:listen: He's still talking about Ron Paul.
IRS Admits Targeting Conservative Groups; Apologizes
- Thread starter serpentdove
- Start date
Bush appointed him. But he's now Obama's employee. And Obama was remiss in not making sure that everyone understood that the old way wasn't acceptable anymore.
The climate of corruption was sufficiently well-documented that he should have known this sort of thing would happen, without some effort to prevent it.
Unless, of course, Obama or his immediate staff knew that the employee was doing this. Then, it's more than an oversight; it's corruption.
I'm guessing, since no one has drawn that kind of line yet, there's no evidence for it.
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
Yep, government does absolutely do that, and itsgood to know that you're one of the few around here who actually appreciates people who want to roll back government.
Government exists to serve itself, whether "Conservative" or "Liberal" its all the same.
I agree that its annoying when some liberals do this, but that's only becuase they pretend Obama is somehow not responsible. Bush, however, is responsible for his own bad policies. Obama is responsible for keeping said policies, as well as his own bad policies.
:listen: He's still talking about Ron Paul.
I'm not talking about Ron Paul, I'm talking about the Ron Paul MOVEMENT. The true patriots are hated by both sides because government exists to parasite off the productive. BOTH sides want big government, whether its nation building and regime changing or handouts to everyone.
This Charming Manc
Well-known member
To my mind there are two question on that in a democracy.
What do they have a mandate for?
What do you get for your money?
I've just looked at the stats, the USA government spends just over 25% of GDP, the UK government spends about 40% of GDP.
But we get
- a decent education system for all our kids
- decent healthcare for all
- decent welfare system
We all think our taxes should come down a bit, but I think the average Brit is happier with there taxes than the average American
A low tax position is a perfectly valid one to hold, its just not more moral than one than takes a more 'were all in this together' stance.
Your right than individualism is the key to the viewpoint, does the bible anywhere suggest individualism is a virtue?
...Except that we are not talking about a democracy. We are talking about a Constitutional Republic. I suppose that if you really wanted to wedge "democracy" in there you could say that we are a Constitutional Representative Democracy , but a "Representative Democracy" is just another form of "Republic" so you're really just playing semantics.
Now...before you decide to "pooh-pooh" the "Constitutional" aspect of that; please be aware that it's significance is quite as important there as it is in a Constitutional Monarchy. If you catch my drift. :e4e:
Does it suggest collectivism should be mandatory? :juggle:
Last edited:
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
Its one thing to say "We're all in this together", its another thing to say "We're all in this together, and we'll kill you if you try to maintain control of your own property."
The latter is an absolutely disgusting position to hold, but its a position that most people hold without even thinking about it because of state indoctrination.
"Thou shall not steal" seems pretty darn explicit to me.
And yeah, the US gets a bloated defense budget and an unsustainable entitlement system for its money. That, and the highest prison population in the world. Its DEFINITELY not worth the price. If I had a red button that would instantaneously make FedGov disappear from the planet, I'd push it, and we'd be better off.
The same is true for the UK government, but your government may well waste less money than ours, simply because its smaller. Same reason the states do a better job than the Feds over here, but what they do still isn't "Good", just less bad.
Christian Liberty
Well-known member
This is the bottom line. Peter never told Annanias and Saphira they HAD to give to the poor. As such, I don't think Peter would have advocated a government who told them they had to either...
VOLUNTARY collectivism is not only fine, but excellent. Its coercive collectivism that's the problem.
Republicans are still furious over IRS scrutiny of non-profit groups with "Tea Party" and "patriots" in their names, but the life of the scandal depends entirely upon the political affiliation of the hundreds of other groups investigated by tax officials.
Only 25% of the 300 scrutinized groups seeking non-profit status were reportedly affiliated with right-wing causes. Whether the rest aligned with left-leaning causes like abortion and climate change will not be known until the entire list is released. The IRS told Gawker today that the full list has yet to be made public.
President Obama said he only learned of the Cincinnati office's tactics on Friday but "will not tolerate it." Republicans in Congress are calling for investigations.
IRS examinations of politically vocal non-profits is not new—the most recent outrage to make the national news was in 2006, when tax officials threatened and persecuted liberal churches during the presidency of George W. Bush.
But as the harassment of both liberal and conservative churches in 2004 and 2006 shows, it is sometimes difficult to create a partisan scandal out of some bureaucrats interpreting the ridiculously vague tax code prohibitions on non-profits engaging in political campaigns.
http://gawker.com/irs-didnt-just-hunt-the-tea-party-liberal-churches-al-504685119
So the IRS apparently has been targeting both the left and the right for inappropriate attention since the early 2000s. Obama deserves criticism for not putting a stop to it. Although the culprits seem to be Bush holdovers, they now work for Obama, and he should have told them that such things would no longer be allowed.
