Poor gritsboy, you know exactly why I call you gritsboy. Your intellectual "stove" cooks grits like none other in existence. You probably can't tell time, either. See the cross examination scene of one of the "eye" witnesses in "My Cousin Vinnie."did you catch the score of the game today?
For the rest of you, here it is.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZkbtP-t_D8
BTW, gritsboy, you got any beanstalk beans left?
Also, you don't look any better in Yanker's pinafore and mary janes than he does. Originally Posted by Randy4Candy
The fact of the matter is these 501c4 groups should not be tax exempt. . . On both sides of the aisle. They are supposed to promote social welfare not influence elections. Any of you numbnut tea puckers think you aren't trying to influence elections? Originally Posted by WTFThen ALL of them should be targets, not just the ones that oppose the administration.
I'd like to hear what Nadfly's definition of a conspiracy is without looking it up and pasting it. In fact, I'd like to hear what CJ, WTF, and the rest say a conspiracy is because considering some of the posting, I don't think they know. Originally Posted by JD Barleycornreputable sources have told other reputable sources GOP insiders pulled some IRS strings and had the Tea Party audited in order to slow them down and increase republicans chances at the polls.
I'd like to hear what Nadfly's definition of a conspiracy is without looking it up and pasting it. In fact, I'd like to hear what CJ, WTF, and the rest say a conspiracy is because considering some of the posting, I don't think they know. Originally Posted by JD BarleycornDo you know what a 501(c)(4) is?
I'd like to hear what Nadfly's definition of a conspiracy is without looking it up and pasting it. In fact, I'd like to hear what CJ, WTF, and the rest say a conspiracy is because considering some of the posting, I don't think they know. Originally Posted by JD BarleycornI've already cut and pasted the LEGAL definition of a conspiracy in another thread. The nonlegal definition is somewhat looser. What is in this article IMO adheres to the legal definition: two or more people planning a course of action in this case thru a misuse of power to perpetrate harm by an illegal act to another party (not necessarily political party but person(s) or organization or their property).
Do you know what a 501(c)(4) is?If the Dims can shovel their manure, then the TPs has the right to shovel likewise. However, there is a problem when, during a Dim administration and during an election cycle, the TPs are onerously overburdened by intrusive government requirements and the Dims are allowed to keep shoveling unimpeded.
That is the IRS's job to check and see if a group is legit.
My point of contention is that they allow questionable groups on both sides to enjoy that status.
The tax code needs to be overhauled if some Tea Turds are getting tax exempt status to spread their manure!
Originally Posted by WTF
So the Tea Party types got a little taste of racial profiling....It was political profiling, Doofus, and libertards ranted and threw tantrums when Nixon did it, now you libertards want to bend over backwards trying to excuse the Odumbo administration for the same violation!
No surprise that they don't like it. Originally Posted by Doove