partsisparts Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Looks like the IRS has been doing this sort of thing for a long time... http://www.politicususa.com/irs-targeted-liberal-churches-bush.html http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/when_the_irs_targeted_liberals/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Looks like the IRS has been doing this sort of thing for a long time... http://www.politicususa.com/irs-targeted-liberal-churches-bush.html http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/when_the_irs_targeted_liberals/ Which, of course, makes it perfectly acceptable to keep doing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Which, of course, makes it perfectly acceptable to keep doing. Yes, when it's "defend our guy no matter what he does". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 17, 2013 Author Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) Can you read? He was the DEPUTY Commissioner. That means he had a leadership role there for the past 5 years, not since May 8th. He was in charge of the tax exempt unit since May 8th genius. The unit that is responsible for targeting conservative 501 C groups. I'm well aware of the fact that he's not new to the IRS. Do you really think they would just put some new off the street guy in charge of one of their divisions? If you can't grasp this simple concept Langston then again, stay out of the conversation, it's above your comprehension level. Does it make sense to you that a guy who is already set to retire on June 3rd would be given a whole new division to run on May the 8th? Think about it Langston. Try real hard. Sure is convenient that he's already out the door in less than a month isn't it? That way when he gets canned for being in charge of the tax exempt unit it's no big deal is it? When you retire from a Federal Government job its not some decision where you just say "Oh I think I want to be gone in three weeks." It usually takes a couple of months to get everything together. You have to attend briefings about how they will handle your health care, your retirement check, etc etc. It's not a three week process. So that tells me that this guy had already decided to retire long before he was put in charge of the tax exempt unit. He's a scape goat. Edited May 17, 2013 by BlackHorse 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partsisparts Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Yes, when it's "defend our guy no matter what he does". No, it's more like "it's ok when we do it, but not when the democrats do it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 No, it's more like "it's ok when we do it, but not when the democrats do it." It's wrong no matter which party does it, and we can use the opportunity to make sure it doesn't happen again, regardless of whether a Republican or a Democrat is in the White House. Peggy Noonan sums it up best: What happened at the IRS is the government's essential business. The IRS case deserves and calls out for an independent counsel, fully armed with all that position's powers. Only then will stables that badly need to be cleaned, be cleaned. Everyone involved in this abuse of power should pay a price, because if they don't, the politicization of the IRS will continue—forever. If it is not stopped now, it will never stop. And if it isn't stopped, no one will ever respect or have even minimal faith in the revenue-gathering arm of the U.S. government again. Note - when she says, "If it is not stopped now, it will never stop," I'm guessing she means that Republicans will use these tactics when in a position to do so. And she is 100 percent correct on that score. And guess what - it will be wrong then, too. Here's more from her: And it would be shameful and shallow for any Republican operative or operator to make this scandal into a commercial and turn it into a mere partisan arguing point and part of the game. It's not part of the game. This is not about the usual partisan slugfest. This is about the integrity of our system of government and our ability to trust, which is to say our ability to function. (emphasis added) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) No, it's more like "it's ok when we do it, but not when the democrats do it." I'll repeat myself in the name of assuring myself that you have read me making this statement....... "Two wrongs are still wrong." I am not approving any preceding transgressions. But, I cannot re-write the past. I AM attempting to persuade others to reject such failures from our elected officials. Are you saying your side can do anything that the other side has done? If so, you support nothing better than you have gotten already. And so it repeats, in perpetuity. Edited May 17, 2013 by FiredMotorCompany Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) "f this fact came out in September 2012, in the middle of a presidential election? The terrain would have looked very different." Report: IRS Deliberately Chose Not to Fess Up to Scandal Before Election No, no, no. Our politicians are above lying to the people in order to get re-elected. /s (For LH) I seem to remember an acronym.... CREEP.....Committee to RE-Elect the President, sometime back in the early 70's. So Obama can do what Nixon did? Fine, let Obama DO what Nixon did.......resign. Edited May 17, 2013 by FiredMotorCompany 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 Are you dizzy yet?.....I know you've got to be tired, running from post to post trying to cover for this idiot! The guy essentially in charge of the unit retired. That's a good thing correct? It's not a scandal to have upper management pushed out after mistakes. You work (ed) @ Ford, you know area managers get hit for the mistakes more than do Plant managers. I haven't seen one underperforming Plant manager get retired but I have seen more than a few people under them get forced into retirement. It's always run government like a business till they do and then it's a scandal. There's no scandal concerning that guy's retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 17, 2013 Author Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) The guy essentially in charge of the unit retired. That's a good thing correct? It's not a scandal to have upper management pushed out after mistakes. You work (ed) @ Ford, you know area managers get hit for the mistakes more than do Plant managers. I haven't seen one underperforming Plant manager get retired but I have seen more than a few people under them get forced into retirement. It's always run government like a business till they do and then it's a scandal. There's no scandal concerning that guy's retirement. BS. He was a scape goat, pure and simple. What sense does is make to punish some guy who wasn't in charge when the events for which he is being punished were