CreativeDominant
Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote:
ORIGINAL: joether quote:
ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Perhaps, if they spent less time investigating groups with "Patriot" in the name, they'd have had more time to do their fucking jobs. Unfortunately, they have to examine any issue that is out of order, irrelevant of the name. If fifty right-wing organizations have 'heritage', 'patriot', 'american', or '2nd amendment'..... ....They'll get investigated if it looks like their records are incorrect. There were plenty of liberal groups that got investigated; funny how conservatives and libertarians leave that bit of FACT out of their 'arguments'..... Numbers comparison, Joether? Length of time before granting those liberal groups the same status the conservative groups were asking for? We're all aware that liberal groups were investigated. Your attempt to make it a non-issue simply by stating that and yet not bringing the fact that there were fewer liberal groups investigated or the fact that it took them less time to be granted the status the conservative groups sought is merely an attempt to deflect. Here penguin, I'll answer the questions I asked of you and I'll use Hunters article citation to do it. Number of liberal groups on comparison to conservative groups? Of the 298 applications that were collected and put on hold by the Internal Revenue Service between mid-2010 and mid-2012, 248, or 83%, were right-leaning, while 29, or 10%, were left-leaning. So, unless I'm mistaken, that woulwould seem to indicate that MORE conservative groups were targeted. That's the numbers comparison. How about the length of time to get the status sought after? Of the right-leaning groups’ applications, about 45% have been approved, while about 70% of the left-leaning groups have been approved. I can't WAIT to hear how you go around this.
|