It seems there was evidence that there was a culture of politically-motivated investigation, going back over a decade before he took office. Bill Clinton's mom was the subject of one such fishing expedition, when he was running for president.
Should be interesting to see what else is there.
Only 25% of the 300 scrutinized groups seeking non-profit status were reportedly affiliated with right-wing causes. Whether the rest aligned with left-leaning causes like abortion and climate change will not be known until the entire list is released. The IRS told Gawker today that the full list has yet to be made public.
President Obama said he only learned of the Cincinnati office's tactics on Friday but "will not tolerate it." Republicans in Congress are calling for investigations.
IRS examinations of politically vocal non-profits is not new—the most recent outrage to make the national news was in 2006, when tax officials threatened and persecuted liberal churches during the presidency of George W. Bush.
But as the harassment of both liberal and conservative churches in 2004 and 2006 shows, it is sometimes difficult to create a partisan scandal out of some bureaucrats interpreting the ridiculously vague tax code prohibitions on non-profits engaging in political campaigns.
http://gawker.com/irs-didnt-just-hunt-the-tea-party-liberal-churches-al-504685119
So the IRS apparently has been targeting both the left and the right for inappropriate attention since the early 2000s. Obama deserves criticism for not putting a stop to it. Although the culprits seem to be Bush holdovers, they now work for Obama, and he should have told them that such things would no longer be allowed.
It seems there was evidence that there was a culture of politically-motivated investigation, going back over a decade before he took office. Bill Clinton's mom was the subject of one such fishing expedition, when he was running for president.
Should be interesting to see what else is there.
It does appear, though, that no matter what scandalous behavior is exposed during this administration it is found by apologists, such as yourself, to either have it's roots in the Bush era or be a vendetta on the part of conservatives or be perfectly understandable under the circumstances.
President Obama remains a tabula rasa, a blank page, a clean slate. a teflon coated icon.
In this case, Obama deserves to be criticized. He obliquely admitted it by saying that such behavior is outrageous and unacceptable. Now, let's see if he actually does something to clean it up.
I'll say he's better than his predecessor in this regard, only after (and if) he takes action to put a stop to it. "Bush started it" is not an excuse to let it continue. I have to say that I find this particular tradition of corruption, although very disturbing, less worrisome than the former practice of grading federal prosecutors according to their loyalty to the president and his party. That indicates corruption right to the top in the WH.
If Obama is doing that, I'd call him despicable.
Liberals see themselves as the victim (Eccl 10:2, Jn 10:10). You feel harassed? :Nineveh: I feel harassed?
lain: Am 8:5 "What difference does it make?!" :sibbie: ~ Hillary Clinton 
Last edited:
You will get no argument from me. But I would tack on some more things. His bad policies were not kept in place, they were greatly amplified. Like the "bailout", and prescription drugs for seniors to all out socialized medicine. Bush II was just liberal democrat light.
This Charming Manc
Well-known member
OK I have two issues with this
- The first is that you had an equal choice in what system that has been choosen.
- The second is that you have the option to leave anytime you want
both those suggest you have not been 'coherced'
Simple but wrong and I think you know it.
When the bible talks of taxes it never even suggests they are theft, it even says that Caesar taxes belong to Caesar. So that scripture is misappropriated and quite clearly misused.
and what would the results be? how many people would gte hurt and die ? or is that not your problem?
Hey at 40% I think its at its absolute limit and would like to see it come down, also money is waisted, I would want every government employee to spend time in the real world before spending our money, I get frustrated with it to.
But it does not stop me from keeping faith with the simple belief that we are our brothers keepers, that it is the strongs responsibility to protect the weak, and we should be in this together.
This Charming Manc
Well-known member
I think on an issue such as taxes,we need to learnt to live with I had my say I lost the argument without claiming theft !
And yet we have the revelation that rightwing groups were only about 25% of the groups so targeted, but serpent is clinging to her belief that she's a victim.
It's the usual extremist pandering for sympathy, while ignoring that others were similarly treated. You'r a victim only as long as you let yourself be.
You removed the scripture from my quote (Eph 4:14, Jn 8:44, Jn 1:1, Isa 30:12). It is what you do. :Shimei:
Liberals see themselves as the victim (Eccl 10:2, Jn 10:10).
lain: As a reminder, Barbie does not have a biblical worldview.
See:
Barbarian
Last edited:
Just another whiny conservative, playing the victim card. I see where you again claim Christians don't have a "biblical view.":yawn: