PDA

View Full Version : As Usual; Outrage first, Facts Later - What the IRS did right!



Cigar
05-28-2013, 02:22 PM
Outrage first, facts later. That’s often the way American political “scandals” unfold, and it seems to be the case with the news that the IRS targeted conservative political groups for extra scrutiny before granting them tax-exempt status as social-welfare organizations.

We knew from the beginning of the IRS mess that the only group actually denied tax-exempt status was the Maine chapter of a Democratic women’s group, Emerge America. Now we’re learning about some of the right-wing organizations that came in for extra scrutiny, as reported by the New York Times Monday: a conservative veterans’ group that only backed one candidate, a Republican, for Congress; an Alabama Tea Party group that took part in a “defeat Barack Obama” voter-turnout drive, and the “Ohio Liberty Coalition” led by a Republican activist who sent his members information on Mitt Romney campaign events and recruited them to volunteer for the GOP nominee.

Some former IRS officials are speaking out to defend the agency, and taking issue with parts of the critical inspector general’s report. Inspector General J. Russell George found evidence of inadequate management and supervision, and that the agency incorrectly used keywords like “Tea Party” or “patriots” to scrutinize applications. But the report also concluded that the agency acted inappropriately when it asked groups about their donors, or their leaders’ plans to run for public office – when in fact such questions can be perfectly appropriate when trying to discover if a political group is wrongly seeking “social welfare” status.

“The I.G. was as careless with terminology as the Cincinnati office was,” said Marcus S. Owens, former head of the IRS’s exempt organizations division. “Half of those questions have been found to be germane in court decisions.” Some election lawyers told the Times that they believed the IRS “scandal” was at least partly ginned up to derail audits and other scrutiny of the rising number of political groups seeking tax-exempt status as the 2014 midterms approach.

full article
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/28/what_the_irs_did_right/

Turns out some of the conservative groups it scrutinized were actively and wrongly involved in partisan politics :wink:

patrickt
05-28-2013, 02:25 PM
When you delay forever you don't have to deny, do you? And when you're perfectly willing to lie you are a propagandist.

Cigar
05-28-2013, 02:29 PM
When you delay forever you don't have to deny, do you? And when you're perfectly willing to lie you are a propagandist.



Oh ... so you don't think it fair to make people jump through hoops, stand in line and wait long hours ... really .... ?

Cry me a river ...

Welcome to the World of Suppression ... How-Da-Ya-Like it?

Chris
05-28-2013, 02:30 PM
That the IRS does some things right doesn't deny they did other things wrong.

Nice distraction though.

simpsonofpg
05-28-2013, 04:35 PM
That the IRS does some things right doesn't deny they did other things wrong.

Nice distraction though.

As much as I hate to admit it I agree with you. I do think that gov'ty employees are run amuk and out of control over paid and I can go on. They are supposed to work for the tax payer and they basically ignore us.

jillian
05-28-2013, 06:14 PM
As much as I hate to admit it I agree with you. I do think that gov'ty employees are run amuk and out of control over paid and I can go on. They are supposed to work for the tax payer and they basically ignore us.

government employees generally earn less for the same work that they would earn in private industry.

they don't work for the taxpayer, per say. they work for whatever agency employs them.

i always laugh when i hear people complain that they "paid [some government worker's] salary".

Cigar
05-28-2013, 07:17 PM
That the IRS does some things right doesn't deny they did other things wrong.

Nice distraction though.

I don't see anything wrong with putting everyone under the microscope who want "free-stuff" ... that's everyone who claims they are for Social Welfare, while carrying Guns and Signs of Obama with Hitler Mustaches.

Really folks ... ?

If Democrat Organization do the same, they should be closely looked at also.

BTW .. if have the Name "Party" in your title ... really ... are you fir Social Welfare?

I say prove it first. :)

Ransom
05-28-2013, 07:47 PM
Oh ... so you don't think it fair to make people jump through hoops, stand in line and wait long hours ... really .... ?

Cry me a river ...

Welcome to the World of Suppression ... How-Da-Ya-Like it?


All this cheering about elections being won, I wonder if Democrats would actually begin an organized defense of the IRS such as Cigar examples here. Never one to deny we struggle winning elections although we did retain the House...thank God....I wouldn't feel uncomfortable running against the IRS should this brilliant tactic of Cigar's become the Dem platform.

Ransom
05-28-2013, 07:52 PM
government employees generally earn less for the same work that they would earn in private industry.

Given their retirement and benefit packages though Jillian, their actual compensation(salary+benefits) earns them right on par with the private sector. Especially when you exclude military personnel. But you go ahead and make as many claims as you'd like without the slightest back up, you spout your nonsense anytime you'd like.


they don't work for the taxpayer, per say. they work for whatever agency employs them.

Yeah. That agency the government, Jillian. The government for and by the people, completely funded by the taxpayer.

Chris
05-28-2013, 08:30 PM
As much as I hate to admit it I agree with you. I do think that gov'ty employees are run amuk and out of control over paid and I can go on. They are supposed to work for the tax payer and they basically ignore us.

In various dealings with government workers I get the same feeling, like they think I'm working for them.

I guess, actually, I am.

Chris
05-28-2013, 08:32 PM
government employees generally earn less for the same work that they would earn in private industry.

they don't work for the taxpayer, per say. they work for whatever agency employs them.

i always laugh when i hear people complain that they "paid [some government worker's] salary".

And where exactly does their pay come from, jillian? Aren't you a taxpayer? Still laughing?

keymanjim
05-28-2013, 09:52 PM
Oh ... so you don't think it fair to make people jump through hoops, stand in line and wait long hours ... really .... ?

Was it fair that the scam charity run by obama's half brother got approval in 32 days retroactive for three years?

Chris
05-29-2013, 10:14 AM
The fundamental question raised by the IRS scandal isn’t whether Obama ordered, or even knew of, the apparent misuse of the taxing power to punish political opponents. Rather, the fundamental question asks about the wisdom of creating in the first place government agencies that can so easily abuse their power in order to play political favorites.

In the private sector, we rely upon two core features of markets to protect against such abuse. First, each person is free not to patronize firms that fail to deliver sufficient value. Second, firms prosper only by — and only so long as they continue — competing successfully for consumers’ dollars. But because government agencies are funded with taxes — and because those agencies face no competition — greater reliance than is necessary in the private sector must be put on the integrity, altruism and diligence of elected officials to oversee government agencies in ways that ensure that those agencies don’t abuse their awesome powers.

When, as appears to be the case here, government officials turn out to be mere humans at monitoring the vast legions of government workers under their charge, it is indeed appropriate to blame and to criticize those officials. It is appropriate to blame and to criticize them not for their being human but, instead, for their promising the impossible — namely, for their promising to exercise the superhuman abilities that alone can ensure that government agencies behave with at least as much efficiency and integrity as the great majority of private firms routinely display.

@ Count on It: Power Will Be Abused (http://cafehayek.com/2013/05/count-on-it-power-will-be-abused.html)


The allusion is to Madison's Federalist 51:


If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.