Who will be the next president

[Shady]

Then there was the IRS asking groups the content of their prayers. Um, what does that have to do with applying for tax exempt staus? Answer. Absolutely nothing, except political.

IRS asked anti-abortion group about content of public prayers

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/irs-conservative-group-2009-members-pray-193833144.html

Anyone that suggests this was just regular order of instituations like the IRS or CRA doesn't have the full facts. I've never heard of the CRA asking a tax exempt group to agree not to protest something, nor have I ever heard of them asking the contents of a tax exempt groups prayers. It's likely nothing they care much about, nor is it any of their GD business.

[guyser]

Well, the IRS acted much differently. Unless you think asking a pro-life group to agree not to protest abortion providers in exchange for their tax exempt status is appropriate.

IRS Urged Pro-Life Group Seeking Tax-Exempt Status Not to Protest at Planned Parenthood Clinics

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/irs-urged-pro-life-group-seeking-tax-exempt-status-not-protest-planned-parenthood

First off , they didnt ask for that and then get the exempt status,. which I am sure you know but fudge on.

Secondly, they appeared to be in violation of the 501 © clause .

Thirdly....heres a tid bit you may wich to read from the who are they section of CSN News...pretty funny that youd use them but hey..float your boat...

Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes "news."

So they hire themselves to prove they need to exist ! Worked great for tobacco companies didnt it?

[guyser]

Anyone that suggests this was not just a regular order of instituations like the IRS or CRA isnt being given the full facts.

[Shady]

First off , they didnt ask for that and then get the exempt status,. which I am sure you know but fudge on.

Secondly, they appeared to be in violation of the 501 © clause .

Thirdly....heres a tid bit you may wich to read from the who are they section of CSN News...pretty funny that youd use them but hey..float your boat...

Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes "news."

So they hire themselves to prove they need to exist ! Worked great for tobacco companies didnt it?

Then read my yahoo news link from AP. Or is that no good either? Pathetic.

Yeah, the IRS didn't do anything wrong, that's why several of their officials took the 5th while in front of congress, as to not incriminate themselves.

[Shady]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHSp50EzJxU

Watch for yourselves.

Edited September 11, 2013 by Shady

[Argus]

Hi Kimmy - just to add an interesting point: I read last week that most of the big money for these PACs comes from super wealthy individuals and not corporations, who are starting to become aware of public boycotts for "controversial" politics.

Unfortunately, I didn't remember the source (I think it was NYT or Harper's magazine) and went down the data rabbit hole trying to find a corroborating source.

I agree with you on the source of funding for these super pacs, however, the corporate world funnels massive amounts of money into the pockets of politicians and candidates through a wide variety of lobbying efforts, both collectively and individually.

[guyser]

Then read my yahoo news link from AP. Or is that no good either? Pathetic.

Yeah, the IRS didn't do anything wrong, that's why several of their officials took the 5th while in front of congress, as to not incriminate themselves.

According to your article, they would be violating a rule for tax exempt status if they held the protests outside PP.

Faux outrage, you related to Ezra?

[Argus]

Well, the IRS acted much differently. Unless you think asking a pro-life group to agree not to protest abortion providers in exchange for their tax exempt status is appropriate.

Yes, as a matter of fact it would be entirely accurate if they were applying for charitable status and their activities went against the requirements of the statutes. In order to qualify for charitable status you must meet a number of criteria as set out in the tax laws, as to what you intend to do with that money. Political protest is not general among the acceptable uses.

The whole nonsense over the IRS was completely at odds with reality. CRA disallows all manner of charitable requests every year, or cancels ongoing charity status when it's found the organizations violate the rules on charities.

Edited September 11, 2013 by Argus

[Shady]

Yes, as a matter of fact it would be entirely accurate if they were applying for charitable status and their activities went against the requirements of the statutes. In order to qualify for charitable status you must meet a number of criteria as set out in the tax laws, as to what you intend to do with that money. Political protest is not general among the acceptable uses.

The whole nonsense over the IRS was completely at odds with reality. CRA disallows all manner of charitable requests every year, or cancels ongoing charity status when it's found the organizations violate the rules on charities.

I agree, but the criteria and tax laws has nothing to do with what your prayers entail. It's one of the reasons why several IRS officials have taken the 5th during their congressional testimony. You don't take the 5th if you've done nothing wrong and are just following tax law.

