Posts tagged tea party
May 17, 2013
The Internal Revenue Service official in charge of the tax-exempt organizations at the time when the unit targeted tea party groups now runs the IRS office responsible for the health care legislation.
Sarah Hall Ingram served as commissioner of the office responsible for tax-exempt organizations between 2009 and 2012. But Ingram has since left that part of the IRS and is now the director of the IRS’ Affordable Care Act office, the IRS confirmed to ABC News today.
Her successor, Joseph Grant, is taking the fall for misdeeds at the scandal-plagued unit between 2010 and 2012. During at least part of that time, Grant served as deputy commissioner of the tax-exempt unit.
Grant announced today that he would retire June 3, despite being appointed as commissioner of the tax-exempt office May 8, a week ago.
Image added to original post.
By Gary DeMar
If you underpay and are assessed a penalty, just quote back to the agency what senior IRS official Lois Lerner said when she was asked a question: “I’m not good at math.”
If it’s good enough for the IRS, then it should be good enough for us. Tax payers of America unite! We have nothing to lose but our chains!
In 2012, the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative political groups to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status. The rules regarding non-profit organizations are very specific. The IRS was asking questions and searching for information that was not part of the requirements. It was obvious harassment.
Folks at the IRS are blaming “low-level” employees in its Cincinnati office. The problem with is lame excuse is that the Cincinnati office is THE office “where determinations on tax-exempt organizations’ eligibility are made and is the only physical office in the complex IRS bureaucracy dedicated to tax-exempt determinations.”
The IRS hierarchy demanded that groups reveal the internal workings of their organizations, a provision that is not required by the law. This included “the identification of members, how they are selected, who they associate with, and even what they discuss.”
The tip off to the IRS was words like “tea party” or “patriot” on their exemption applications.
An Associated Press story made me laugh out loud:
“The agency — led at the time by a Bush administration appointee — blamed low-level employees, saying no high-level officials were aware. But that wasn’t good enough for Republicans in Congress, who are conducting several investigations and asked for more.
It’s not the fault of liberals. It was George Bush’s fault . . . I’m not good at math . . . low level government employees. Everything but the fault of liberals.
Let’s get something straight. Administrators and appointees come and go, but bureaucrats go on forever. Most government employees are liberal. Talk by conservatives to shrink the size of government is a threat to government unions and their employees.
It’s time to abolish the IRS and implement a low-level consumption tax that includes a requirement to shrink government expenditures.
Don’t Tread On Me: Rise of the Republic – Full Movie
http://DontTreadOnMeMovie.com | Support the film makers, please purchase an offical copy with DVD extras and bonus material. From the Tea Party Movement to State Legislators, the American people are drawing a line in the sand. On what side of it will you stand? Has the government our Founders created been forgotten by Washington DC? Is a Patriot Uprising ready to capture the spirit of 1776? “Don’t Tread On Me: Rise of the Republic” gives the viewer a look into the movements, mindset, and legislation that will catapult the “Great Restoration” into households across America. What is the choke-collar the Federal Government uses to reign in the States? Are the States sovereign or subjects of Washington DC? What did the Founders foresee and how did they seek to protect us from a tyrannical government? “Don’t Tread On Me: Rise of the Republic” exposes the commerce clause, defines Sovereignty, the proper role of government, a Constitutional Militia and much more. “Don’t Tread On Me: Rise of the Republic” offers sound solutions to take back rights stolen by our out-of-control, despotic federal government. “Don’t Tread On Me: Rise of the Republic” will educate, inspire, and activate a nation desperately seeking direction. What side of the line will you stand?
Picture of Billboard on Highway here in East Tennessee “America or Obama – You Can’t have Both”
I took this picture yesterday of this billboard on Highway 40 going East.
It is located right after the Buttermilk Rd. Exit and before the Oak Ridge Lenoir City Exit.
I think it states it very well!
It says at the bottom it was paid for by the “Roane County Tea Party”
As I see it the only real candidate that could have saved America is out of the running now (Ron Paul).
Romney is just as much as a puppet as Obama. So….. my choice is I WILL NOT VOTE!
