some cases, for approval.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-official-lerner-approved-exemption-for-obama-brothers-charity/

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 03:23 PM
IRS official Lerner speedily approved exemption for Obama brother’s ‘charity’

Lois Lerner, the senior IRS official at the center of the decision to target tea party groups for burdensome tax scrutiny, signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a shady charity headed by the president’s half-brother that operated illegally for years.

According to the organization’s filings, Lerner approved the foundation’s tax status within a month of filing, an unprecedented timeline that stands in stark contrast to conservative organizations that have been waiting for more than three years, in some cases, for approval.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-official-lerner-approved-exemption-for-obama-brothers-charity/

were any of the tea baggers denied tax exempt status?

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 03:32 PM
let's say there is a group called Teabaggers R Us, and they hold rallies, and HIRE speakers and celebrities. Then they want to be tax exempt. How should these groups not be scrutinized again?

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 03:36 PM
let's say there is a group called Teabaggers R Us, and they hold rallies, and HIRE speakers and celebrities. Then they want to be tax exempt. How should these groups not be scrutinized again?

What about any of that would disqualify them? Were the speakers saying things you no like?

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 03:45 PM
were any of the tea baggers denied tax exempt status?

If a black person comes into a store and asks for help, but they just ignore him until he leaves, did they refuse to sell to him?

If a white person comes in and instantly gets help would that show them to be playing favorites and unfairly treating blacks?

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 03:48 PM
What about any of that would disqualify them? Were the speakers saying things you no like?

My point is these groups have a ton of cash, why should they just be tax exempt?

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 03:49 PM
If a black person comes into a store and asks for help, but they just ignore him until he leaves, did they refuse to sell to him?

If a white person comes in and instantly gets help would that show them to be playing favorites and unfairly treating blacks?

are you high again?

Requiem
05-15-2013, 03:49 PM
Right, we will never know who they are and they will voluntarily resign and receive 10 years severance pay with automatic pay raise adjustments and then be allowed to take full retirement with benefits for life.

You should read up on CSRS and FERS before sounding like a retard.

Rigs11
05-15-2013, 03:54 PM
If a black person comes into a store and asks for help, but they just ignore him until he leaves, did they refuse to sell to him?

If a white person comes in and instantly gets help would that show them to be playing favorites and unfairly treating blacks?

are you high again?

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 04:00 PM
My point is these groups have a ton of cash, why should they just be tax exempt?

Many charities and non-profits have tons of cash. Bill Gates' foundation is tax exempt, as are all of Warren Buffett's various shelt... err I mean "charities" :)

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 04:01 PM
Just answer it. You seem to think its ok for the IRS to stall, not serve, hinder conservative apps as long as they don't outright say no we don't serve you.

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 04:04 PM
are you high again?

Yeah but were my brain cells ever actually denied the THC?

cutthemdown
05-15-2013, 04:04 PM
My point is these groups have a ton of cash, why should they just be tax exempt?

LOL you should get high. You're kidding right? How much money they have has nothing to do with whether or not you get tax exempt status. Are you that stupid?

Smiling Assassin27
05-15-2013, 04:29 PM
acting IRS director 'resigns at president's request'. huh, i thought the president said the IRS was independent.

Smiling Assassin27
05-15-2013, 04:35 PM
IRS officials refused to grant tax exempt status two pro-life organizations because of their position on the abortion issue, according to a non-profit law firm, which said that one group was pressured not to protest a pro-choice organization that endorsed President Obama during the last election.

“In one case, the IRS withheld approval of an application for tax exempt status for Coalition for Life of Iowa. In a phone call to Coalition for Life of Iowa leaders on June 6, 2009, the IRS agent ‘Ms. Richards’ told the group to send a letter to the IRS with the entire board’s signatures stating that, under perjury of the law, they do not picket/protest or organize groups to picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood,” the Thomas More Society announced today. “Once the IRS received this letter, their application would be approved.”

Must be a coincidence that Planned Parenthood endorsed Obama. Nothing to see here, i'm sure.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/report-irs-denied-tax-exempt-status-to-pro-lifers-on-behalf-of-planned-parenthood/article/2529750

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 04:39 PM
acting IRS director 'resigns at president's request'. huh, i thought the president said the IRS was independent.

It is, the president can still fire the guy. Jobs at the IRS are not lifetime appointments.
BTW, you guys all know that the commissioner that all this happened under was a Republican appointee, appointed by GWB.

DenverBrit
05-15-2013, 04:41 PM
acting IRS director 'resigns at president's request'. huh, i thought the president said the IRS was independent.

Should he stay?


Treasury Secretary Jack Lew had sought and accepted Miller's resignation — something many Republicans had demanded.

TonyR
05-15-2013, 04:42 PM
Sirota's a serial exaggerationist...

So we should add him to your list of people you don't like and are always wrong and not to be believed or trusted because they don't always agree with you?


Using the possibility of past wrongdoing to excuse the current (and far more widespread)

Good grief, did you miss the very first line of the article?!?

As your kindergarten teacher probably told you, two wrongs do not make a right.

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 04:51 PM
Must be a coincidence that Planned Parenthood endorsed Obama. Nothing to see here, i'm sure.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/report-irs-denied-tax-exempt-status-to-pro-lifers-on-behalf-of-planned-parenthood/article/2529750

How the IRS, led by a GWB appointee, could do this is outrageous!

BroncoBeavis
05-15-2013, 04:58 PM
So we should add him to your list of people you don't like and are always wrong and not to be believed or trusted because they don't always agree with you?

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/16/lets_hope_the_boston_marathon_bomber_is_a_white_am erican/

Let’s hope the Boston Marathon bomber is a white American

Yes, please go ahead and chalk him up. Right ahead of Ezra, but behind Dr. Sullivan, tele-OBGYN. :)

ant1999e
05-15-2013, 06:06 PM
How the IRS, led by a GWB appointee, could do this is outrageous!

You're really trying aren't you?

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 06:14 PM
You're really trying aren't you?

The facts are what they are. BTW, has any of you been able to actually connect this to Obama? So far all that's been proven is that the IRS had a couple of bad apples.

ant1999e
05-15-2013, 07:45 PM
The facts are what they are. BTW, has any of you been able to actually connect this to Obama? So far all that's been proven is that the IRS had a couple of bad apples.

According to you it's Bush's fault. For some reason I'm not surprise with your conclusion.

Requiem
05-15-2013, 07:49 PM
Quoted from the little man that has no potential. Please get back with us when you are living any part of the American Dream.

Considering you are a middle-aged person spending a majority of your social time pissing in the ear of people half your age online, I don't know if you should be talking about potential. Must be a humbling feeling knowing that your "best" days aren't ahead of you and have already past you by, huh? Sure sounded like it when you told me stories about what you are doing with your life that you felt so bad about that you didn't want others on here to know.

At any case: Your version of the "American Dream" and mine are probably quite different. As it is for most people. That is how it sticks around, because it can re-invent itself. It may be a central ethos in American culture, but it is highly transient and the concept of what it means has greatly changed through the course of history in this country. Never really bought into the myth, but it is obvious you did. Big houses, business endeavors, big trucks, materialism and ownership, being all about yourself. You are pretty much like everyone else. Boring.

At its core, the old protestant belief and fables of going from rages to riches -- emphasizing individualism is highly contestable. I could begin to talk about coercive and mimetic isomorphism, elite theory, marginalization, mobility, etc. but it would be a waste of my time because we would get into areas that require high intellect that you would be unable to participate in because you are not an educated person and lack the critical thinking skills necessary to engage in such talks.

