Friday, June 7, 2013
The more we hear about it, the more it's clear the real scandal of the IRS actions regarding certain "social" groups is that political groups like teabagger affiliates, or left-wing analogues, get tax exemptions at all. The law states that only groups with purely non-political social aspirations qualify for tax deductions. As it stands, they've been a tax scam not only for the groups but for their donors.
So, yeah, they should be scrutinized by the IRS; and yeah, the law should be way tidied up. And, yeah, it's not a little rich that teabagger groups should be demanding favors from red-blooded American taxpayers. But when have they ever been consistent?
If the IRS actions were unfairly applied to teabagger groups (I'm not sure we know: and we do know that of the groups that applied for tax exempt status, none of the teabaggers were denied, but some lefty groups were...) then, sure, it needs corrective action. (Turns out fully two-thirds of the groups that were granted tax exempt status were conservative groups, which is, you know, a little too facty for the Foxified.) But if there are groups abusing the law, appyling for tax-exempt status that are, in fact, political organizations, then by what criteria ought they be tagged for scrutiny? (Irony alert: the same people outraged that the IRS used certain terms for screening, are the ones demanding that anyone with a funny hat gets stopped and frisked... Profiling, I believe they call it.) Me, I'd go for teabags; and, maybe, any group that mentions Saul Alinksy. For starters.
But, as I wrote previously, the only one of the Foxobeckian scandals that really bothers me is the investigations of reporters. And that's anything but a clear-cut issue: finding the balance between protecting national security, and freedom of the press, and freedom of inquiry is murky water. And I guess I've forgotten what teabaggRs had to say when George Bush got his patriot act, after which he gathered data like a squirrel, technically legally, and before which he did the same with no regard for the law at all.
Surely, though, there's no hypocrisy on either side about this, right? And no way Fox "news" would be humping the questionable IRS story for political purposes.
Here comes my next newspaper column: Once upon a time, most Republican members and leaders had integrity. Believed in science. Consi...
My next newspaper column: “Being president doesn’t change who you are. It reveals who you are.” (Michelle Obama.) The same can be sa...
My next newspaper column : Allocated only around 700 words once a week, I’m always playing catch-up. So here’s a time- and space-limit...
My next newspaper column, sent in with too little time to address the latest mass murder. But Trump sent condolences, so it's all ok...
Tomorrow's newspaper column: Bullet points for Trumpists: · Trump said he’d protect Medicare and Medicaid. His budget cu...