[Shady]

Progressive 501© 3s were given almost instant approval. Conservative 501©3s were strung out for months and even years, asked to provide more information.

Things asked by the IRS of conservative groups.

1. Provide all direct and indirect communication.

2. Provide all information of your members.

3. Your present and past employees and their relationship.

4. Provide any past activities with the news media.

5. Any information provided to the IRS is then considered to be public information.

6. Provide the income you expect to receive in 2013, 2014 and 2015.

7. Please detail the types of prayers you participate in.

[kimmy]

I wasn't inferring that this might have cancelled Romney's parade to the White house. I was wondering if the fact that conservative(not just tea party groups) groups were delayed by about 5 to every 1 progressive or liberal group, if this hurt Romney's voter turn out at all.

Why would the tax exempt status of some political action groups affect Romney's voter turn out?

Even these tea party people you hate so much have a right to vote.

You're suggesting that peoples' right to vote was taken away because some political action group didn't get a charitable tax exemption? I think that's a ridiculous idea, but feel free to convince me otherwise.

-k

[sharkman]

...Because I think that if a government body even accidentally affects voter turn out, then that is wrong.

Sure there are some extremists in their numbers, but there are extremists on both sides.

Kimmy,

If a government body, the IRS, withheld conservative groups' applications for tax free status(which is what happened for up to 2 years in some cases), then that would affect the money they could raise, and that raised money would of course be spent getting out the conservative vote in those affected communities.

Edited September 12, 2013 by sharkman

[kimmy]

Kimmy,

If a government body, the IRS, withheld conservative groups' applications for tax free status(which is what happened for up to 2 years in some cases), then that would affect the money they could raise, and that raised money would of course be spent getting out the conservative vote in those affected communities.

I missed the part where you explain how anybody's "right to vote" was interfered with. I mean, you Elephant Team guys who insist that voter roll purges and voter ID laws and 6 hour lineups aren't impeding peoples' right to vote had better be prepared to come up with a hell of a good argument if you're going to claim that peoples' right to vote was impeded because the Tallahassee TeaTards weren't given a tax exemption. You're a long way from meeting the standard, sharkman.

And, like I said earlier, Republican-supporting groups spent hundreds of millions of dollars to "get out the vote". How much more money do you think they needed?

And, like I said earlier, there are specific requirements for what kind of activities are eligible for this type of tax exception, and political groups don't fit the criteria.

-k

[dre]

I mean, you Elephant Team guys who insist that voter roll purges and voter ID laws and 6 hour lineups aren't impeding peoples' right to vote had better be prepared to come up with a hell of a good argument if you're going to claim that peoples' right to vote was impeded because the Tallahassee TeaTards weren't given a tax exemption.

Haha!

[sharkman]

I missed the part where you explain how anybody's "right to vote" was interfered with. I mean, you Elephant Team guys who insist that voter roll purges and voter ID laws and 6 hour lineups aren't impeding peoples' right to vote had better be prepared to come up with a hell of a good argument if you're going to claim that peoples' right to vote was impeded because the Tallahassee TeaTards weren't given a tax exemption. You're a long way from meeting the standard, sharkman.

And, like I said earlier, Republican-supporting groups spent hundreds of millions of dollars to "get out the vote". How much more money do you think they needed?

And, like I said earlier, there are specific requirements for what kind of activities are eligible for this type of tax exception, and political groups don't fit the criteria.

-k

Uh, I don't think I'm an 'elephant team' guy, I've never debated those items(whoops, you must mean Republican team guy? Okay, I get that) . It's real simple Kimmy. If a group gets delayed on its application for tax free status, then 18 months later approved, that means they are approved by the IRS, whatever you may feel about their political leanings. However, if you can't see the correlation between raising money to get out the vote and voting, then I can't help you.

Edited September 12, 2013 by sharkman

[sharkman]

Progressive 501© 3s were given almost instant approval. Conservative 501©3s were strung out for months and even years, asked to provide more information.

Things asked by the IRS of conservative groups.

1. Provide all direct and indirect communication.

2. Provide all information of your members.

3. Your present and past employees and their relationship.

4. Provide any past activities with the news media.

5. Any information provided to the IRS is then considered to be public information.

6. Provide the income you expect to receive in 2013, 2014 and 2015.

7. Please detail the types of prayers you participate in.

Well the good news is, the IRS won't be doing this in 2016.