I am a firm believer in having your own dreams, sets of goals and lists of things to accomplish. Fortunately, I was raised well enough to not get in competition with the Jones' and am smart enough to avoid the pitfalls socially and economically that plague this society. Very pleased with my life experiences so far and am stoked for what is to come. I know I will get to where I am going . . . :) and I definitely know I won't be a miserable middle-aged malcontent such as yourself demonstrating your behavior 20 to 30 years down the road. :flower:

ant1999e
05-15-2013, 08:53 PM
:clown:

peacepipe
05-15-2013, 08:54 PM
According to you it's Bush's fault. For some reason I'm not surprise with your conclusion.

More likely it's neither gwb or Obama's fault.

Pony Boy
05-15-2013, 09:16 PM
Considering you are a middle-aged person spending a majority of your social time pissing in the ear of people half your age online, I don't know if you should be talking about potential. Must be a humbling feeling knowing that your "best" days aren't ahead of you and have already past you by, huh? Sure sounded like it when you told me stories about what you are doing with your life that you felt so bad about that you didn't want others on here to know.

At any case: Your version of the "American Dream" and mine are probably quite different. As it is for most people. That is how it sticks around, because it can re-invent itself. It may be a central ethos in American culture, but it is highly transient and the concept of what it means has greatly changed through the course of history in this country. Never really bought into the myth, but it is obvious you did. Big houses, business endeavors, big trucks, materialism and ownership, being all about yourself. You are pretty much like everyone else. Boring.

At its core, the old protestant belief and fables of going from rages to riches -- emphasizing individualism is highly contestable. I could begin to talk about coercive and mimetic isomorphism, elite theory, marginalization, mobility, etc. but it would be a waste of my time because we would get into areas that require high intellect that you would be unable to participate in because you are not an educated person and lack the critical thinking skills necessary to engage in such talks.

I am a firm believer in having your own dreams, sets of goals and lists of things to accomplish. Fortunately, I was raised well enough to not get in competition with the Jones' and am smart enough to avoid the pitfalls socially and economically that plague this society. Very pleased with my life experiences so far and am stoked for what is to come. I know I will get to where I am going . . . :) and I definitely know I won't be a miserable middle-aged malcontent such as yourself demonstrating your behavior 20 to 30 years down the road. :flower:

JFC…..Tiny Tim your really are a p***Y, the way I see it you spend half your life on the OM. Most guys your age are working their ass off to support a family but on the bright side we won’t have to worry about you pissing in the gene pool and passing your lazy ass DNA on to others.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 09:28 PM
JFC…..Tiny Tim your really are a p***Y, the way I see it you spend half your life on the OM. Most guys your age are working their ass off to support a family but on the bright side we won’t have to worry about you pissing in the gene pool and passing your lazy ass DNA on to others.

Good deflection, but he's pretty much right.

Your "potential", if there ever were any, was used up long ago. Now you'll just be another old POS with a bone to pick. Your only contribution to society will be the taxes you pay, which is kind of ironic, considering your ideology.

errand
05-15-2013, 09:39 PM
Everyone is wondering why the IRS would need to know what books people read or what they posted on their FaceBook pages....perhaps this explains why -

http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/14/irs-sent-confidential-info-on-conservatives-to-liberal-nonprofit-propublica/

spdirty
05-15-2013, 09:41 PM
At any case: Your version of the "American Dream" and mine are probably quite different. As it is for most people. That is how it sticks around, because it can re-invent itself. It may be a central ethos in American culture, but it is highly transient and the concept of what it means has greatly changed through the course of history in this country. Never really bought into the myth, but it is obvious you did. Big houses, business endeavors, big trucks, materialism and ownership, being all about yourself. You are pretty much like everyone else. Boring.

I am a firm believer in having your own dreams, sets of goals and lists of things to accomplish. Fortunately, I was raised well enough to not get in competition with the Jones' and am smart enough to avoid the pitfalls socially and economically that plague this society. Very pleased with my life experiences so far and am stoked for what is to come. I know I will get to where I am going . . . :)

I found this part of your quote interesting. I don't much care for the argument with pony boy, just curious as to what your goals in life and things to accomplish are. What is your American Dream?

I'll start since I asked first. For me, it's raising my boys right, strengthening my marriage, getting my house paid off, and strengthening the family business. Pretty simple and boring stuff I admit. But to me, once those things are accomplished, then my wife and I can move onto more exciting, fun goals. In fact accomplishing those 4 simple things are my American Dream. Curious as to what yours are.

Requiem
05-15-2013, 10:39 PM
JFC…..Tiny Tim your really are a p***Y, the way I see it you spend half your life on the OM.

You apparently don't see too well. I get a lot of downtime at work where I'm allowed to mosey on the forums because I do my job very well. Multi-tasking might be hard for you, but it comes naturally to me.

Most guys your age are working their ass off to support a family but on the bright side we won’t have to worry about you pissing in the gene pool and passing your lazy ass DNA on to others.

Except that really isn't the case. You wouldn't have a clue on what is going on with my generation. You are so far socially detached from anything that resembles reality that you don't really have a dog in this fight to make an assertion, but I will humor you.

There aren't many people in the Millennial generation at 26 who are popping out kids and having families. Out of all my high school and college friends, I can only think of a handful that are actually have families at this time. Things aren't like they used to be.

Most are enjoying themselves, pursuing graduate school aspirations or building a foundation for themselves to that in the future they can afford to have a family. Considering the economic climate for most recent graduates in my peer group and those forthcoming, having a family is simply something they cannot afford, and for most they just don't have an interest in.

I do know some people at my age (or younger) who are having families outside of marriage, get their girlfriends to be on WIC and social welfare programs to help pay for these things. Usually, these are the kids that didn't get **** rolling for them in high school, nor ever tried to better themselves. You would be more apt to direct your comments to them.

I will decide to have children when I am ready. I have a lot of things I want to do personally that would not be possible if I was tied down with a child. It was one of the primary reasons my ex and I aren't together because she wanted to start a family while in school and there was no chance in Hell I'd roll with that.

But keep it up man. You demonstrate every day how sad and pathetic of an individual you really are. Trying to attack me saying that I live in a basement (LOL), don't work (LOL) and all this other stuff, while passing off PM's to other people on the board trying to bring me down. What are you, a 16 year old girl? You read my posts and probably think I get all flustered and angry with your diatribe. I don't. I just laugh and smile knowing that I have been blessed to the point where I will never be as morose and empty as you are.

Requiem
05-15-2013, 11:04 PM
I found this part of your quote interesting. I don't much care for the argument with pony boy, just curious as to what your goals in life and things to accomplish are. What is your American Dream?

I'll start since I asked first. For me, it's raising my boys right, strengthening my marriage, getting my house paid off, and strengthening the family business. Pretty simple and boring stuff I admit. But to me, once those things are accomplished, then my wife and I can move onto more exciting, fun goals. In fact accomplishing those 4 simple things are my American Dream. Curious as to what yours are.

And that is a wonderful dream for you to have. There is nothing wrong with wanting to become a better spouse, raising your kids right, getting out of debt and making the central part of your income (I'd guess your family business is that) -- stronger. Those are all big parts of your life and you want to do your best to ensure stability for not only yourself, but your loved ones. It's an admirable thing.

I will preface the following with this: I do not see my life goals and aims as separate endeavors, but in a broader sense a system of experience.

Here I go. . .

To learn something new every day. Better myself with knowledge and become familiar with something I am completely foreign to. The pursuit of knowledge is something I hold in extremely high regard. I probably read a half of a book a day, and if it isn't a book, it's scholarly journals on topics I have significant interest in, such as politics and evolutionary anthropology. I do not take this opportunity for granted. Most people I know do. They'd rather play WoW all day or veg out in front of their televisions. Not my kind of thing.

To be there for my mom, dad, brothers, sister(s). I won't get too deep into this, but my immediate family is pretty fractured. I am the only person that talks to everyone out of the people I listed. I am in the middle of everything and have been as a child. I removed that being a burden from my life as I grew up and realized that regardless of bad blood between others, I can still have quality relationships with everyone -- and after years of work, I do. Family is sacred to me. It always has been, always will be. It is one of the reasons I love genaeology so much and have been working on a Family History book to be compiled and given to everyone. I believe that knowing your roots and where you came from is important. Obviously my ancestors (at some point in time) did too -- considering we have records and letters dating back several centuries.

I'd also like to get my DNA Haplogroups analyzed. There are a lot of reasons for this. I could anthro-geek out on you, but this is already going to be along post.

I also want to travel the world and spend time abroad immersing myself in different cultures and testing my own limits. This means living somewhere else for a while. See what the world is like outside of the USA. The best things in life aren't things, and I believe that getting as much out of my experience here as *me* is very important.

I write all the time. Music, poetry and books. I have projects for each of them. This July I get to go to Minneapolis to start recording songs I have been working on for twelve years. To finally get that done will be great. I have 40 or 50 page PDF of poetry I have written since I was a teenager that I am going to compile and self-publish. I am going to make them all unique and individual (no book/pamphlet) will be the same and sell them for a couple dollars. I am working on my first fiction novel and also doing an analysis of American Culture to use as a foundation towards graduate school aspirations.

I have aspirations to obtain at the minimum a Master's in one of the two majors I had in college, and if I play my cards right, a PhD. I am a versatile person who can do a lot of things, but I have known from a long time I wanted to either do research or teach. A lot of positions would allow me to do both. I am just very interested and good at those things. I connect with almost everyone, anybody from anywhere, despite age, origins, etc.

I give everyone a chance and thoroughly enjoy spending time with others. I also do a good job of encouraging others and like helping them reach their goals and get past their struggles. That is why I am such a well-liked person (not bragging, just being honest) and have a social circle that spans the entire globe. It is just too bad flying costs so much, otherwise I'd have already visited friends who have moved back to their homes in Europe, Asia, Africa and South America. Haven't made an Aussie friend yet!

If I had some sort of grand, materialistic goal, I would like to have an eco-friendly, modernized (different than usual architecture) either by a lake, ocean or in the mountains. I am tired of the plains. I want it to be able to be a place where family and friends are always welcome. A place of healing. A place to become educated. A place to jam out.

I just want to make the most out of my life and have a great ride.

That is just the tip of the iceberg. Hope that is suitable.

houghtam
05-15-2013, 11:18 PM
And that is a wonderful dream for you to have. There is nothing wrong with wanting to become a better spouse, raising your kids right, getting out of debt and making the central part of your income (I'd guess your family business is that) -- stronger. Those are all big parts of your life and you want to do your best to ensure stability for not only yourself, but your loved ones. It's an admirable thing.

I will preface the following with this: I do not see my life goals and aims as separate endeavors, but in a broader sense a system of experience.

Here I go. . .

To learn something new every day. Better myself with knowledge and become familiar with something I am completely foreign to. The pursuit of knowledge is something I hold in extremely high regard. I probably read a half of a book a day, and if it isn't a book, it's scholarly journals on topics I have significant interest in, such as politics and evolutionary anthropology. I do not take this opportunity for granted. Most people I know do. They'd rather play WoW all day or veg out in front of their televisions. Not my kind of thing.

To be there for my mom, dad, brothers, sister(s). I won't get too deep into this, but my immediate family is pretty fractured. I am the only person that talks to everyone out of the people I listed. I am in the middle of everything and have been as a child. I removed that being a burden from my life as I grew up and realized that regardless of bad blood between others, I can still have quality relationships with everyone -- and after years of work, I do. Family is sacred to me. It always has been, always will be. It is one of the reasons I love genaeology so much and have been working on a Family History book to be compiled and given to everyone. I believe that knowing your roots and where you came from is important. Obviously my ancestors (at some point in time) did too -- considering we have records and letters dating back several centuries.

I'd also like to get my DNA Haplogroups analyzed. There are a lot of reasons for this. I could anthro-geek out on you, but this is already going to be along post.

I also want to travel the world and spend time abroad immersing myself in different cultures and testing my own limits. This means living somewhere else for a while. See what the world is like outside of the USA. The best things in life aren't things, and I believe that getting as much out of my experience here as *me* is very important.

I write all the time. Music, poetry and books. I have projects for each of them. This July I get to go to Minneapolis to start recording songs I have been working on for twelve years. To finally get that done will be great. I have 40 or 50 page PDF of poetry I have written since I was a teenager that I am going to compile and self-publish. I am going to make them all unique and individual (no book/pamphlet) will be the same and sell them for a couple dollars. I am working on my first fiction novel and also doing an analysis of American Culture to use as a foundation towards graduate school aspirations.

I have aspirations to obtain at the minimum a Master's in one of the two majors I had in college, and if I play my cards right, a PhD. I am a versatile person who can do a lot of things, but I have known from a long time I wanted to either do research or teach. A lot of positions would allow me to do both. I am just very interested and good at those things. I connect with almost everyone, anybody from anywhere, despite age, origins, etc.

I give everyone a chance and thoroughly enjoy spending time with others. I also do a good job of encouraging others and like helping them reach their goals and get past their struggles. That is why I am such a well-liked person (not bragging, just being honest) and have a social circle that spans the entire globe. It is just too bad flying costs so much, otherwise I'd have already visited friends who have moved back to their homes in Europe, Asia, Africa and South America. Haven't made an Aussie friend yet!

If I had some sort of grand, materialistic goal, I would like to have an eco-friendly, modernized (different than usual architecture) either by a lake, ocean or in the mountains. I am tired of the plains. I want it to be able to be a place where family and friends are always welcome. A place of healing. A place to become educated. A place to jam out.

I just want to make the most out of my life and have a great ride.

That is just the tip of the iceberg. Hope that is suitable.

I don't see anything in there about making money.

YOU'RE A DRAIN ON SOCIETY BECAUSE YOUR GOALS DON'T INCLUDE MAKING MORE MONEY MONEY MONEY

ant1999e
05-15-2013, 11:24 PM
IRS Suspicion Widens: GOP Donors Question Audits

There is a widening circle of prominent Republican donors and activists stepping forward this week to declare that they were audited by the IRS, and many now are questioning if they were targeted for their political views.

"It makes you wonder," said Charlie Moncrief, a Texas oil executive who is raised more than $1 million for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential bid. "You just don't know. But given what's out there now, you have to ask the question."

The wave of mistrust on the part of prominent conservatives comes in response to a report by the IRS Inspector General's office published Tuesday that suggested the IRS singled out conservative advocacy groups -- specifically those with references to the Tea Party in their names -- for special scrutiny after they had applied for nonprofit status. The report has triggered a federal investigation into whether officials inside the taxing agency let political motives guide their actions.

Now Frank VanderSloot, an Idaho businessman who donated more than $1 million to groups supporting Romney, told ABC News he believes he may have been targeted for an audit after his opposition to the Obama administration. So did Hal Scherz, a physician who started the group Docs4PatientCare to lobby against President Obama's health care initiative, and became a vocal critic of the president on cable news programs. Franklin Graham, the son of the evangelist Billy Graham, said he believes his father was a target of unusual IRS scrutiny as well, according to published reports Wednesday.

Graham told Politico that groups founded by his famous father, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and the family's international humanitarian organization Samaritan's Purse, were both subjected to aggressive action by the IRS. In a letter to President Obama, which he shared with the news outlet, he wrote: "I do not believe that the IRS audit of our two organizations last year is a coincidence -- or justifiable."

So far, the suggestions of impropriety at the Internal Revenue Service have been limited to the agency's review of advocacy groups that had applied for nonprofit status. The IRS Inspector General's office has not signaled that political factors could have bled into audits of individuals and the IRS maintained in a letter to the Inspector General that its agents made no decisions "out of partisan or political viewpoint."

