What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Status
Not open for further replies.
joecct said:
Rover

El Presidente is not going to be impeached. I would think that the Congre$$ would prefer an impotent Executive so they can call the shots. Of course, that implies that the two houses would work together.
Click to expand...

There's a great article about Republicans in Congress aren't governed by either reason or opposition to their policies that I'll try to find. Witness the Clinton era. I could easily see a new age Tom Delay type forcing The Boner's hand, and then once again leading to a disasterous outcome for the GOP.
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Rover said:
No need to wait too long. This ought to clarify it in a nifty graph!

http://graphics.latimes.com/2012-election-superpac-spending/
Click to expand...
And how does that prove they all claimed tax exempt status or that they're are significantly more groups on the right? It's not plausible that they're just better at raising money, let alone a million other things that disprove your assertion that there are significantly more conservative groups attempting to "cheap" the system, deserving extra scrutiny...
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

FlagDUDE08 said:
After Kennedy died, there were a lot of people who were murdered that had any relation to the cover-up and were looking to talk. Dorothy Kilgallen was one of them.
Click to expand...
Oh, ok, kind of like how some folks tied to the Clintons died when some of their scandals were going on. Got it.
 
Shirtless Guy said:
And how does that prove they all claimed tax exempt status or that they're are significantly more groups on the right? It's not plausible that they're just better at raising money, let alone a million other things that disprove your assertion that there are significantly more conservative groups attempting to "cheap" the system, deserving extra scrutiny...
Click to expand...

You've been taking lessons from Fishy. I already stated (feel free to look back a few posts) that these groups are a victim of their success. They most likely are better at raising money in this manner (Dems tend to do more small donor fund raising directly from people as opposed to SuperPAC's). However, conservatives have taken advantage, legally as best I can tell, of the new laws post Citizens United ruling. Good for them, but that's going to get you some scrutiny by the IRS as it should. To the extent that liberal groups are doing the same thing (and those groups are out there) they should get the same scrutiny.

What I find funny is how the knuckledraggers are playing this. Far better to come out with a statement saying that you have nothing to hide and welcome a review. Given all the problems right wing groups had in the last election, with people setting up funds claiming to help a candidate and then lining their own pockets with the donations, one would think they'd like some sort of legal crackdown on rogue SuperPac's.
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Rover said:
You've been taking lessons from Fishy. I already stated (feel free to look back a few posts) that these groups are a victim of their success. They most likely are better at raising money in this manner (Dems tend to do more small donor fund raising directly from people as opposed to SuperPAC's). However, conservatives have taken advantage, legally as best I can tell, of the new laws post Citizens United ruling. Good for them, but that's going to get you some scrutiny by the IRS as it should. To the extent that liberal groups are doing the same thing (and those groups are out there) they should get the same scrutiny.

What I find funny is how the knuckledraggers are playing this. Far better to come out with a statement saying that you have nothing to hide and welcome a review. Given all the problems right wing groups had in the last election, with people setting up funds claiming to help a candidate and then lining their own pockets with the donations, one would think they'd like some sort of legal crackdown on rogue SuperPac's.
Click to expand...

So you admit that the report you sent to us is biased? After all, when you look at the report, it states the reporting of monies used by Super PACs, but then you say that the left doesn't use those.
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

joecct said:
Rover

El Presidente is not going to be impeached. I would think that the Congre$$ would prefer an impotent Executive so they can call the shots. Of course, that implies that the two houses would work together.
Click to expand...

I think the world would prefer an impotent Sun King over crazy Uncle Joe.

Watching Carney get smacked like a pinata is a fun way to spend a part of our vacation. :D The MSM is finally doing its job.
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

SteveP said:
I think the world would prefer an impotent Sun King over crazy Uncle Joe.

Watching Carney get smacked like a pinata is a fun way to spend a part of our vacation. :D The MSM is finally doing its job.
Click to expand...

Probably because the WH press corps took the messiah dictator out of the equation.
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Rover said:
Exactly. Frankly all political 501c3 groups should be scrutinized.
Click to expand...

I believe the issue at hand is 501 (c) (4) groups, which are much less constrained than 501 (c) (3) groups.

Unfortunately, so far this scandal is mainly about a lot of dark pronouncements and very little evidence of real wrongdoing. It's certainly possible (maybe even likely, based on reactions) that the IRS disproportionately targeted keywords that tended to right-leaning groups, but nobody's made that case yet. I'd like to see evidence that agents exceeded their authority in their response to these groups and/or that they investigated a greater proportion of them than was merited by both their volume of application and previous observance of issues (denial or fraud). As it is, we seem to be jumping from "the IRS investigated certain right-leaning 501 (c) (4) groups" to "the IRS unfairly harassed right-leaning 501 (c) (4) groups" without filling in the details in between.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Craig P. said:
I believe the issue at hand is 501 (c) (4) groups, which are much less constrained than 501 (c) (3) groups.

Unfortunately, so far this scandal is mainly about a lot of dark pronouncements and very little evidence of real wrongdoing. It's certainly possible (maybe even likely, based on reactions) that the IRS disproportionately targeted keywords that tended to right-leaning groups, but nobody's made that case yet. I'd like to see evidence that agents exceeded their authority in their response to these groups and/or that they investigated a greater proportion of them than was merited by both their volume of application and previous observance of issues (denial or fraud). As it is, we seem to be jumping from "the IRS investigated certain right-leaning 501 (c) (4) groups" to "the IRS unfairly harassed right-leaning 501 (c) (4) groups" without filling in the details in between.
Click to expand...

