RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


DomKen -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/4/2014 6:40:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


I read today that Obama has only vetoed two bills this session.

As far as I know he's never vetoed any bills.




Sanity -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/4/2014 7:02:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity
If the IRS had targeted leftists under Bush, or Bush had been caught sneaking in illegal Republican voters that would harm the country as a whole, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc, the leftist riots would make the time they assaulted the old folks attending the Minneapolis RNC convention look like a cakewalk

Once again, without their hypocrisy leftists would have nuthin'

You mean like when the IRS did target leftists.
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/16/local/me-allsaints16


You really believe that the IRS making one admittedly "liberal" activist church justify their tax exempt status is in the same league as Obamas IRS admittedly systematically auditing and harrassing every group that had “tea party” or “patriot” in their names?

I don't care how dishonest people say you are ken, you're even worse than that.

[image]http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/files/2014/06/lois-lerner-irs-emails-cartoon-mckee-495x324.jpg[/image]





DesideriScuri -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/4/2014 7:04:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity
If the IRS had targeted leftists under Bush, or Bush had been caught sneaking in illegal Republican voters that would harm the country as a whole, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc, the leftist riots would make the time they assaulted the old folks attending the Minneapolis RNC convention look like a cakewalk
Once again, without their hypocrisy leftists would have nuthin'

You mean like when the IRS did target leftists.
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/16/local/me-allsaints16


Seriously? That's your proof?!? You're trotting out an already-exempt organization that may have crossed the law and got investigated, against groups applying for exemption whose only "suspect" activity is listing "tea party,""patriot," et. al. in their submission forms?!? Did the Church lost it's exemption while being investigated?

http://dev.ombwatch.org/node/3608
    quote:

    The IRS concluded that All Saints Church violated the ban, while the NAACP did not. In a warning letter to the church, the IRS wrote that All Saints had committed political intervention, but that no further action would be taken. Both organizations retain their nonprofit tax exempt status.


So, they were determined to have crossed the line, but there were no sanctions?

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/24/local/me-allsaints24
    quote:

    One of Southern California's largest and most liberal congregations, All Saints came under IRS scrutiny after a sermon two days before the 2004 presidential election by a guest speaker, the Rev. George F. Regas. In his sermon, Regas, the church's former rector, imagined Jesus participating in a political debate with then-presidential candidates George W. Bush and John F. Kerry.

    Regas did not endorse either candidate, saying that "good people of profound faith" could support either one. But he strongly criticized the war in Iraq and said that Jesus would have told Bush that his preemptive war strategy in Iraq "has led to disaster."

    A letter from the IRS arrived in June 2005 stating that the church's tax-exempt status was in jeopardy. Federal law prohibits tax-exempt organizations, including churches, from intervening in political campaigns and elections.

    The letter said the agency's concerns were based on a Nov. 1, 2004, article in the Los Angeles Times, which included three paragraphs about Regas' sermon in a lengthy national roundup of rhetoric from the pulpit on the Sunday before the election.

    In its latest letter to All Saints, dated Sept. 10, the IRS said the church continues to qualify for tax-exempt status, but said that Regas' sermon did amount to intervention in the 2004 presidential race. The letter offered no details or explanation for either conclusion.


The IRS "targeted" a liberal church 8 months after finding out about the possible infraction (which they found to be not legal under the rules), when the infraction occurred 2 days before an election (also 8 months prior to the "targetting"), and still didn't take any action?

That's hardly the same situation, Ken.




DomKen -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/4/2014 8:22:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity
If the IRS had targeted leftists under Bush, or Bush had been caught sneaking in illegal Republican voters that would harm the country as a whole, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc, the leftist riots would make the time they assaulted the old folks attending the Minneapolis RNC convention look like a cakewalk
Once again, without their hypocrisy leftists would have nuthin'

You mean like when the IRS did target leftists.
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/16/local/me-allsaints16


Seriously? That's your proof?!? You're trotting out an already-exempt organization that may have crossed the law and got investigated, against groups applying for exemption whose only "suspect" activity is listing "tea party,""patriot," et. al. in their submission forms?!? Did the Church lost it's exemption while being investigated?

http://dev.ombwatch.org/node/3608
    quote:

    The IRS concluded that All Saints Church violated the ban, while the NAACP did not. In a warning letter to the church, the IRS wrote that All Saints had committed political intervention, but that no further action would be taken. Both organizations retain their nonprofit tax exempt status.


So, they were determined to have crossed the line, but there were no sanctions?

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/24/local/me-allsaints24
    quote:

    One of Southern California's largest and most liberal congregations, All Saints came under IRS scrutiny after a sermon two days before the 2004 presidential election by a guest speaker, the Rev. George F. Regas. In his sermon, Regas, the church's former rector, imagined Jesus participating in a political debate with then-presidential candidates George W. Bush and John F. Kerry.

    Regas did not endorse either candidate, saying that "good people of profound faith" could support either one. But he strongly criticized the war in Iraq and said that Jesus would have told Bush that his preemptive war strategy in Iraq "has led to disaster."

    A letter from the IRS arrived in June 2005 stating that the church's tax-exempt status was in jeopardy. Federal law prohibits tax-exempt organizations, including churches, from intervening in political campaigns and elections.

    The letter said the agency's concerns were based on a Nov. 1, 2004, article in the Los Angeles Times, which included three paragraphs about Regas' sermon in a lengthy national roundup of rhetoric from the pulpit on the Sunday before the election.

    In its latest letter to All Saints, dated Sept. 10, the IRS said the church continues to qualify for tax-exempt status, but said that Regas' sermon did amount to intervention in the 2004 presidential race. The letter offered no details or explanation for either conclusion.