The IRS reiterated today that politics "play[s] no factor in audit selection."

"The IRS stresses that audits are based on the information contained on the tax return and the underlying tax law," the agency said. "The audit process is handled by career, non-partisan civil servants, and we have processes in place to safeguard the exam process."

But many of those in an already skeptical group of prominent conservatives are unconvinced.

"I happen to believe there are people inside the IRS who feel emboldened," said Cleta Mitchell, a Washington attorney who represents several of the conservative groups that were audited. "I've heard of several instances of donors to conservative causes who were audited. We need to find out if this is just random or if it's more than that."

Mitchell said she is hearing from a range of high-profile Republicans who want to know if their politics motivated the government's decision to audit them.

"I suspect that they looked at individuals as well," Scherz told ABC News. "It is odd that nothing changed on my tax return and I was never audited until I publicly criticized Obamacare."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/irs-suspicion-widens-gop-donors-question-audits/story?id=19184358#.UZRs5LXVAoM

Requiem
05-15-2013, 11:31 PM
I don't see anything in there about making money.

YOU'RE A DRAIN ON SOCIETY BECAUSE YOUR GOALS DON'T INCLUDE MAKING MORE MONEY MONEY MONEY

Hehe, why should I make something that isn't even real in the first place a goal? :O ;) But yeah, I know dude. I totally suck because I don't long for the greenbacks. There is a reason for that though.

It was the primary pursuit of my dad in life and it has made him absolutely miserable. He retired after 30 years of federal service, doesn't have a debt to his name and cash for days (like insane amounts, enough to be able to build a garage bigger than most people's houses just to store sports cars), but he is always upset, stressed and worried about something. All the money in the world can't make him happy. Want to know what the pathetic thing is? I made his business cards, brochures and website for his new business endeavor and he was low enough to ask me if I'd give him the family discount. I was pretty baffled by it. People with the most money are always the ****ing cheapest. I really feel bad for the guy. I guess it didn't mean that much to me, it was money coming in that I didn't expect, so whatever.

On a side note. . .

He once asked me when I left my job as a project manager in the legal realm, "How could you just walk away from a job that paid you a lot coming out of school and gave you great benefits?"

I looked at him and said, "I know a man pretty well who had the same thing going for him, but hated every day he walked into work for the 30 years he was there. It was the perfect example of what I didn't want to become."

Staying at that job would have given me a lot of money, but like I said, I don't give a ****. I did what I wanted to do, had a great time in Colorado and unfortunately had to come back home to bury three family members within a year because it was asked of me by my grandparents (the ones who died) to do so because they trusted me with carrying on their legacy.

So yeah, **** Pony Boy for trying to bring that **** up too. Not many people my age who are willing to put their lives on hold to help others. So yeah, Pony -- lick Wayne Newton's 9.

Fedaykin
05-15-2013, 11:36 PM
Hehe, why should I make something that isn't even real in the first place a goal? :O ;) But yeah, I know dude. I totally suck because I don't long for the greenbacks. There is a reason for that though.

It was the primary pursuit of my dad in life and it has made him absolutely miserable. He retired after 30 years of federal service, doesn't have a debt to his name and cash for days (like insane amounts, enough to be able to build a garage bigger than most people's houses just to store sports cars), but he is always upset, stressed and worried about something. All the money in the world can't make him happy. Want to know what the pathetic thing is? I made his business cards, brochures and website for his new business endeavor and he was low enough to ask me if I'd give him the family discount. I was pretty baffled by it. People with the most money are always the ****ing cheapest. I really feel bad for the guy. I guess it didn't mean that much to me, it was money coming in that I didn't expect, so whatever.

On a side note. . .

He once asked me when I left my job as a project manager in the legal realm, "How could you just walk away from a job that paid you a lot coming out of school and gave you great benefits?"

I looked at him and said, "I know a man pretty well who had the same thing going for him, but hated every day he walked into work for the 30 years he was there. It was the perfect example of what I didn't want to become."

Staying at that job would have given me a lot of money, but like I said, I don't give a ****. I did what I wanted to do, had a great time in Colorado and unfortunately had to come back home to bury three family members within a year because it was asked of me by my grandparents (the ones who died) to do so because they trusted me with carrying on their legacy.

So yeah, **** Pony Boy for trying to bring that **** up too. Not many people my age who are willing to put their lives on hold to help others. So yeah, Pony -- lick Wayne Newton's 9.


I have to agree with Houghtam here again. I see lots of sniveling above about trying to be a decent cultured human being or some such nonsense, but nothing about the only thing that matters: money.

Really need to get you priorities in order sonny.

cutthemdown
05-16-2013, 12:02 AM
We are going to need a complete audit of the IRS. This is going to be a big big job. They are going to have to look at all the audits of rich people and see if the govt was attacking way beyond just non profits.

ant1999e
05-16-2013, 12:06 AM
I'm not rich and I got audited in '10 and '11.

Fedaykin
05-16-2013, 01:26 AM
I'm not rich and I got audited in '10 and '11.

Why do you think you were audited?

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 08:52 AM
Good deflection, but he's pretty much right.

Your "potential", if there ever were any, was used up long ago. Now you'll just be another old POS with a bone to pick. Your only contribution to society will be the taxes you pay, which is kind of ironic, considering your ideology.


Yes, I contribute to society by paying a lot of taxes and BO wants even more. I also have 7 employees that depend on my wife and me to write them a paycheck every Friday, so they can raise a family or continue with their education and they all pay taxes and contribute to society.

What was you contribution to society again, studying Latin for 7 years and now selling popcorn at the movie theatre?

baja
05-16-2013, 09:03 AM
Yes, I contribute to society by paying a lot of taxes and BO wants even more. I also have 7 employees that depend on my wife and me to write them a paycheck every Friday, so they can raise a family or continue with their education and they all pay taxes and contribute to society.

What was you contribution to society again, studying Latin for 7 years and now selling popcorn at the movie theatre?

Hey now there is huge profit in theater pop corn. Hogheaven is a wonderful corporate fascist. He works in an industry that demands you enter their place of business without any form of nourishment than sells you 10 cents worth of pop corn for 8 dollars. And just for added insult they subject you to 10 minutes of commercials after you paid 12 dollars to see a film.

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 09:19 AM
And that is a wonderful dream for you to have. There is nothing wrong with wanting to become a better spouse, raising your kids right, getting out of debt and making the central part of your income (I'd guess your family business is that) -- stronger. Those are all big parts of your life and you want to do your best to ensure stability for not only yourself, but your loved ones. It's an admirable thing.

I will preface the following with this: I do not see my life goals and aims as separate endeavors, but in a broader sense a system of experience.

Here I go. . .

To learn something new every day. Better myself with knowledge and become familiar with something I am completely foreign to. The pursuit of knowledge is something I hold in extremely high regard. I probably read a half of a book a day, and if it isn't a book, it's scholarly journals on topics I have significant interest in, such as politics and evolutionary anthropology. I do not take this opportunity for granted. Most people I know do. They'd rather play WoW all day or veg out in front of their televisions. Not my kind of thing.

To be there for my mom, dad, brothers, sister(s). I won't get too deep into this, but my immediate family is pretty fractured. I am the only person that talks to everyone out of the people I listed. I am in the middle of everything and have been as a child. I removed that being a burden from my life as I grew up and realized that regardless of bad blood between others, I can still have quality relationships with everyone -- and after years of work, I do. Family is sacred to me. It always has been, always will be. It is one of the reasons I love genaeology so much and have been working on a Family History book to be compiled and given to everyone. I believe that knowing your roots and where you came from is important. Obviously my ancestors (at some point in time) did too -- considering we have records and letters dating back several centuries.