Actually, in the articles that I cited, especially the Huffington Post one, it does say that the tactic used was lumping key words together. Obviously they deny politically motivated audits, but it isn't that difficult to put two and two together, especially considering this had been going on for at least two years, and didn't surface until the messiah dictator affirmed the oath.
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Rover said:
Far better to come out with a statement saying that you have nothing to hide and welcome a review.
Click to expand...

Are you saying you'd welcome an IRS audit? Do you have any clue what that entails, even if you have filed completely legal returns? The amount of time, paperwork, legal /accounting expense, etc alone can be daunting. The article I've read also have said that the IRS exceeded its statutory authority in its requests, asking for donor lists for example, which is not required for the filings in question.

Of course if you only file a 1040A or a 1040EZ that wouldn't matter. But even a simple corporate return can take hours of extra work and expense.

You are either being disingenuous or pretending to be naive. Some employees of the government used its authority in an unauthorized manner. You don't just shrug that off merely because your "side" wasn't targeted (this time). We never want that done to anyone if we want our freedoms to remain secure and our laws to remain respected.

You really need to learn how to distinguish between important public policy concerns that matter to every citizen and cheerleading.
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Rover said:
You've been taking lessons from Fishy. I already stated (feel free to look back a few posts) that these groups are a victim of their success. They most likely are better at raising money in this manner (Dems tend to do more small donor fund raising directly from people as opposed to SuperPAC's). However, conservatives have taken advantage, legally as best I can tell, of the new laws post Citizens United ruling. Good for them, but that's going to get you some scrutiny by the IRS as it should. To the extent that liberal groups are doing the same thing (and those groups are out there) they should get the same scrutiny.

What I find funny is how the knuckledraggers are playing this. Far better to come out with a statement saying that you have nothing to hide and welcome a review. Given all the problems right wing groups had in the last election, with people setting up funds claiming to help a candidate and then lining their own pockets with the donations, one would think they'd like some sort of legal crackdown on rogue SuperPac's.
Click to expand...
You can't have it both ways, I asked you to prove that there were significantly more conservative groups attempting to gain 501(c)4 status than liberal groups. You show me a graph that shows how much money was spent on political campaigns and point out all the Super PAC money. Then when I point out that doesn't prove anything raw numbers of groups you state you already agree with that point and they likely are getting scrutinized because they are better are raising and spending money than their left leaning counterparts. If you'd like to claim both are true, you still haven't proven the first part is true at all so I ask again for this proof...I'm still waiting.
 
Shirtless Guy said:
You can't have it both ways, I asked you to prove that there were significantly more conservative groups attempting to gain 501(c)4 status than liberal groups. You show me a graph that shows how much money was spent on political campaigns and point out all the Super PAC money. Then when I point out that doesn't prove anything raw numbers of groups you state you already agree with that point and they likely are getting scrutinized because they are better are raising and spending money than their left leaning counterparts. If you'd like to claim both are true, you still haven't proven the first part is true at all so I ask again for this proof...I'm still waiting.
Click to expand...

*** are you talking about? Let me keep this simple for you and Flaggy for example. 1) Conservative groups rely more on these organizations, which are legal, for campaign funding than liberals ones do. 2) Given that this is a relatively new phenomenon, and right leaning groups were better out of the gate at setting up and funding these entities, it makes sense they would be getting more of the scrutiny from the IRS. If you can't follow that, I can't do much more for you.

FlagDUDE08 said:
So you admit that the report you sent to us is biased? After all, when you look at the report, it states the reporting of monies used by Super PACs, but then you say that the left doesn't use those.
Click to expand...

Facts do have a liberal bias. It is a fact conservative SuperPacs spent more than liberal ones. To your second point, I said the left relies more on small individual donations, not that they don't rely on SuperPacs at all. Nice try, but at some point you must get tired of getting proven wrong. ;)

Oh and Fishy, I've dealt with external and internal audits my whole career. If you're not ready to deal with an audit in one of these organizations, you're an idiot. Not too much more complicated than that.
 
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Rover said:
*** are you talking about? Let me keep this simple for you and Flaggy for example. 1) Conservative groups rely more on these organizations, which are legal, for campaign funding than liberals ones do. 2) Given that this is a relatively new phenomenon, and right leaning groups were better out of the gate at setting up and funding these entities, it makes sense they would be getting more of the scrutiny from the IRS. If you can't follow that, I can't do much more for you.



Facts do have a liberal bias. It is a fact conservative SuperPacs spent more than liberal ones. To your second point, I said the left relies more on small individual donations, not that they don't rely on SuperPacs at all. Nice try, but at some point you must get tired of getting proven wrong. ;)

Oh and Fishy, I've dealt with external and internal audits my whole career. If you're not ready to deal with an audit in one of these organizations, you're an idiot. Not too much more complicated than that.
Click to expand...
You stated "As the vast majority of them are conservative leaning" and I asked for proof. You haven't proven that statement at all...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top