Skip to main content

View Diary: All Three GOP Manufactured Scandals Falling Apart (160 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It IS indefensible! (0+ / 0-)

    The IRS uses political and ideological criteria to target applications is defensible? jeez. Maybe you're OK if they used Progressive ? Community? Organizing? Forward? They sued Patriot, Constitution.

    this is insane:

    with political ideologies right there in the name might be at a substantially higher risk of, you know, operating primarily as political vehicles and not as vehicles for social welfare,
    We have a lot of 504c too: Organizing for Action -which actually was an outgrowth of the Obama campaign. Media Matters? Move on?

    I cannot believe you would approve of the IRS using political bias to hold up applications. The IRS says it is wrong but you defend them anyway?  Nixon would approve.

    •  YES! When the SPECIAL TREATMENT you're after (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      certainot

      requires that you're not primarily political (at all, actually, see 1959 etc.)... then MANY things that indicate you might just be primarily political could cause problems with your application...

      ...LIKE HAVING THE FACT RIGHT THERE IN YOUR NAME.

      I hope that you simply don't get that they were sent for extra scrutiny because they were OVERTLY political, not because of WHICH political affiliation, because scrutinizing how political an application is IS PRETTY MUCH EXACTLY WHAT IS REQUIRED IN MAKING A DETERMINATION ON IF THE GROUP GETS SPECIAL TREATMENT ONLY GRANTED IF IT'S NOT PRIMARILY POLITICAL...

      ...because the other option does not paint you in a positive light.

      •  You are simply wrong (0+ / 0-)
        not because of WHICH political affiliation
        It WAS because of which political affiliation. They used specific political terms from ONE side only. "Patriot", "Constitution" are political? They didn't use Green, Liberal, Progressive for identification. Why this is acceptable to supposed liberals is beyond my comprehension. It is Nixonian.

        And why are you defending this action when they themselves have admitted it was wrong?  

        I hope you just didn't realize these facts because the other option does not paint you in a positive light.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (137)
  • Community (62)
  • 2016 (44)
  • Environment (39)
  • Elections (38)
  • Culture (36)
  • Bernie Sanders (36)
  • Republicans (34)
  • Hillary Clinton (27)
  • Education (25)
  • Climate Change (24)
  • Labor (24)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (24)
  • Barack Obama (23)
  • Media (22)
  • GOP (21)
  • Civil Rights (21)
  • Economy (20)
  • Affordable Care Act (19)
  • Spam (18)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site