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!
Well that didn't last long.
Hard to be blind to a distinction I did not make.
Hard to be blind to a distinction I did not make.
Is Lois Lerner a ***** because she admitted to being bad at math or because she is using her 5th amendment right? You're such a huge fan of the 1st amendment, surely you couldn't decry someone for using the 5th. Or is she a ***** because you can't help but use personal attacks when referring to people you dislike, especially women.
Doesn't matter whether they were ultimately denied, just as it doesn't matter that they were scrutinized closely. The problem is that they were scrutinized DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs, and their approvals were approved on DIFFERENT time scales than other groups. The government simply cannot do that, period. I would be shocked beyond belief if Obama had anything whatsoever to do with this or if he was even aware of this - it has nothing to do with my opinions of the man or the party in the White House.
It matters in that if this was any kind of purposely done, maliciously inclined action then there would have been at least one that they denied just cause they had to get something done to further their goal of obama fascism. Hanlon's razor, Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
In this case, where groups are applying for a specific status for a specific type of group, the government most certainly can scrutinize them based on their beliefs if they contradict the purpose for that status. The audit findings did not have any evidence that the determination unit which said they used 'tea party' as a blanket term for all potentially political groups was approving or disapproving just because of names. They found fault with it because it gave the impression of being less than impartial.
Well in this new world where something different from what happened was happening, I would find fault with the policy to fast track. I'm not aware of the IRS purposely fast tracking non "tea party" applications.
If beliefs A get through faster than beliefs B, does it really matter whether beliefs B were slowed down or if beliefs A were fast tracked? Those are exactly the same thing: unequal treatment.
Both positions took the same amount of time to get through, position B due to the high volume and political connotations of their titles and goals just made itself a larger target to possibly get audited. Has it been shown at all that every conservative group was instantly audited? Certainly the unequal treatment between conservative groups themselves is something to be outraged about! For what is the difference between tea party and 9/12 but the name and how ****tarded they are?