Islander
5/27/2013 4:25:00 PM
On 5/26/2013 6:57 PM, Josh wrote:
> On 5/26/2013 9:54 PM, Islander wrote:
>> On 5/26/2013 3:54 PM, Josh wrote:
>>> On 5/26/2013 5:23 PM, chatnoir wrote:
>>>> On May 26, 2:09 pm, Josh <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It would of come anyway - or your an innocent regarding politics!
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly - it would have come because of the pressure from the report.
>>>>> If this is all a fable, then you have to show why the report is
>>>>> mistaken.
>>>>
>>>> The article!
>>>
>>> The article makes the same argument the IRS made in its defense during
>>> the investigation: "only" 1/3 of the cases (96 out of 298) receiving
>>> special attention came from groups with Tea Party, Patriot, or 9/12 in
>>> their names - and therefore the IRS wasn't disproportionately reviewing
>>> conservative groups.
>>>
>>> However, the report says that another 141 groups should have been
>>> targeted in addition to the 298 that were, and none of those 141 has the
>>> name Tea Party, Patriot or 9/12. So, Tea Party groups had a 0% chance
>>> of escaping scrutiny while other groups had a 40% chance.
>>
>> Perhaps, but what do you think the odds are that the Tea Party groups
>> were not primarily political? The scandal here is that so many
>> political organizations were finally approved for 501(c)(4) status.
>
> That may indeed be another scandal - I don't know. But, that doesn't
> take away from the one being debated.
Unfortunately it doesn't take away. But, put yourself in the job of
setting priorities on a flood of 501(c)(4) applications. How would you
decide which ones to pay the most attention to? My understanding is
that a pre-selection was done on the basis of a key-word search.
Unfortunately, we don't know all the key-words that were used and the
IRS is not likely to release *that* list or they will be attacked by
everyone who feels discriminated against! Was the word "Occupy" used,
for example? From a practical point of view, I can see good reason to
include the expressions "Tea Party" and "9/12" in your search because
they are very likely to be primarily political. Makes for a good
scandal, tho, since someone leaked those specific key-words in what
appears to me to be intentional incitement to rile up the conservative
political base.