taking place? Meanwhile the person who was in charge during that time has not been forced into retirement. She too should be forced to retire. At best it is yet another example of no leadership ability on the part of the administration. Make sure the guy you're going to fire is the guy that actually should be punished. At worst it is an obvious scape goat. Lets fire the guy who is about to retire anyway. The public will be none the wiser and they'll think the White House took the necessary action. Only you can't so easily get away with that crap in this day and age. Edited May 17, 2013 by BlackHorse 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partsisparts Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 I'll repeat myself in the name of assuring myself that you have read me making this statement......."Two wrongs are still wrong." I am not approving any preceding transgressions. But, I cannot re-write the past. I AM attempting to persuade others to reject such failures from our elected officials. Are you saying your side can do anything that the other side has done? If so, you support nothing better than you have gotten already. And so it repeats, in perpetuity. No, neither side should be doing anything. But I am looking for republican "outrage" when they learn that they have done the exact same thing in the past. I have yet to see any. Hypocisy at its best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 18, 2013 Author Share Posted May 18, 2013 No, neither side should be doing anything. But I am looking for republican "outrage" when they learn that they have done the exact same thing in the past. I have yet to see any. Hypocisy at its best. Pfft. If anything of this magnatude had been done by the Republicans does anyone here really believe that the left wing mainstream media wouldn't have been all over it like white on rice? Does anyone really believe that liberal politicians wouldn't have been holding hearings and trying to lock people up? Of course they would have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 No, neither side should be doing anything. But I am looking for republican "outrage" when they learn that they have done the exact same thing in the past. I have yet to see any. Hypocisy at its best. Don't expect more than the democrats have done, evade, ignore and lie. Since I am not a republican and I have well stated I demand better behavior and action from elected officials, and having stated that I do not defend the failures of the past and cannot undo what has been done, I do believe continuing to do those things we all recognize as wrong....is wrong. So, who will be "man enough" to stand up and start demanding THEIR party behave as they should, instead of fighting over who should cast the first stone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 He was in charge of the tax exempt unit since May 8th genius. The unit that is responsible for targeting conservative 501 C groups. I'm well aware of the fact that he's not new to the IRS. Do you really think they would just put some new off the street guy in charge of one of their divisions? If you can't grasp this simple concept Langston then again, stay out of the conversation, it's above your comprehension level. Does it make sense to you that a guy who is already set to retire on June 3rd would be given a whole new division to run on May the 8th? Think about it Langston. Try real hard. Sure is convenient that he's already out the door in less than a month isn't it? That way when he gets canned for being in charge of the tax exempt unit it's no big deal is it? When you retire from a Federal Government job its not some decision where you just say "Oh I think I want to be gone in three weeks." It usually takes a couple of months to get everything together. You have to attend briefings about how they will handle your health care, your retirement check, etc etc. It's not a three week process. So that tells me that this guy had already decided to retire long before he was put in charge of the tax exempt unit. He's a scape goat. Really how dumb are you? He was the DEPUTY COMMISSIONER of the TAX EXEMPT UNIT. Do you know what that means? I will spell it out for you... Tax exempt unit: Chain of command Commissioner: Sarah Hall Ingram 2009 to 2012, was active with the IRS's ACA involvement since 2010 Deputy commissioner: Joseph Grant 2007 to May 7th, 2013, (commissioner: May 8th to present) acting commissioner since 2010 as Ingram was sidelined with other duties. Director: Lois Lerner -Worked under Joseph Grant. Essentially the superior to those that created the scandal. So here we have a basic leadership/chain of command for the TAX EXEMPT UNIT. Lerner was the superior to the people who actually created the scandal and she was under Joseph Grant, who was directly over her as deputy commissioner (and as acting commissioner) Now your telling me that a forced retirement for someone leading the unit that caused the scandal is a scandal in and of itself? And that NO ONE can be hustled out the retirement door? Your not that dumb are you? I mean really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trimdingman Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Pfft. If anything of this magnatude had been done by the Republicans does anyone here really believe that the left wing mainstream media wouldn't have been all over it like white on rice? Does anyone really believe that liberal politicians wouldn't have been holding hearings and trying to lock people up? Of course they would have. Watergate is under the radar compared to Fast and Furious, Benghazi and the IRS targeting right wing organizations. The average man on the street has not heard of any of them. Watergate was comparatively minor, and happened forty years ago. Everybody knows about Watergate. Why is that? Could it be pro-Liberal bias in the media? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partsisparts Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Pfft. If anything of this magnatude had been done by the Republicans does anyone here really believe that the left wing mainstream media wouldn't have been all over it like white on rice? Does anyone really believe that liberal politicians wouldn't have been holding hearings and trying to lock people up? Of course they would have. They have, Genius. That is what this conversation is about. Check out post # 51 in this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partsisparts Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 (edited) Watergate is under the radar compared to Fast and Furious, Benghazi and the IRS targeting right wing organizations. The average man on the street has not heard of any of them. Watergate was comparatively minor, and happened forty years ago. Everybody knows about Watergate. Why is that? Could it be pro-Liberal bias in the media? Everybody knows about Watergate because it was the greatest embarrassment to this country ever....period. Do you even know what happened? You do understand that Nixon planned a heist to break in to the DNC headquarters? That 43 people in his administration went to jail? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal Edited May 18, 2013 by partsisparts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partsisparts Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Don't expect more than the democrats have done, evade, ignore and lie. Since I am not a republican and I have well stated I demand better behavior and action from elected officials, and having stated that I do not defend the failures of the past and cannot undo what has been done, I do believe continuing to do those things we all recognize as wrong....is wrong. So, who will be "man enough" to stand up and start demanding THEIR party behave as they should, instead of fighting over who should cast the first stone? Not a republican? Do you consider yourself an independent? Your views are to the right of the Pope.You are republican.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 18, 2013 Author Share Posted May 18, 2013 Really how dumb are you? He was the DEPUTY COMMISSIONER of the TAX EXEMPT UNIT. Do you know what that means? I will spell it out for you... Tax exempt unit: Chain of command Commissioner: Sarah Hall Ingram 2009 to 2012, was active with the IRS's ACA involvement since 2010 Deputy commissioner: Joseph Grant 2007 to May 7th, 2013, (commissioner: May 8th to present) acting commissioner since 2010 as Ingram was sidelined with other duties. Director: Lois Lerner -Worked under Joseph Grant. Essentially the superior to those that created the scandal. So here we have a basic leadership/chain of command for the TAX EXEMPT UNIT. Lerner was the superior to the people who actually created the scandal and she was under Joseph Grant, who was directly over her as deputy commissioner (and as acting commissioner) Now your telling me that a forced retirement for someone leading the unit that caused the scandal is a scandal in and of itself? And that NO ONE can be hustled out the retirement door? Your not that dumb are you? I mean really. He's a scape goat Langston. It doesn't matter how many hairs you try to split. The guy was fired to take the fall for something he had nothing to do with. It was done for the sake of appearance to the general public and not out of any actual effort to correct the problem. When you finally come to that realization then we can continue, but until then you're just another libtard having a fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 18, 2013 Author Share Posted May 18, 2013 Everybody knows about Watergate because it was the greatest embarrassment to this country ever....period. Do you even know what happened? You do understand that Nixon planned a heist to break in to the DNC headquarters? That 43 people in his administration went to jail? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_scandal Watergate was the greatest embarrassment to the country ever? Apparently you weren't alive during the Jimmy Carter years because I can assure you that America was a laughing stock the world over thanks to him. American service members stationed across Europe got to endure being openly laughed at by many a German citizen thanks to the "embarrassment" that was Jimmy Carter. Watergate is by no means our greatest embarrassment ever. Heck it doesn't even hold a candle to some of the crap that Obama has pulled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 18, 2013 Author Share Posted May 18, 2013 (edited) They have, Genius. That is what this conversation is about. Check out post # 51 in this topic. I did read it. Frankly your link to some liberal hack piece does not impress me as a valid opinion without "bias". Far from it. Secondly, a single church that was singled out doesn't scream of targeting to me. There were a whole bunch of people and organizations that were giving anti-war speeches during the Bush administration. Why weren't they targeted too? Why wasn't Jeremiah Wright and his Trinity United Church targeted? To quote your big hero, "There no there, there." It's just another liberal temper tantrum in an effort to use the age old liberal tactic, lie and deflect. Not gong to work anymore. Edited May 18, 2013 by BlackHorse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 (edited) Not a republican? Do you consider yourself an independent? Your views are to the right of the Pope.You are republican.... I am not a republican. How can I help it if a large group of people happen to have many stated ideals in common with me. But, just because a thumb is a finger does not mean a finger is a thumb. Edited May 18, 2013 by FiredMotorCompany Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partsisparts Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Watergate was the greatest embarrassment to the country ever? Apparently you weren't alive during the Jimmy Carter years because I can assure you that America was a laughing stock the world over thanks to him. American service members stationed across Europe got to endure being openly laughed at by many a German citizen thanks to the "embarrassment" that was Jimmy Carter. Watergate is by no means our greatest embarrassment ever. Heck it doesn't even hold a candle to some of the crap that Obama has pulled. The President committed multiple felonies. He should have went to jail. Did it ever occur to you that America was weakened by this scandal and had an effect on Carter's Presidency and America's standing in the world at the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partsisparts Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 I did read it. Frankly your link to some liberal hack piece does not impress me as a valid opinion without "bias". Far from it. Secondly, a single church that was singled out doesn't scream of targeting to me. There were a whole bunch of people and organizations that were giving anti-war speeches during the Bush administration. Why weren't they targeted too? Why wasn't Jeremiah Wright and his Trinity United Church targeted? To quote your big hero, "There no there, there." It's just another liberal temper tantrum in an effort to use the age old liberal tactic, lie and deflect. Not gong to work anymore. I guess it's OK when your side does it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 The President committed multiple felonies. He should have went to jail. Did it ever occur to you that America was weakened by this scandal and had an effect on Carter's Presidency and America's standing in the world at the time? If it hadn't been for Nixon, we wouldn't have had Carter. So, are ya kinda cheering for Nixon now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts