IRS Poll Question

[jwlcosu]

Poll questions to come

 

[TheVictors]

E) The IRS targeted liberal groups when Dubya was President and this ain't the first or last time it will happen, despite the false indignation expressed by Fox News regarding the current Admin.

 

[Thumb]

What difference does it make? If your books are clean and square with nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear right?

 

[spockmaster]

F) I dont give a flying fuck either way.

 

[Monster]

I don't get this targeting thing. Were any of these groups denied their status? No. Were they harassed in any way? No. Did the IRS do anything with them that they wouldn't do to other groups? No. When hundreds of these stupid little groups pop up, of course they need to be investigated. In fact, get rid of all of them...liberal and conservative.

Oh and liberal groups were targeted by the IRS as well. Of course that is never reported, but it's true and you know it.

Just another conservative attempt at making the American people think that the Government is the enemy. Pathetic.

 

[TheVictors]

What difference does it make? If your books are clean and square with nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear right?

Remember it is also okay to wiretap US citizens, provided you're "fighting terrorism" because only those with something to hide would object to such a patent violation of Privacy.

Unless the President is Black.


Then it's not okay at all and part of a secret (terrorist?) agenda.

 

[tsmith7559]

I don't get this targeting thing. Were any of these groups denied their status? No. Were they harassed in any way? No. Did the IRS do anything with them that they wouldn't do to other groups? No. When hundreds of these stupid little groups pop up, of course they need to be investigated. In fact, get rid of all of them...liberal and conservative.

Oh and liberal groups were targeted by the IRS as well. Of course that is never reported, but it's true and you know it.

Just another conservative attempt at making the American people think that the Government is the enemy. Pathetic.

groups are still trying to get status after 4 years

 

[Michchamp]

groups are still trying to get status after 4 years

do they even deserve status? there are rules here. Conservatives have to play by them too. I know it seems unfair...

 

[Michchamp]

I remember reading about this "scandal" when retards first started crying about it. the facts don't seem to support the label of "scandal" though. There's nothing scandalous about it.

and beyond that, Fox, Breitbart, et al have failed to convince me why I should be more concerned about this "scandal" than any of those real scandals from 2001-2008 that they yawned and shrugged off. Or why the literal half-dozen people killed as a result of the Benghazi and Fast and Furious "scandals" are more troubling than the thousands killed as the result of an invasion of Iraq on false pretenses.

 

[JScottWriter]

Why should these "social welfare" groups(super PACS) be exempt from paying taxes? All they do is run negative ads. How do they even help society to be rewarded by not being taxed?

 

[Michchamp]

Why should these "social welfare" groups(super PACS) be exempt from paying taxes? All they do is run negative ads. How do they even help society to be rewarded by not being taxed?

They benefit society by providing us with the Holy Conservative Message, which is good for all of us, and will make us better people and a better nation.

not only exempt from paying taxes... exempt from scrutiny, exempt from disclosing the sources of their funding, and exempt from all election laws that may otherwise prevent them from doing and saying whatever they want, whenever they want, and wherever they want. If they cannot have those things, then they are victims.

 

[tsmith7559]

do they even deserve status? there are rules here. Conservatives have to play by them too. I know it seems unfair...

you would think that answer would have been made in 4 months, not yearss

 

[tsmith7559]

I remember reading about this "scandal" when retards first started crying about it. the facts don't seem to support the label of "scandal" though. There's nothing scandalous about it.

and beyond that, Fox, Breitbart, et al have failed to convince me why I should be more concerned about this "scandal" than any of those real scandals from 2001-2008 that they yawned and shrugged off. Or why the literal half-dozen people killed as a result of the Benghazi and Fast and Furious "scandals" are more troubling than the thousands killed as the result of an invasion of Iraq on false pretenses.

we had congressional vote and UN resolutions on Iraq..seems like congress is getting nothing but brick walls from the admin on all these scandals

 

[Michchamp]

we had congressional vote and UN resolutions on Iraq..seems like congress is getting nothing but brick walls from the admin on all these scandals

Fox News has always been very concerned about the separation of powers. that explains it.

 

[tsmith7559]

Fox News has always been very concerned about the separation of powers. that explains it.

Fox news?? why bring them up?

 

[Thumb]

we had congressional vote and UN resolutions on Iraq..seems like congress is getting nothing but brick walls from the admin on all these scandals

UN did not authorize the use of force or the invasion of Iraq. In fact, this is what they had to say about it... On September 16, 2004 Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, speaking on the invasion, said, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

Also, you Bush blow-jobbers keep bringing up the congressional vote like that's a thread stopper, yes, Congress, based on false and likely doctored intel voted to invade Iraq. But Congress was lied to, Dubya in numerous press conferences said they "know for a fact Iraq has WMD's".

Seems like you conveniently forget about all of that though when trying to justify the loss of US servicemen and trillions of dollars wasted. But keep telling us how Obama spends out of control. lulz, moron.

Btw, whats 2 years interest on $1000? anyone know?

 

[tsmith7559]

UN did not authorize the use of force or the invasion of Iraq. In fact, this is what they had to say about it... On September 16, 2004 Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, speaking on the invasion, said, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

Also, you Bush blow-jobbers keep bringing up the congressional vote like that's a thread stopper, yes, Congress, based on false and likely doctored intel voted to invade Iraq. But Congress was lied to, Dubya in numerous press conferences said they "know for a fact Iraq has WMD's".

Seems like you conveniently forget about all of that though when trying to justify the loss of US servicemen and trillions of dollars wasted. But keep telling us how Obama spends out of control. lulz, moron.





bill and hillary were all in on the invasion..

 

[Gulo Blue]

UN did not authorize the use of force or the invasion of Iraq. In fact, this is what they had to say about it... On September 16, 2004 Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, speaking on the invasion, said, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

Also, you Bush blow-jobbers keep bringing up the congressional vote like that's a thread stopper, yes, Congress, based on false and likely doctored intel voted to invade Iraq. But Congress was lied to, Dubya in numerous press conferences said they "know for a fact Iraq has WMD's".

I think it's BS to blame it on Congress being lied to. They knew. Quotes out of context make it look like people were duped, but at the time, so much of what was said to the public about Iraq's capabilities was so laced with weasel words, it was clear they didn't have proof. And I think Congressmen knew more and lie about what they knew. We've seen that with regard to Guantanamo. The problem is that people can't see through the weasel words when they don't want to see through the weasel words and Congressmen are too spineless to vote against certain public opinions.

There's a lot of BS revisionist history. Colin Powell's presentation of the evidence was weak...and everyone stood around and applauded it and called it a strong case even though it failed to change the position of France or Germany (or Russia or China).

 

[Thumb]

I think it's BS to blame it on Congress being lied to. They knew. Quotes out of context make it look like people were duped, but at the time, so much of what was said to the public about Iraq's capabilities was so laced with weasel words, it was clear they didn't have proof. And I absolutely think Congressmen knew more and lie about what they knew. We've seen that with regard to Guantanamo. The problem is that people can't see through the weasel words when they don't want to see through the weasel words and Congressmen are too spineless to vote against certain public opinions.

There's a lot of BS revisionist history. Colin Powell's presentation of the evidence was weak...and everyone stood around and applauded it and called it a strong case even though it failed to change the position of France or Germany (or Russia or China).

So it's BS when I say Congress was lied to, but it's okay for you to say Congress lied about what they knew?

This is kind of a pot/kettle situation.

The fact is that the excuse that the War in Iraq was approved by the Congress is a joke. Now I don't know which members knew exactly what, and neither do you, but it's a safe bet to assume several members believed the intel reports. I don't buy that most of them knew the reports were false, and voted to invade anyways.

 

[tsmith7559]

Based on Gates book Hillary voted against the surge for political reasons...so i guess some politicians vote for items based on various reasoning