[waldo]

Progressive 501© 3s were given almost instant approval. Conservative 501©3s were strung out for months and even years, asked to provide more information.

waldo calls ShadyPosting! Report Says IRS Approved Tax-Exempt Status For Twice as Many Conservative Groups as Liberal Groups ... sourced from Tax Analysts:

the IRS does publish the names of groups that have received special scrutiny and been approved for tax-exempt status. They recently released a list of 176 organizations that have been approved since 2010, so Martin Sullivan checked each one to figure out if it was liberal or conservative. Here's what he found:

122 conservative

48 liberal/nonconservative

6 unknown

Two-thirds of the groups who were approved for tax-exempt status were conservative. If the IRS was on a partisan witch hunt against conservative groups, that's sure an odd way of showing it, isn't it?

[Argus]

Well the good news is, the IRS won't be doing this in 2016.

Unless the tax code definition of charities has changed they will.

[Argus]

I agree, but the criteria and tax laws has nothing to do with what your prayers entail. It's one of the reasons why several IRS officials have taken the 5th during their congressional testimony. You don't take the 5th if you've done nothing wrong and are just following tax law.

Depends on what they suspected those prayers were about. If you're having a prayer-in asking for God to strike Obama dead that probably wouldn't qualify you as a community service organization. And given the nature of some of the right wing groups in the US I wouldn't doubt for a moment that type of thing happens.

[Argus]

Uh, I don't think I'm an 'elephant team' guy, I've never debated those items. It's real simple Kimmy. If a group gets delayed on its application for tax free status, then 18 months later approved, that means they are approved by the IRS, whatever you may feel about their political leanings. However, if you can't see the correlation between raising money to get out the vote and voting, then I can't help you.

None of these groups should be tax exempt in the first place. The whole problem with the US political system is the amount of money flooding into it.

When it takes tens of millions to run a senate or congressional or gubernatorial campaign, well, you don't get that without having to bow down before the people with deep pockets, and despite all the lies to the contrary, you don't get that without making promises about what bills you're going to support and oppose.

[roy baty]

Shady, you're wasting your time with anyone who believes the spin from the left that the IRS did absolutely nothing out of the ordinary. Obama or any government agency under his administration could ever be responsible for anything like this in the eyes of those that adore him and his sideshow of an administration. So no matter how much evidence there is that there was IRS targeting, there's no convincing them that there was any wrong doing hence making your efforts very futile.

[guyser]

Shady, you're wasting your time

Of course he is when he is wrong to begin with.

Now if the truth were printed then perhaps not.

Maybe we should have more monitoring watching for anti-truth postings.

[waldo]

Shady, you're wasting your time with anyone who believes the spin from the left that the IRS did absolutely nothing out of the ordinary. Obama or any government agency under his administration could ever be responsible for anything like this in the eyes of those that adore him and his sideshow of an administration. So no matter how much evidence there is that there was IRS targeting, there's no convincing them that there was any wrong doing hence making your efforts very futile.

your conservative victim card ain't workin!

one hates to pile on your false victimhood but:

before U.S. Congressional House committee investigation:

Rep. Peter Roskam, R-IL: “How come only conservative groups got snagged?”

Outgoing acting IRS commissioner Steve Miller: “They didn’t sir. Organizations of all walks and all persuasions were pulled in. That’s shown by the fact that only 70 of the 300 organizations were tea party organizations, of the ones that were looked at by TIGTA [Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration].”

[Shady]

waldo calls ShadyPosting! Report Says IRS Approved Tax-Exempt Status For Twice as Many Conservative Groups as Liberal Groups ... sourced from Tax Analysts:

Lol @ Mother Jones! What's next, the Daily Worket?!! Lol!

[waldo]

Lol @ Mother Jones! What's next, the Daily Worket?!! Lol!

lil' buddy, that's why I purposely highlighted the source behind that MJ article... just for you, a linked source was provided. Here, have it again: Tax Analysts Have a go at that organization, hey!

I note you paired down your provided list (from its actual 'top 10' number down to 7) - wonder why? I also note that/your provided list appears on all the usual mad-barking right-wing blogs... first choice is 'Hot Air' on your googly dial!