A Christian law firm is defending nearly 20 tea party organizations from apparent intimidation by the Internal Revenue Service.
As reported recently on OneNewsNow, at the beginning of 2012 tea party organizations across the country began receiving letters from the IRS requesting more information related to their applications for designation as 501(c)(4) non-profit organizations. The letters were apparently sent out after six liberal Democratic senators sent a letter to the IRS commissioner requesting that he investigate whether certain 501(c)(4) groups are engaging in substantial campaign activity, including opposition to any candidate.
The Associated Press says documents provided by some of the groups show the IRS wants painstaking details about the groups’ postings on Twitter and other social networking sites, information on donors and key members’ relatives, and minutes of meetings. The IRS will not comment on specific cases, but says it simply wants to gather enough information to decide if the groups qualify for tax-exempt status. This would require the organizations not to be involved primarily in activities that could influence an election.
David French is a senior counsel at the American Center for Law & Justice, which is representing at least 16 tea party organizations targeted by these letters. He says there appears to be a coordinated effort to intimidate these groups during an election year.
“Quite frankly for a lot of these groups, it’s intimidating,” says French. “And to be clear, these are not groups that have been accused of any wrongdoing. They’re simply groups applying for a status that has been routinely granted to hundreds and hundreds of other groups.”
Read the article here.
(but not the occupiers! who paid for nothing, cost taxpayers a fortune, took donations and spent with no oversight.)
He has a point (although not the one he’s trying to make), what Maher said is a million times worse.
Bill Burton, the former Obama 2008 campaign press secretary who went on to found the pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA, appeared on Andrea Mitchell’s MSNBC show Thursday, trying to distinguish between the rhetoric used by HBO “Real Time” host Bill Maher and conservative radio talker Rush Limbaugh. Maher recently donated $1 million to Priorities USA.
Mitchell asked Burton how Maher has gotten away with what he said about former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin while Limbaugh was condemned for his own ill-advised remarks.
“Well, a couple of things,” Burton said. “First of all, obviously, some of those things were vulgar and inappropriate and said over the course of years of a comedian’s life. It’s not language I would use or language we would use at Priorities USA.”
“But the notion that there is an equivalence between what a comedian has said over the course of his career and what the de facto leader of the Republican Party said to sexually degrade a woman who led in a political debate of our time, is crazy,” Bill Burton told MSNBC. “There’s no just similarity about what Rush Limbaugh said, lying about the argument that Miss Fluke was making — a law student at Georgetown — and what a comedian has said in the past.”
But he’s perfectly happy to be the arbitrator when it’s a conservative making the comments.
I think the points that you made as you were asking your question are the ones that I will make. We are not, and cannot be, the arbitrator of every statement that everybody makes in the policy and political arena.
As a general matter, obviously language that denigrates women is inappropriate and I think I would point you to what the president said when he was asked about this at his press conference which was he chooses to lead by example, or to try to. He chooses to, in the pursuit of a more civil discourse in our public space, he chooses to try to practice that civility himself. And he calls on everybody to do just that.”
CAIR Press Release 3.7.12: The Oklahoma chapter of the terror-linked CAIR (Council on Islamic-American Relations) called on Fairview Baptist Church in Edmund, OK to drop its anti-Islam agenda, citing the ‘Islamophobic views’ of a church speaker who claims that Barack Obama is an undercover Saudi Arabian Muslim plant in the White House.
The keynote speaker of tonight’s event at Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, Okla., is AVI LIPKIN, an infamous Islamophobe who alleges among other things that Muslims worship the devil and that all Muslims want to kill Christians and Jews.
“This kind of bigotry and hysteria only serves to fuel the growing chorus of anti-Muslim sentiment that is unfortunately spreading in the Heartland,” said CAIR-OK Executive Director Muneer Awad. “We respectfully request that the church drop this speaker and other hate-mongers, and offer it’s congregants a sincere opportunity for dialogue and information about Islam and Muslims.”
