Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-16-2013, 05:44 AM
 
Location: The Brat Stop
8,347 posts, read 7,252,356 times
Reputation: 2279

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Good luck getting rid of the supervisors, they are probably going to claim this was their interpretation of policy, very doubtful anything significant will happen.
'Angry' Obama announces IRS leader's ouster in scandal - CNN.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-16-2013, 05:45 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,122,721 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
Yes, he's wrong. By his nature, Obama is timid and too willing to raise the white flag. The IRS actions were perfectly reasonable as the New York Times said today:
LOL.... the article you are citing says:
Quote:

The Internal Revenue Service was absolutely correct to look into the abuse of the tax code by political organizations masquerading as “social welfare” groups over the last three years. The agency’s mistake — and it was a serious one — was focusing on groups with “Tea Party” in their name or those criticizing how the country is run.
Nobody is questioning whether they should be investigating these types of organizations, I've bolded the issue for you. Please try and focus on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2013, 05:48 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,122,721 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
It's ridiculous that the only firing goes to an ACTING IRS Commissioner who wasn't even the Commissioner at the time this thing started and metatasized and whose acting term was supposed to be up on June, anyway....
He was in charge of the division that oversaw these investigations and testified twice before Congress. Even when aware of the situation and questioned about it he did not answer the question truthfully. He absolutely needs to be fired.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2013, 05:52 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,122,721 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
The method was not good, the objective was, and still is, perfect. .
Bob, the objective here was to harass Conservative groups.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2013, 05:54 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,295,161 times
Reputation: 17209
He was leaving anyway. As has been noted over and over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2013, 05:56 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,295,161 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
He was in charge of the division that oversaw these investigations and testified twice before Congress. Even when aware of the situation and questioned about it he did not answer the question truthfully. He absolutely needs to be fired.
I am not aware of the situation at the time but if he was under oath he should be charged with perjury but that is never going to happen and things are going to continue to go down hill as long as nobody in government is actually held responsible for their actions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2013, 06:30 AM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,505,011 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
He was in charge of the division that oversaw these investigations and testified twice before Congress. Even when aware of the situation and questioned about it he did not answer the question truthfully. He absolutely needs to be fired.
He'll be rewarded with some private sector job at some liberal "think tank" for being loyal to The Party.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2013, 06:41 AM
 
2,295 posts, read 2,372,553 times
Reputation: 2668
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Bob, the objective here was to harass Conservative groups.
Bob fully knows what the objective was, and knows that what the IRS did was wrong. Bob just has an axe to grind over the SCOTUS Citizens United decisions. As he sees it, this single decision will be the undoing of our nation. The left's outrage over the decision is actually due to the loss of their near monopoly in fund raising. For decades, the left enjoyed a huge advantage in unrestrained funding from labor unions. The Citizens United decision essentially allowed management at the same companies where union members were employed to also donate like their union members. The decision held that corporations are free to speak publicly and donate to political candidate the same as private citizens. Once that occurred, the left began running around screaming about the sky falling.

I could possibly be persuaded to entertain any of the outrage from the left if they could clearly indicate how the corporate headquarters of a given company, as a group, differs in any way from the collective grouping of the members of a labor union at the same company. In other words, why was it completely fair, equitable, and ethical for the left to accept donations from unions, at times, against the will of union members for decades, but now it is bad form that corporate leadership can do the same?

Last edited by TXStrat; 05-16-2013 at 06:52 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2013, 06:44 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,295,161 times
Reputation: 17209
“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.”

Report: IRS denied tax-exempt status to pro-lifers on behalf of Planned Parenthood | WashingtonExaminer.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2013, 06:52 AM
 
Location: South East
4,209 posts, read 3,594,792 times
Reputation: 1465
Default IRS Also Targets Graham and Other Religious Organizations

How convenient these groups were targeted as the election was in progress.

Obama's house of cards are falling down around him.


Religious Groups Claim To Be Targets Of IRS Scrutiny

IRS Targets Billy Graham, Religious Groups | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes

Franklin Graham: IRS targeted us, too - Reid J. Epstein - POLITICO.com


AND....they also targeted Pro Life Groups.

IRS Told Pro-Life Group Not to Picket Planned Parenthood | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes

This is disgusting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top