I'd also like to get my DNA Haplogroups analyzed. There are a lot of reasons for this. I could anthro-geek out on you, but this is already going to be along post.

I also want to travel the world and spend time abroad immersing myself in different cultures and testing my own limits. This means living somewhere else for a while. See what the world is like outside of the USA. The best things in life aren't things, and I believe that getting as much out of my experience here as *me* is very important.

I write all the time. Music, poetry and books. I have projects for each of them. This July I get to go to Minneapolis to start recording songs I have been working on for twelve years. To finally get that done will be great. I have 40 or 50 page PDF of poetry I have written since I was a teenager that I am going to compile and self-publish. I am going to make them all unique and individual (no book/pamphlet) will be the same and sell them for a couple dollars. I am working on my first fiction novel and also doing an analysis of American Culture to use as a foundation towards graduate school aspirations.

I have aspirations to obtain at the minimum a Master's in one of the two majors I had in college, and if I play my cards right, a PhD. I am a versatile person who can do a lot of things, but I have known from a long time I wanted to either do research or teach. A lot of positions would allow me to do both. I am just very interested and good at those things. I connect with almost everyone, anybody from anywhere, despite age, origins, etc.

I give everyone a chance and thoroughly enjoy spending time with others. I also do a good job of encouraging others and like helping them reach their goals and get past their struggles. That is why I am such a well-liked person (not bragging, just being honest) and have a social circle that spans the entire globe. It is just too bad flying costs so much, otherwise I'd have already visited friends who have moved back to their homes in Europe, Asia, Africa and South America. Haven't made an Aussie friend yet!

If I had some sort of grand, materialistic goal, I would like to have an eco-friendly, modernized (different than usual architecture) either by a lake, ocean or in the mountains. I am tired of the plains. I want it to be able to be a place where family and friends are always welcome. A place of healing. A place to become educated. A place to jam out.

I just want to make the most out of my life and have a great ride.

That is just the tip of the iceberg. Hope that is suitable.

You apparently don't see too well. I get a lot of downtime at work where I'm allowed to mosey on the forums because I do my job very well. Multi-tasking might be hard for you, but it comes naturally to me.


Wow if that's just the tip of the iceberg you must be a totally amazing busy guy, that's a lot of stuff put on your plate and now I understand why you would need a job with a lot of downtime. Let me guess it must be a government job because no private sector boss would say "we have nothing to do today and since you do such an awesome job Req, you can use the company computer to surf the net.

Also, do you know that there are a lot of liberals and conservatives that pursue the same intellectual and cultural goals as you say you do and they also work long hours, raise families and build financial security and contribute the society as a whole without downtime.

houghtam
05-16-2013, 09:23 AM
Hey now there is huge profit in theater pop corn. Hogheaven is a wonderful corporate fascist. He works in an industry that demands you enter their place of business without any form of nourishment than sells you 10 cents worth of pop corn for 8 dollars. And just for added insult they subject you to 10 minutes of commercials after you paid 12 dollars to see a film.

Ha! Take it up with the film companies, producers and distributors, chumps! Take a guess how much of your ticket price goes into the theater's pocket?

Man, that Everything You Wanted to Know About Movie Theaters thread is looking like a better idea every day... LOL

Isn't it cute when a used up condom tries to insult those still in the package?

BroncoBeavis
05-16-2013, 09:24 AM
Hey now there is huge profit in theater pop corn. Hogheaven is a wonderful corporate fascist. He works in an industry that demands you enter their place of business without any form of nourishment than sells you 10 cents worth of pop corn for 8 dollars. And just for added insult they subject you to 10 minutes of commercials after you paid 12 dollars to see a film.

Are we really arguing over movie theater prices?

Requiem
05-16-2013, 09:26 AM
I pay $5 for Friday Night Advance tickets for any show at our theater. Well worth it IMHO. It's like 8 bucks for nachos and water. So $13 bucks for a Friday night out. Fair to me.

baja
05-16-2013, 09:31 AM
Ha! Take it up with the film companies, producers and distributors, chumps! Take a guess how much of your ticket price goes into the theater's pocket?

Man, that Everything You Wanted to Know About Movie Theaters thread is looking like a better idea every day... LOL

Isn't it cute when a used up condom tries to insult those still in the package?

I see first run movies (most recently Oblivion ) for $5.60, that is a theater with huge recliners if I go to the regular theaters it's $3.50. Pop corn $2.40 for a bucket. My theater pays the same distributers

houghtam
05-16-2013, 09:36 AM
I see first run movies (most recently Oblivion ) for $5.60, that is a theater with huge recliners if I go to the regular theaters it's $3.50. Pop corn $2.40 for a bucket. My theater pays the same distributers

Yep, and the distributors charge different prices in different markets. They also charge different prices to different theater chains.

Requiem
05-16-2013, 09:40 AM
Wow if that's just the tip of the iceberg you must be a totally amazing busy guy

Yeah, very busy.

that's a lot of stuff put on your plate and now I understand why you would need a job with a lot of downtime.

Yep, it is. I have good time management skills though.

Let me guess it must be a government job because no private sector boss would say "we have nothing to do today and since you do such an awesome job Req, you can use the company computer to surf the net."

Once again, your reading comprehension is pretty poor. I can do this while doing my work. Can you walk and chew bubble gum at the same time? Probably not.

Also, do you know that there are a lot of liberals and conservatives that pursue the same intellectual and cultural goals as you say you do and they also work long hours, raise families and build financial security and contribute the society as a whole without downtime.

Do you even have a point or are you arguing just for the sake of arguing?

I don't care about what other people are doing. SPDIRTY asked me a question, I responded. Deal with it and find something better to do than trying to get your jollies by talking tough and trying to get under the skin of someone half your age.

Time to go weigh out that scrap metal. Get to work.

Requiem
05-16-2013, 09:47 AM
Aw man, Houghtam. They are insulting you again for knowing another language. You should be ashamed of yourself.

baja
05-16-2013, 09:55 AM
Aw man, Houghtam. They are insulting you again for knowing another language. You should be ashamed of yourself.

?

Rigs11
05-16-2013, 09:56 AM
so the rightards are still not wanting hearings to investigate the targeting of the NAACP and liberal church during the dubya years?

baja
05-16-2013, 10:00 AM
Why did we put a man on the moon before we realized it would be a good idea to make luggage with wheels?

BroncoBeavis
05-16-2013, 10:06 AM
so the rightards are still not wanting hearings to investigate the targeting of the NAACP and liberal church during the dubya years?

Have you done anything (other than quote a guy who openly wished the Boston Bomber was a WASP) to help us build up the foundation for outrage? :)

BroncoBeavis
05-16-2013, 10:08 AM
I see first run movies (most recently Oblivion ) for $5.60, that is a theater with huge recliners if I go to the regular theaters it's $3.50. Pop corn $2.40 for a bucket. My theater pays the same distributers

Are we supposed to be surprised that movies in the 3rd world are cheaper? :)

baja
05-16-2013, 10:10 AM
Are we supposed to be surprised that movies in the 3rd world are cheaper? :)

What might surprise you is Mexico is no longer a third world country.

BroncoBeavis
05-16-2013, 10:14 AM
What might surprise you is Mexico is no longer a third world country.

I know. But you get the point. :)

I do know this though. If anyone deserves (most of) the blame for Box Office prices, it's Hollywood.

Their cut in your part of the world is much lower than it is here.

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 10:18 AM
Aw man, Houghtam. They are insulting you again for knowing another language. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Ytray againway inway away angugelay ehay ancay uderstandway

Pick Six
05-16-2013, 10:23 AM
I have to agree with Houghtam here again. I see lots of sniveling above about trying to be a decent cultured human being or some such nonsense, but nothing about the only thing that matters: money.

Really need to get you priorities in order sonny.