Awad said Fairview Baptist Church is known for hosting anti-Muslim speakers such as Gen. William Boykin, who believes that Islam does not deserve religious protections under the First Amendment, and Bridgette Gabriel, who is scheduled to speak at the Edmond church in April, and claims a “practicing Muslim who believes the word of the Koran to be the word of Allah, who abides by Islam, who goes to mosque and prays every Friday, who prays five times a day — this practicing Muslim cannot be a loyal citizen to the USA.”
Pastor Paul Blair of the Fairview Baptist Church issued the following reply,“The Council on American Islamic Relations has been proven in US Federal Court to be the propaganda arm of the Muslim Brotherhood operating in America.
They are on record as having a stated goal to overthrow western civilization and replace our current rule of law with Islamic law. Their ties with terrorist organizations are well established by the United States government and it is shocking that the current Department of Justice is not prosecuting them.”
Read the article here.
(we need to send all islamic assholes back to the sands of some 7th century land like yemen)
Surely the owner must be some islamic dirtbag….
By: Vince, Flopping Aces
From the moment that Barack Obama threw his hat into the ring for President, Democrats have been accusing those who disagree with him of being racists. They are of course being disingenuous, pernicious and at the end of the day, most importantly, wrong.
But what if they weren’t? Let’s say somehow the entire universe of conservatives was made up of racists… so what? Does it change the veracity of their stated disagreements with President Obama? If it were in fact the case that conservatives hate him because he is black does that mean that their well thought out, reasonable and clearly articulated reasons for opposing him are somehow less valid? No, of course it doesn’t.
This issue makes me think of hate crimes. I’ve never been a supporter of hate crime legislation. Not because I like crimes or hate, but because it’s the act that makes something a crime, not the real or imagined hate. If someone beats up someone else because of their race or sexual orientation or religion, they should be prosecuted for assault, period. Is a victim any less injured or dead because the perpetrator assaulted them for their money instead of their – fill in the blank characteristic? No, obviously not. That’s ridiculous. The criminal justice system should deal with the crime and not worry about trying to look into the soul of the criminal.
Race has been an issue swirling around Barack Obama since he first declared his candidacy and then continued once he became President. There was the whole Jeremiah Wright deal and Obama’s spending two decades in his church but somehow inexplicably never hearing a single racist comment. There was his knee jerk reaction that the Cambridge police department “acted stupidly” without knowing the facts of the case. There was his attorney general dropping voter intimidation charges against the demonstrably guilty New Black Panther Party. And just last month the President revived African-Americans for Obama. Can one imagine the outrage if Mitt Romney created a Whites for Romney organization?
To the degree that race is an issue for President Obama, it’s either been because he is making it so or because his party is using it as a red herring to deflect criticism of their agenda. The most obvious example of the latter was during the ObamaCare debate when the Democrats famously accused protesters of using racial epithets and spitting on black congressmen. The late Andrew Breitbart did a good job of dispensing with those charges.
That brings us to the basic element of liberal politics. Their default position towards anyone who opposes Barack Obama and the Democratic Party’s socialist agenda is to accuse them of being racist and that is supposed to be the end of the conversation. In that kind of an environment a conservative simply cannot win – how do you disprove something for which the mere accusation itself is seemingly enough to prove guilt? You can’t. My suggestion therefore is to take a different tack altogether: Don’t try. Rather, I suggest playing the hypothetical card. Instead of trying to disprove the undisprovable, instead suggest: “Ok, let’s pretend I am what you have painted me to be, and let’s assume that’s not going to change… now let’s talk about the issues.”
Read the article here.
President Obama’s White House website is reviving his 2008 campaign slogan, “Yes we can,” by pointing to one of the president’s green energy loan programs as an outgrowth of that campaign mentality.
“In 2008, Presidential candidate Barack Obama declared ‘Yes We Can,’” Emily Niehaus of Community Rebuilds posted, under the headline “Taking Part in a Yes We Can America,” to the White House blog. “I, along with millions of other Americans, was inspired by this approach to politics. I understood this message to be a partnership request.”
Niehaus explains that she founded Community Rebuilds to construct energy-efficient housing for low-income familes, in keeping with the Yes We Can slogan, but she couldn’t have done it without government subsidies. “The green building industry was suffering from a lack of green builders,” she said.