The IRS "targeted" a liberal church 8 months after finding out about the possible infraction (which they found to be not legal under the rules), when the infraction occurred 2 days before an election (also 8 months prior to the "targetting"), and still didn't take any action?

That's hardly the same situation, Ken.

Do you know how many conservative churches do the same thing and never got even a tiny whiff from the IRS?




DesideriScuri -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/4/2014 8:41:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Do you know how many conservative churches do the same thing and never got even a tiny whiff from the IRS?


Nope. You?




CreativeDominant -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/4/2014 9:15:34 PM)

Obama's IRS targeted conservative Christian churches: news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/073114-711290-irs-deal-with-atheists
There's also Obama's IRS targeting a 180 year old Baptist newspaper Called the Biblical Recorder and also, they went after Samaritans Purse: thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06

Now then, if they're "politicking", then they should be gone after. But what was asked was "have conservative churches been targeted"?




DomKen -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 6:58:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Obama's IRS targeted conservative Christian churches: news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/073114-711290-irs-deal-with-atheists
There's also Obama's IRS targeting a 180 year old Baptist newspaper Called the Biblical Recorder and also, they went after Samaritans Purse: thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06

Now then, if they're "politicking", then they should be gone after. But what was asked was "have conservative churches been targeted"?

Neither of those links works. Some Googling didn't turn up the stories either just a bunch of scare mongering.




cloudboy -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 9:17:51 AM)

I have yet to read of any deserving conservative organization being denied its tax exempt status. I have only read of delays and requests for more information. That's standard in a regulatory environment and delays happen for understaffed-underfunded agencies.

Conservatives are actually upset that out of state organizations couldn't pour more anonymous money into their local races -- while titillating that such donors can can hide behind terms like "Americans for Freedom."

While conservatives blather about Obama "not enforcing the immigration laws" they don't like it when the IRS tries enforce 501 laws by not giving political organizations 501(c)(3) status. Where's the conservative concern over this?

BTW: I am happy to change out the term "conservative" here for "right wing operatives" or "fox news idiots."




CreativeDominant -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 9:19:13 AM)

My Google must be better than yours then. All I did was Google IRS targeting of churches. It brought up articles about the IRS going after left and right churches.




BamaD -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 9:46:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

I have yet to read of any deserving conservative organization being denied its tax exempt status. I have only read of delays and requests for more information. That's standard in a regulatory environment and delays happen for understaffed-underfunded agencies.

Conservatives are actually upset that out of state organizations couldn't pour more anonymous money into their local races -- while titillating that such donors can can hide behind terms like "Americans for Freedom."

While conservatives blather about Obama "not enforcing the immigration laws" they don't like it when the IRS tries enforce 501 laws by not giving political organizations 501(c)(3) status. Where's the conservative concern over this?

BTW: I am happy to change out the term "conservative" here for "right wing operatives" or "fox news idiots."

No, they were held in limbo till the election was over.




mnottertail -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 9:50:17 AM)

I thought those delays were because of due diligence being executed. After all, we all want these to conform to the law, we want everyone to be law abiding, don't we?

And did it stop them from doing what they were doing while waiting on the approval? No, its a tax status, not a license to steal (well, actually it is).




DomKen -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 10:35:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

My Google must be better than yours then. All I did was Google IRS targeting of churches. It brought up articles about the IRS going after left and right churches.

Some more searching found an article about a very recently settled lawsuit but nothing about the IRS actually going after any churches.

The other article made claims but then failed o actually back them up.




Lucylastic -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 10:49:01 AM)

amazing deflection Sanity..well done!!! ignoring the shit congress has put on you in the past few weeks to complaining about the much hated IRS no matter what side of the aisle you prefer, or religion, colour or gender.




cloudboy -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 11:38:02 AM)

The feeling of being persecuted trumps the facts of being persecuted. It's a ratings driver for Fox News and AM radio while agitating the base. If you flash back to when this story first broke, there was no more hopeful poster than the Heretic pining for a special prosecutor and an impeachment torpedo to fire at the White House. The whole thing just fizzed out.




thishereboi -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 12:01:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

My Google must be better than yours then. All I did was Google IRS targeting of churches. It brought up articles about the IRS going after left and right churches.


Your right and one of the first links is the one he claimed didn't turn up. Imagine that

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/073114-711290-the-irs-bullied-pulpit.htm

and oh look, there's the other one

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06/confirmed-obama-irs-targeted-infiltrated-and-harassed-christian-churches/




DomKen -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 1:54:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

My Google must be better than yours then. All I did was Google IRS targeting of churches. It brought up articles about the IRS going after left and right churches.


Your right and one of the first links is the one he claimed didn't turn up. Imagine that

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/073114-711290-the-irs-bullied-pulpit.htm

and oh look, there's the other one

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06/confirmed-obama-irs-targeted-infiltrated-and-harassed-christian-churches/

Neither of which supports the claims he made despite your whine.




thishereboi -> RE: Congressional Dysfunction 101 (8/5/2014 2:42:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

My Google must be better than yours then. All I did was Google IRS targeting of churches. It brought up articles about the IRS going after left and right churches.


Your right and one of the first links is the one he claimed didn't turn up. Imagine that

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/073114-711290-the-irs-bullied-pulpit.htm

and oh look, there's the other one

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06/confirmed-obama-irs-targeted-infiltrated-and-harassed-christian-churches/

Neither of which supports the claims he made despite your whine.



I wasn't whining about anything so I am not sure why you felt the need to lie and say I did. I also didn't say they supported any claims made. I merely provided them because you seemed to be having a problem finding them yourself.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875