Did you miss these two paragraphs?

Requiem wrote:

I write all the time. Music, poetry and books. I have projects for each of them. This July I get to go to Minneapolis to start recording songs I have been working on for twelve years. To finally get that done will be great. I have 40 or 50 page PDF of poetry I have written since I was a teenager that I am going to compile and self-publish. I am going to make them all unique and individual (no book/pamphlet) will be the same and sell them for a couple dollars. I am working on my first fiction novel and also doing an analysis of American Culture to use as a foundation towards graduate school aspirations.

I have aspirations to obtain at the minimum a Master's in one of the two majors I had in college, and if I play my cards right, a PhD. I am a versatile person who can do a lot of things, but I have known from a long time I wanted to either do research or teach. A lot of positions would allow me to do both. I am just very interested and good at those things. I connect with almost everyone, anybody from anywhere, despite age, origins, etc.

Rigs11
05-16-2013, 10:38 AM
Have you done anything (other than quote a guy who openly wished the Boston Bomber was a WASP) to help us build up the foundation for outrage? :)

there is this amazing thing called google. You should try it sometime.

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 10:49 AM
Well you have certainly used all the buzz words but I’ve got to say, if you handed me a resume with any of this crap in it, I would probably have a hard time reading it. I would be thinking WTF kind of rock did this clown crawl out from under.

Requiem’s Resume …..

“I have good time management skills”.
“Multi-tasking comes naturally to me”.
“I can do this while doing my work”.
“I don't long for the greenbacks”
“I also do a good job of encouraging others and like helping them reach their goals and get past their struggles”.
“I’m willing to put my life on hold to help others“.

And the deal breaker would be: “That is why I am such a well-liked person (not bragging, just being honest) and have a social circle that spans the entire globe.

Rohirrim
05-16-2013, 10:49 AM
Why did we put a man on the moon before we realized it would be a good idea to make luggage with wheels?

Probe too deeply into the eccentricities of mankind and you will go mad. ;D

Dr. Broncenstein
05-16-2013, 10:54 AM
Well you have certainly used all the buzz words but I’ve got to say, if you handed me a resume with any of this crap in it, I would probably have a hard time reading it. I would be thinking WTF kind of rock did this clown crawl out from under.

Requiem’s Resume …..

“I have good time management skills”.
“Multi-tasking comes naturally to me”.
“I can do this while doing my work”.
“I don't long for the greenbacks”
“I also do a good job of encouraging others and like helping them reach their goals and get past their struggles”.
“I’m willing to put my life on hold to help others“.

And the deal breaker would be: “That is why I am such a well-liked person (not bragging, just being honest) and have a social circle that spans the entire globe.

A legend in his own mind.

BroncoBeavis
05-16-2013, 10:59 AM
there is this amazing thing called google. You should try it sometime.

Yeah, that would be super fun. Your job is to make claims. My job is to GTFY.

Small problem... the IRS already admitted wrongdoing that significantly impacted many many organizations. Yet you place a single organization once being investigated (and cleared) on a similar level.

If you have an issue with audits in general... hey kumbaya, brother. Let's cut the IRS in half, go to a flat tax and stop taxing all non-profits. We'll cut those audits down to almost nothing in no time.

houghtam
05-16-2013, 11:01 AM
Aw man, Houghtam. They are insulting you again for knowing another language. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Yep. The used condom comment was intended for Puny Boy, not baja. Isn't it hilarious anytime people don't have a decent comeback for us, they have to resort to insulting our profession (or in my case, former profession)? You can smell the jealousy through the Internet tubez.

No need, guys. It's not a glamorous job, it was just an enjoyable means to an end. But you've definitely convinced me there's enough interest and little enough knowledge about the industry that I need to set some things straight. :)

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 11:18 AM
A legend in his own mind.

You're just jealous because he's been chatting online with hot babes all day.

No, sorry I ment multi-tasking not chatting online with hot babes and not all day just during down time and all while reading a half of a book a day......awesome.

TonyR
05-16-2013, 12:33 PM
This right here is why you have to take with a grain of salt everything that comes from these right wing sources at times like this:

...Once the scandal momentum gets going, however, people start in on all sorts of efforts to connect dots that may not have any necessary connection or even qualify as dots at all. Example: at the Daily Caller this morning, reporter Patrick Howley is out with a story headlined, “Embattled IRS official Lois Lerner’s husband’s law firm has strong Obama connections.”

Curious, I read on to see which law firm with strong Obama connections Lerner’s husband, an attorney named Michael Miles, is a member of. It turned out to be Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, a pillar of the Atlanta legal establishment known for its strong tax practice.

Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan is a so-called BigLaw firm. Per the American Lawyer’s profile, it has 387 lawyers and represents all sorts of clients, with an emphasis on corporate work across a wide range of industries.

So what’s the evidence that Sutherland has “strong Obama connections” or is tight with White House Democrats? Here it is: according to Howley, the firm:... Read the rest here:
http://overlawyered.com/2013/05/irs-scandal-the-daily-caller-fires-blank-lois-lerner/

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 01:08 PM
Eagles OL Evan Mathis Peeing on IRS Building Sign

I hope Mathis doesn’t owe any Taxes, because I am sure an audit is coming his way now.

32351

I guess this proves the research that political motivations may have evolutionary links to physical strength.

Men who are physically strong are more likely to take a right wing political stance, while weaker men are inclined to support the welfare state, according to a new study

baja
05-16-2013, 01:13 PM
hqw do you explain george bush than

BroncoInferno
05-16-2013, 01:21 PM
32351

I guess this proves the research that political motivations may have evolutionary links to physical strength.

Men who are physically strong are more likely to take a right wing political stance, while weaker men are inclined to support the welfare state, according to a new study

Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/intelligence-study-links-prejudice_n_1237796.html

Rigs11
05-16-2013, 01:25 PM
Yeah, that would be super fun. Your job is to make claims. My job is to GTFY.

Small problem... the IRS already admitted wrongdoing that significantly impacted many many organizations. Yet you place a single organization once being investigated (and cleared) on a similar level.

If you have an issue with audits in general... hey kumbaya, brother. Let's cut the IRS in half, go to a flat tax and stop taxing all non-profits. We'll cut those audits down to almost nothing in no time.

Yeah they did, because the righties have blown this out of proportion. this occurred under bush and you didn't hear a peep. Even from that damn liberal media. correct?Keep whining and crying though.

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 01:26 PM
hqw do you explain george bush than


The only left wing liberal that could whip George Bush's ass would be Hillary and she doesn't count because women were not included in the study.


FYI baja, I'm setting on my deck and toasting an Oliva Master Blend 3 Churchill, I picked a couple up at the golf course yesterday. It's an excellent smoke, I would like to try one that aged in the humidor for a while.

TonyR
05-16-2013, 01:27 PM
Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/intelligence-study-links-prejudice_n_1237796.html

Notice, for example, how Pony Boy wasn't even smart enough to post a link to the source of what he posted. He probably thinks tough guys plagiarize whereas weak ones don't.

cutthemdown
05-16-2013, 01:34 PM
Obamas refusing to name an outside investigator so I call BS. Of course he wants his lackey Holder to do it then say nothing to see here.

So much for Obama being different.

Requiem
05-16-2013, 01:35 PM
Well you have certainly used all the buzz words but I’ve got to say, if you handed me a resume with any of this crap in it, I would probably have a hard time reading it. I would be thinking WTF kind of rock did this clown crawl out from under.

Requiem’s Resume …..

“I have good time management skills”.
“Multi-tasking comes naturally to me”.
“I can do this while doing my work”.
“I don't long for the greenbacks”
“I also do a good job of encouraging others and like helping them reach their goals and get past their struggles”.
“I’m willing to put my life on hold to help others“.

And the deal breaker would be: “That is why I am such a well-liked person (not bragging, just being honest) and have a social circle that spans the entire globe.

Do you think I would ever waste my time applying to a guy who runs a scrapyard?

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 01:36 PM
Notice, for example, how Pony Boy wasn't even smart enough to post a link to the source of what he posted. He probably thinks tough guys plagiarize whereas weak ones don't.

It hard to plagiarize a picture unless you meant the one about the research and I think it has been posted in the past and I thought it was common knowledge that left wingers are the weak link, but here you go.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2325414/Men-physically-strong-likely-right-wing-political-views.html

Requiem
05-16-2013, 01:36 PM
Notice, for example, how Pony Boy wasn't even smart enough to post a link to the source of what he posted. He probably thinks tough guys plagiarize whereas weak ones don't.

It is quite obvious that he doesn't even read the links he posts to, just glosses over the title and slaps it around in threads. Reading? He ain't got time for that. (The truth is that his reading level is equivalent to that of a 12 year old.)

Requiem
05-16-2013, 01:38 PM
Did you miss these two paragraphs?

Requiem wrote:

I write all the time. Music, poetry and books. I have projects for each of them. This July I get to go to Minneapolis to start recording songs I have been working on for twelve years. To finally get that done will be great. I have 40 or 50 page PDF of poetry I have written since I was a teenager that I am going to compile and self-publish. I am going to make them all unique and individual (no book/pamphlet) will be the same and sell them for a couple dollars. I am working on my first fiction novel and also doing an analysis of American Culture to use as a foundation towards graduate school aspirations.

I have aspirations to obtain at the minimum a Master's in one of the two majors I had in college, and if I play my cards right, a PhD. I am a versatile person who can do a lot of things, but I have known from a long time I wanted to either do research or teach. A lot of positions would allow me to do both. I am just very interested and good at those things. I connect with almost everyone, anybody from anywhere, despite age, origins, etc.

The first indicates generating revenue from creative work(s). The second discusses what I would like to be down the road. Neither signify a thirst for money, they discuss means to acheive getting it. Another not-so-bright conservative on the board. You guys just prove Inferno's link over and over and over. Congratulations. The shoe fits -- wear it!

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 01:57 PM
Do you think I would ever waste my time applying to a guy who runs a scrapyard?

Not sure where you got the idea that I own a scrapyard but that's false. I wish I could say I owned a scrapyard because that's a hot business to be in. People are cleaning up America by dragging every piece of metal they can to the scrapyard. I passed through Paducah KY a few months back when they were holding barges and there were barges as far as the eye could see piled high with rusted scrap metal, unfortunately all the barges were bound for China. If you got out more often you would know these facts and not make fun of scrapyards.

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 02:03 PM
It is quite obvious that he doesn't even read the links he posts to, just glosses over the title and slaps it around in threads. Reading? He ain't got time for that. (The truth is that his reading level is equivalent to that of a 12 year old.)

At least I'm not going to post something like "I read a half a book a day" I don't think anyone belives that crap.....

Requiem
05-16-2013, 02:06 PM
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4743530353197732&pid=1.7

irony below

http://www.delmarscene.com/square.php/data/photos/familyponyboy.jpg
http://siteaboutstars.com/images/pony-boy-07.jpg
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4978842977960012&pid=1.7

baja
05-16-2013, 02:11 PM
The only left wing liberal that could whip George Bush's ass would be Hillary and she doesn't count because women were not included in the study.


FYI baja, I'm setting on my deck and toasting an Oliva Master Blend 3 Churchill, I picked a couple up at the golf course yesterday. It's an excellent smoke, I would like to try one that aged in the humidor for a while.

Nice

I stopped the cigars. I was burning through 4 and sometimes 5 a day.

Not hard to stop but I sure miss a good Cuban but I'm an all or nothing kind of a guy so had to take a break.

Requiem
05-16-2013, 02:13 PM
Afghani Blacks for cigars or GTFO.

Requiem
05-16-2013, 02:16 PM
Nice

I stopped the cigars. I was burning through 4 and sometimes 5 a day.

Not hard to stop but I sure miss a good Cuban but I'm an all or nothing kind of a guy so had to take a break.

Good on you for breaking a disgusting habit.

BroncoBeavis
05-16-2013, 02:17 PM
Yeah they did, because the righties have blown this out of proportion. this occurred under bush and you didn't hear a peep. Even from that damn liberal media. correct?Keep whining and crying though.

Again, because the IRS tracks and audits non-profits all the time. It's hard to make a story about a pattern of abuse out of one or two of them.

The IRS is ADMITTING to HUNDREDS. Just think about that. And as we've seen lately, what your government admits to is usually only the tip of the iceberg.

Requiem
05-16-2013, 02:23 PM
Not sure where you got the idea that I own a scrapyard but that's false. I wish I could say I owned a scrapyard because that's a hot business to be in. People are cleaning up America by dragging every piece of metal they can to the scrapyard. I passed through Paducah KY a few months back when they were holding barges and there were barges as far as the eye could see piled high with rusted scrap metal, unfortunately all the barges were bound for China. If you got out more often you would know these facts and not make fun of scrapyards.

You own something that sucks. Don't remember what you told me, but I was like, "Oh damn, pretty worthless." -- So I thought of scrapyard.

At least I'm not going to post something like "I read a half a book a day" I don't think anyone belives that crap.....

Of course you don't want to believe it. Being well read obviously doesn't matter to you, but it must suck knowing that there are other people in this world who in a few months time, learn more through books than you have trying to do so in your entire lifetime.

Half a book is nothing. There are courses @ university that have you do 100 page PDF's every day because you will be tested on them the next day. Sorry you don't display initiative towards pursuit of knowledge. You would rather indulge in stogies, drinking and golfing. Wee.

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 02:28 PM
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4743530353197732&pid=1.7

irony below

http://www.delmarscene.com/square.php/data/photos/familyponyboy.jpg
http://siteaboutstars.com/images/pony-boy-07.jpg
http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4978842977960012&pid=1.7

Hilarious! Stop it, that cuts deep and really hurts my feelings, you are just a cyber bully Hilarious!........ and you accuse me of acting like I'm 12 years old .........

baja
05-16-2013, 02:34 PM
You own something that sucks. Don't remember what you told me, but I was like, "Oh damn, pretty worthless." -- So I thought of scrapyard.



Of course you don't want to believe it. Being well read obviously doesn't matter to you, but it must suck knowing that there are other people in this world who in a few months time, learn more through books than you have trying to do so in your entire lifetime.

Half a book is nothing. There are courses @ university that have you do 100 page PDF's every day because you will be tested on them the next day. Sorry you don't display initiative towards pursuit of knowledge. You would rather indulge in stogies, drinking and golfing. Wee.

You would rather indulge in stogies, drinking and golfing. Wee.

That's a bad thing??? You are young

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 02:46 PM
You would rather indulge in stogies, drinking and golfing. Wee.

That's a bad thing??? You are young

He left out the boat, my wife and I spend every weekend on our boat (weather permitting) I'm a beer man while my wife likes the margaritas in moderation. We don't tolerate anyone on the boat that drinks to get drunk.

You know you are a young punk when you look forward to NFL Draft to get totally ****faced and make an ass out yourself.

baja
05-16-2013, 02:50 PM
He left out the boat, my wife and I spend every weekend on our boat (weather permitting) I'm a beer man while my wife likes the margaritas in moderation. We don't tolerate anyone on the boat that drinks to get drunk.

You know you are a young punk when you look forward to NFL Draft to get totally ****faced and make an ass out yourself.

I enjoy reading a great deal but I never had a per day quota to fill nor do I glorify reading over other pleasures. Although I probably did when I was young and liberal LOL

Dr. Broncenstein
05-16-2013, 02:59 PM
He left out the boat, my wife and I spend every weekend on our boat (weather permitting) I'm a beer man while my wife likes the margaritas in moderation. We don't tolerate anyone on the boat that drinks to get drunk.

You know you are a young punk when you look forward to NFL Draft to get totally ****faced and make an ass out yourself.

Lol that Montee Ball pick was priceless.

Dr. Broncenstein
05-16-2013, 03:04 PM
He left out the boat, my wife and I spend every weekend on our boat (weather permitting) I'm a beer man while my wife likes the margaritas in moderation. We don't tolerate anyone on the boat that drinks to get drunk.

You know you are a young punk when you look forward to NFL Draft to get totally ****faced and make an ass out yourself.

Also, what is the carbon footprint for a 28 ft Cobalt with twin 350's and a summer of cigar smoke?

Pony Boy
05-16-2013, 03:16 PM
Also, what is the carbon footprint for a 28 ft Cobalt with twin 350's and a summer of cigar smoke?

Don't forget the gas grill with the bratts and hot links .....

Requiem
05-16-2013, 03:23 PM
You would rather indulge in stogies, drinking and golfing. Wee.

That's a bad thing??? You are young

Night putting.

Dr. Broncenstein
05-16-2013, 03:37 PM
Don't forget the gas grill with the bratts and hot links .....

I can't wait for lake season. De-winterizing next week. Look for the 24 ft Malibu with me and four kids wake surfing our way to global warming cove.

ant1999e
05-16-2013, 04:45 PM
Why do you think you were audited?

Just lucky I guess.

errand
05-16-2013, 05:41 PM
Boy, this **** just gets better and better doesn't it? no need to worry about anything right?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/irs-official-in-charge-during-tea-party-targeting-now-runs-health-care-office/

baja
05-16-2013, 05:53 PM
Boy, this **** just gets better and better doesn't it? no need to worry about anything right?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/irs-official-in-charge-during-tea-party-targeting-now-runs-health-care-office/

What a coincidence

BroncoBeavis
05-16-2013, 06:10 PM
Boy, this **** just gets better and better doesn't it? no need to worry about anything right?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/irs-official-in-charge-during-tea-party-targeting-now-runs-health-care-office/

Oh FFS.

errand
05-16-2013, 06:20 PM
What a coincidence

Coincidence? I think not.....

This woman might very well be the one who ordered the IRS clowns in Cincinnati to target conservative organizations...and now she's in charge basically of people's healthcare......I wonder if a conservative woman needing a heart transplant is deemed worthy of one in her eyes. But of course the leftists on here will say there's nothing to worry about.

Dr. Broncenstein
05-16-2013, 06:22 PM
Move along, citizen. Nothing to see here.

ant1999e
05-16-2013, 06:23 PM
Boy, this **** just gets better and better doesn't it? no need to worry about anything right?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/irs-official-in-charge-during-tea-party-targeting-now-runs-health-care-office/

Do you know why he has the gall to do this? Because these ****ing idiots will defend him to the death.

errand
05-16-2013, 06:25 PM
That's like putting Eric Holder in charge of investigating Fast and Furious......

cutthemdown
05-16-2013, 07:03 PM
Nice

I stopped the cigars. I was burning through 4 and sometimes 5 a day.

Not hard to stop but I sure miss a good Cuban but I'm an all or nothing kind of a guy so had to take a break.

They ain't crack! A good cigar takes about 40 minutes or more to smoke. Seriously you were smoking 5 quality stogies a day? That is a couple of hours of smoking the way I was shown how to do it.

My favorites are just Short Stories because i can finish one is say 20-25 minutes.

baja
05-16-2013, 07:59 PM
They ain't crack! A good cigar takes about 40 minutes or more to smoke. Seriously you were smoking 5 quality stogies a day? That is a couple of hours of smoking the way I was shown how to do it.

My favorites are just Short Stories because i can finish one is say 20-25 minutes.

Yep 40 to 50 minutes to smoke a good cigar properly - course I was multi tasking. ;D

Stopping cigars is nothing like the torture of quitting cigarettes.

I quit a cigarette habit over twenty years ago and it was the hardest habit to get over by far. Harder than alcohol harder than cocaine.

cutthemdown
05-16-2013, 11:01 PM
My drummer and my keyboard/organ player into cigars big time. I usually don't take one from them because I sort of only smoke them because other people do and the ones they smoke so expensive. So thats why those short stories work well for me.

They do say ciggs harder then cocaine and alcohol to quit. The body really craves that nicotine.

I can say no to alcohol easy. Hard drugs I only messed with as a kid. Ciggs never liked them. But...........marijuana really takes the edge off of stress. I think I got hooked on weed because I had such bad stage fright when i first started playing live. Weed helped me just forget about the crowd and play. Now I sort of just smoke it without thinking but am realizing I have to cut back or maybe quit altogether. Going to be 44 soon and its sort of embarassing to admit I smoke so much. Whats funny is all the attorneys at the office get high and drink like fish. I think they set a bad example for me lol.

Also I like to just roll a fatty and smoke that with them while they smoke their cigars at gigs. Its the only thing that smells above and beyond pot lol.

cutthemdown
05-16-2013, 11:03 PM
We need a special investigator to look at the IRS and the AP news problem. Benghazzi IMO should just wrap up. Whatever damage the dems are going to get from it is about limited at this point. Carrying on too hard will just backfire.

But everyone can get behind investigating the IRS and even dems in Congress pisssed about the AP news story. I think there is still some meat on those bones.

It will be a great way to take up Obama energy heading into the midterms. It derails his agenda and puts him on defense.

baja
05-16-2013, 11:09 PM
My drummer and my keyboard/organ player into cigars big time. I usually don't take one from them because I sort of only smoke them because other people do and the ones they smoke so expensive. So thats why those short stories work well for me.

They do say ciggs harder then cocaine and alcohol to quit. The body really craves that nicotine.

I can say no to alcohol easy. Hard drugs I only messed with as a kid. Ciggs never liked them. But...........marijuana really takes the edge off of stress. I think I got hooked on weed because I had such bad stage fright when i first started playing live. Weed helped me just forget about the crowd and play. Now I sort of just smoke it without thinking but am realizing I have to cut back or maybe quit altogether. Going to be 44 soon and its sort of embarassing to admit I smoke so much. Whats funny is all the attorneys at the office get high and drink like fish. I think they set a bad example for me lol.

Also I like to just roll a fatty and smoke that with them while they smoke their cigars at gigs. Its the only thing that smells above and beyond pot lol.


That is the curious part. Cigars have far more nicotine than cigarettes yet they are far less addictive. The only explanation is the cigarette manufactures are adding some other addictive substance/s to the cigs.

baja
05-16-2013, 11:20 PM
PS as wonderful as the blessed herb Santa Maria is over use or miss-use will diminish one's creativity and uniqueness.

cutthemdown
05-16-2013, 11:22 PM
That is the curious part. Cigars have far more nicotine than cigarettes yet they are far less addictive. The only explanation is the cigarette manufactures are adding some other addictive substance/s to the cigs.

No because you only slightly inhale a cigar. Ciggs you take in deep to the lungs.

ant1999e
05-16-2013, 11:34 PM
We need a special investigator to look at the IRS and the AP news problem. Benghazzi IMO should just wrap up. Whatever damage the dems are going to get from it is about limited at this point. Carrying on too hard will just backfire.

But everyone can get behind investigating the IRS and even dems in Congress pisssed about the AP news story. I think there is still some meat on those bones.

It will be a great way to take up Obama energy heading into the midterms. It derails his agenda and puts him on defense.

I think that's what they want. That was their plan, distraction.

baja
05-16-2013, 11:34 PM
No because you only slightly inhale a cigar. Ciggs you take in deep to the lungs.

still high levels of nicotine enters the blood stream