Silver Wheaton Corp. Message Board

Why do you keep posting the same thing over and over? You must be PRESGORE, AMERICANS_LOVE_OBAMA etc. Or possibly this is just some weird compulsive thing lots of lefties have.

You libtards keep misusing the same statistics over and over and over. The reason we have high infant mortality is high substance abuse among pregnant women, mainly in inner cities. This phenomenon is rare in most of the world. That's not a function of the health care system. Plus the US calculates infant mortality differently than much of the world. We count any infant death if it was born alive. Lots of countries don't count it if the baby dies a few days after birth. Your use of gun violence statistics prove more gun laws are needed is also invalid.

I shouldn't use words like imbecile and so on but I don't know what else to think when you keep assuming things for which there is no actual evidence, disputing things that the IRS itself has admitted are true, combined with a constantly shifting and contradictory line of argument.

What do you mean by "need" tax-exempt status?

From Politifact (not a friend to Republicans):

"During the Bush administration, liberal groups were targeted" by the IRS, similar to recent targeting.

Rep. Jim McDermott, June 4, in a congressional hearing

McDermott's office pointed us to a recent Salon article that described how the IRS subjected the NAACP, Greenpeace and a liberal Episcopal church in California to sometimes intense scrutiny.

The IRS moved to revoke the tax-exempt status of All Saints Episcopal in Pasadena.

That case dragged on for three years before the IRS dropped it. From 2004 to 2009, the IRS had a Political Activities Compliance Initiative aimed at 501(c)(3) groups that might have endorsed a candidate or otherwise crossed the line between charitable work and electioneering.

But the current controversy, which involves the examination of nearly 300 groups, is significantly different from the examples cited in the Salon article, experts told us.

• In the current case, the inspector general found that IRS staff used "inappropriate criteria" to identify groups for special attention. A group's name or a focus on government debt and spending triggered IRS action, rather than the group's activities.

• Most of the current groups, about 70 percent, held or were applying for 501(c)(4) status, not 501(c)(3). The limits on (c)(3) groups — the ones examined under Bush — are much more strict than for (c)(4) groups.

• The inspector general found that all current cases with "tea party," "patriots" or "9/12" in their name were singled out.

While some liberal groups were audited, the numbers we could find were small, largely confined to 501(c)(3) nonprofits where the rules are more strict, and stemmed from complaints levied by outsiders.

...the systematic nature of the IRS actions between 2010 and 2012 represents a distinctly different set of circumstances. We rate the statement Mostly False.

"Well, I read the thing about people with the name "progressive" in their application being targeted."

You got an excerpt of the article?

So this WAS abuse, BUT it was justifiable that the Tea Party was treated this way, which means it wasn't abuse. But if it was abuse then we have to assume liberal groups were also abused with no evidence. I guess we should just pick one or the other. It's a made up world.

You're statements are so continually contradictory combined with made up "facts" that it's clear you're either psychotic, stupid, a congenital liar or some combination of all three.

The liberal groups don't get hundreds of questions or wait years without any decision IMBECILE. That's why it's a scandal in the first place IMBECILE.

Washington, D.C., attorney John Pomeranz represents liberal organizations seeking tax-exemption. He told CBS News that he has found some of the IRS requests of tea party groups "new" and "very troubling," and said he doesn't recall getting similar demands for his liberal clients.

Engelbrecht's attorney, Mitchell, says the IRS process for conservative groups was relatively painless, often taking just a few months, until about 2010 when there was an abrupt shift: simple questions became intrusive, lengthy interrogations requiring professional legal help. Applicants sometimes had to spend tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees, they lost revenue, and in some cases, got so discouraged that they gave up on tax-exempt status altogether.

Also nutjob you're contradicting yourself. You're justifying targeting Tea Party groups and simultaneously implying they WEREN'T targeted, i.e. that liberal groups must have gotten the same treatment. The IRS has already admitted that they were targeted, as I already pointed out, and so you've been trying to justify it, even though the IRS doesn't claim any justification. Then out of the blue you start suggesting they did the same thing to liberal groups, which contradicts the point that they targeted the Tea Party.

True the Vote (TTV), the nation's leading voters’ rights organization, filed suit in federal court in Washington today against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), asking the Court to grant its long-awaited tax exempt status and seeking damages for the unlawful actions by the IRS in the processing of its application for exempt status. ActRight Legal Foundation, a 501(c)3 fundamental rights and public interest law firm represents True the Vote in the lawsuit.

“We’ve been waiting for three years to receive a decision from the IRS about our tax exempt status,” True the Vote President Catherine Engelbrecht said. “After answering hundreds of questions and producing thousands of documents, we’re done waiting. The IRS does not have the power to pocket veto our application. Federal law empowers groups like True the Vote to force a decision in court – which is precisely what we aim to do.”

Why don't you just make up a fact out of thin air that the liberal groups got asked the same questions and got their applications delayed for years in your normal psychotic fashion?

THE LIBERAL GROUPS DO NOT PERFORM 50% SOCIAL WELFARE EITHER PSYCHOTIC IMBECILE.

What does the fact the Tea Party complained since May 2012 got to do with it? Another irrelevant point nutjob.

As I said the liberal groups don't spend on social welfare either nutjob.

Whatever YOU associate the Tea Parties with is irrelevant. That has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LAW freak. Under the law everyone is supposed to be treated the same. The IRS is not allowed to go in with some preconception that this or that group is not likely to qualify and treat them differently. If some question is legitimately needed to determine whether they qualify then that would presumably be asked of everyone and would be a standard question psychotic nutjob. They can't logically know in advance what the answer would be if asked of a liberal group and so determine they don't need to ask it psycho.

Also as I said previously nutjob, if they aren't qualified under the law then you just reject them and tell them why they were rejected, not string it out for years and ask dozens of questions that had no logical connection to whether they qualify nutjob.

What do you think the criminal investigation is about if this is just a legitimate enforcement of the law nutjob?

Schulman actually said Easter egg hunts were a reason for his WH visits. Really.

Your claim that the groups spend money on candidates directly is erroneous as well. They do not. You have NO FREAKING IDEA WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.