“I don’t think (Ron Paul supporters) have been disrespected.” – Mitt Romney
The Grand Old Party produced a scripted appeal to the faithful. The 2012 Republican Party convention in Tampa, designed to sell a filtered image of a country club version of conservatism, begs the historic substance of a traditional embodiment of true timeless values. Hitting a range of obligatory themes is not equivalent to standing for the principles of a constitutional republic. Appealing to the estranged elements of the GOP needs more than words to restore faith and hope. Reasoned policy stands require a refutation of the failure of the Neoconservative agenda. So do not be duped by the language in the platform.
The indomitable Phyllis Schlafly loves the planks, in the article: Republican Party platform best yet.
“It rejects a long list of United Nations treaties, including the treaty on women’s rights, the treaty on the rights of the child, the treaty on persons with disabilities, the arms trade treaty and the Law of the Sea treaty. The platform also rejects Agenda 21, including its proposal for a global tax and various U.N. declarations on the environment.
Altogether, the 2012 Republican Platform is an excellent document written by grass-roots conservatives. It is a true reflection of American values.”
Now how can any red blooded conservative disagree with a political party that rejects the globalism of the United Nations? Well, our distinguished champion at the Eagle Forum engages in wishful thinking, if she believes that the platform is anything more than tomorrows fish wrapper paper.
For a concise analysis of the irrelevance of the planks in the platform, view the John Nichols: Mitt Romney Versus the Tea Party video. In politics, deeds count, while rhetoric blows away with the wind.
Judge a campaign by the political handlers and their records. Examine the viewpoints that the political endorsers are committed to their core. The notion expressed by the New York Times in Platform’s Sharp Turn to Right Has Conservatives Cheering may give temporary joy, but the ugly underbelly of the NeoCon purity sect is at work to purge the party of the residual of real conservatives.
Published on Aug 30, 2012 by BenSwannRealityCheck
Ben Swann Reality Check takes a look at how the most controversial rule change in party history was not legitimately passed.
No matter if you are right, left or capable of critical thinking and not needing a party to tell you where to cast your vote, this should appall everyone. Maybe more will wake up and realize the illusion of choice is just that, an illusion to make you think you still have a voice.
The 2012 Republican National Convention will primarily serve as the coronation of Mitt Romney as the party’s nominee for president.
Many prominent Republicans will make speeches explaining exactly how Mitt Romney and only Mitt Romney (ok, Paul Ryan too) will save America from the inevitable doom which comes free with Barack Obama. A few of them will be hoping to have their 2004 Boston moment where they burst onto the national stage as a fresh face ready to roll up his sleeves and change the way politics are done in four years. Should Romney not win, of course. Which would be tragic according to everyone in attendance.
What differentiates this convention from most pep rallies is the current fight for the soul of the Republican Party. Ron Paul and his supporters have amassed a fair share of the delegates, and they aren’t going down without letting their voices be heard despite attempts from the Romney campaign to ensure otherwise. After eight years of big government “conservatism” perpetuated by George Bush and the Republican House and Senate, the Tea Party finally stood up to both parties in 2010 and demanded that government live within its means. The battle has even found its way into the ticket, with Paul Ryan rhetorically endorsing fiscal restraint.
My question for the week: how much will Republicans embrace liberty and individual government versus demagoguing Mitt Romney? Stay tuned to the convention and check in here to find out.
By Lori Stacey
The real sequence of events leading up to the Rand Paul announcement
Make no mistake about it, the pundits claiming that Rand Paul’s endorsement of Mitt Romney would be good for his political future in the long-run are absolutely wrong. In my opinion, Rand Paul just committed political suicide and we may never know all the reasons behind his decision or the timing of this disastrous announcement. Rumors had been widely circulating that there were serious death threats upon his father, Ron Paul. There has also long-been claims that many on Ron’s paid campaign staff have been undermining his campaign, all along. At this point, we do not know whether Rand came to this decision as a result of bad people around him giving him terrible advice or if he was the sacrificial lamb trying to take the heat off of his father.
It was somewhat interesting that Rand made a point to mention that his conversation with Romney occurred in Washington. Could this have been his way of confirming four witnesses’ claims of seeing Mitt Romney at the Bilderberg Group’s secretive meeting in nearby Virginia? He also knows that the social conservative base has been hard for his father to win over. Mentioning about how much the Romneys and Pauls have in common regarding family values was a bit odd considering the question but delivering it to a Sean Hannity audience was also quite interesting.
The real sequence of these events seems to have been misunderstood. Let us remember that Rand Paul met with Romney days before Ron Paul sent out an email claiming that he will not have enough delegates to win the nomination. I believe the email was actually an attempt to try to soften the blow of his son’s endorsement that Ron would have to be politically savvy enough to realize would be a huge mistake. As a statesman that has fought his entire career to promote the original principles of our constitution and the individual freedom and liberty of the American people, it would be expected that he probably gives his son the individual respect to make his own decisions as an adult. He probably tried to talk him out of it, but we may never know that part of the story. Regardless, the email may likely have been an attempt to lessen the blow of his son’s decision giving the pundits the reasoning that he did not officially endorse Romney until after his father’s email. Although the public announcement was made after the email, the decision to endorse Mitt Romney was probably made before it.
By Rory Carroll
Wisconsin governor Scott Walker survives bitterly fought recall election
Union activists had waged 18-month campaign against the governor whose victory has Republicans rejoicing nationwide
Wisconsin‘s governor Scott Walker survived a bitterly fought recall election on Tuesday after Republican voters mobilised in huge numbers, propelling him to a victory that will boost Mitt Romney’s run for the White House.
Television networks called it for the incumbent at 11pm local time after early returns from rural counties gave him an apparently unassailable lead even as voters were still queuing to cast ballots at polling stations in Milwaukee, a Democratic stronghold.
It was a devastating defeat for Democrats and union activists who had waged an 18-month campaign to oust Walker over his restrictions on collective bargaining and cutbacks of pension and health benefits of public sector workers.
Romney issued a swift statement saying the result would “echo beyond the borders of Wisconsin” by showing Republicans could stand up to “runaway government costs imposed by labor bosses” and demonstrated “what sound fiscal policies can do to turn an economy around”.
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) is the last man standing in the Republican presidential race besides presumptive victor Mitt Romney, even after a strategy statement misunderstood by many as “dropping out.” Since that announcement, Paul has won his second state, Minnesota (Maine was the first), and is on target to end up controlling presidential voting delegations in such states asIowa, Louisiana, and Missouri. Far from fading as a cultural force, Paul continues to draw huge crowds, sometimes over five thousand students, on campuses as well.
As the presidential field has shaped up to a certain Obama vs. Romney in the major parties, the desire for a challenger championing either the serious right or serious progressive left grows. And Ron Paul—though he continues to deny any third party plans and his political machine has clearly hitched itself to the GOP for now—is strangely a viable candidate for either role, should he choose to accept it.
Paul is in many ways the rightest of right wingers, with his desire to kill the income tax, end governmentinterference in medical care, and get to a balanced budget in three years with no tax hikes. A third party Paul, should he make such a radical choice, would provide a choice for right-wingers dissatisfied with Romney’s small-government bonafides.
Yet despite Paul’s impeccable Tea Party credentials on tax and spending issues, he would be an even more appealing choice to progressives dissatisfied with President Obama. Even while running for the GOP presidential nod, Ron Paul has presented a political vision in many respects to the left of the Democratic Party.
President Obama wants to continue and expand every aspect of the war on drugs, including the war onstate-legal medical marijuana operations. Paul thinks government attempts to arrest people for actions that harm only themselves are inherently illegitimate. Obama’s administration has set records in deportations. Paul mocks border walls as un-American in Republican candidate debates.
Obama approves of enormous bailouts to huge financial institutions, and his administration’s high-level economic planning is run almost entirely by insiders from such institutions. Ron Paul is opposed to what he (and leftists) calls “crony capitalism.” Paul’s free-market policies would leave corporations with no more power over the American people than the corporations get by selling people things, things people choose to buy. (Unlike the products of the hated health insurance companies, which ObamaCare mandates that we all purchase.)