You know this is true at your house!
Dear Mr. Green, would you please sing your hit song “Fuck You” to Obama? Thanks.
Barack Obama will continue on the fundraising trail next week, where he will try to roll in the dough alongside Grammy-winning artist and “The Voice” host Cee Lo Green.
According to Party Time, the Sunlight Foundation’s database of congressional and presidential fundraisers, Obama will spend next Friday with the hip-hop star at an up to $10,000-a-head fundraiser in Atlanta at Tyler Perry Studios.
The African American Leadership Council, a DNC group, is planning the affair.
The $10,000 asking price includes a “photo line,” while $2,500 gets guests into a VIP reception. General Admission tickets start at $500, but a limited number of $250 tickets were made available to young donors. A campaign official reports that 1,000 guests are expected to attend.
Wife told me there was a leak in the bathroom. Well played woman, well played!
Thanks to a new policy that government officials are “pretty sure will eliminate the possibility of love affairs,” thousands of male civil servants in northern Indonesia will no longer receive paychecks. Instead, their wives will get their salaries.
The administration of Gorontalo, a small province in the island of Sulawesi, recommended earlier this year that workers transfer their salaries to their wives because of increasing complaints about marital infidelity. The transfers are now mandatory.
Gorontalo Gov. Rusli Habibie said the policy was “imperative to promote openness between officials and their wives and thus could prevent corruption practices among Gorontalo civil servants,” according to the Jakarta Post.
“Men are usually unable to control their behavior if they have too much money in their pocket,” administration spokesperson Rifly Katili said.
According to Katili, more than 90 percent of the 3,200 civil servants in Gorontalo support the policy and voluntarily transferred their salaries to their wives when the government first suggested the idea.
“I’m pretty sure this will eliminate the possibility of love affairs that undermine families,” Katili added.
Some employees were nonchalant about the new requirement.
See more HERE
How weird can the United Nations get?
(LA Times) — A UNESCO commission Thursday condemned the violence against civilians in Syria but did not remove the embattled nation from its human rights committee, as the U.S. and other nations had hoped.
The United States and other countries want Syria removed from the group’s Committee on Conventions and Recommendations, which handles human rights issues, because of the crackdown by forces loyal to President Bashar Assad during the yearlong uprising against his government.
The U.S. “is profoundly disappointed that this resolution does not call for outright removal” of Syria from the committee, Ambassador David Killion said, according to the Associated Press.
The commission of the executive board of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization voted 35-8 to condemn the crackdown on civilians in Syria. The resolution is scheduled to go before the executive board’s plenary session Friday.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01) spoke on the House floor about the numerous frivolous and harmful apologies President Obama has made on behalf of the United States, while disregarding or even refusing to acknowledge some of the most important current events.
Unions engaging in deceptive and shady behavior? — Now I’ve heard it all.
Via Daily Caller:
During the past year, politically aggressive front groups founded by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) have been partnering with regional “Occupy” groups to pressure businesses and politicians, The Daily Caller has learned.
The organizations — including This Is Our DC; Good Jobs, Great Houston; Good Jobs, Better Baltimore; Detroit’s Good Jobs Now; Fight for Philly; One Pittsburgh; Good Jobs LA; and Minnesotans for a Fair Economy — employ “flash demonstrations” and other tactics to deluge their political targets with protesters, sometimes numbering in the hundreds.
TheDC first reported Monday on the secretive ties between these organizations and the SEIU. Their elaborate and sometimes lavish protests, some with expensive-looking production values, advance the giant labor union’s interests without exposing the SEIU directly to criticism from the public.
Since Monday, TheDC has identified another organization in this network: “Working Washington,” whose Seattle-based website mentions nothing about its SEIU ties. That site, however — like those of the other front groups — is hosted on a server that TheDC traced back to the SEIU.
In keeping with the SEIU’s pattern, Working Washington’s corporate registration filed with the state government in Olympia, Wash. lists Secky Fascione as its registered agent. On her LinkedIn profile, Fascione identifies herself as an “Organizing Coordinator at SEIU.”
Only us older people can truly appreciate this one….