Impeachment.

[Mace]

http://stateimpact.npr.org/florida/2013 ... n-profits/

[Cuda]

On the other hand, Mace is still a gibbering dumbfuck who thinks reading other gibbering dumbfucks at the daily kos and npr makes him objective

http://stateimpact.npr.org/florida/2013 ... n-profits/

facepalm:

[mvscal]

Contributions to 501(c)(4)s aren't generally tax-exempt.

carry on...

c4's are tax exempt. Donations to them are not tax deductible. Mace, moron that he is, fails to understand the differences between c4 and c3 orgs which are barred entirely from partisan campaigning.

[mvscal]

I don't think it had too many ill effects on the conservative groups collecting money, as they spent $263 million during the 2012 campaign as compared to $35 million by liberal organizations.

Shut the fuck up, idiot. Majority PAC (a liberal org) spent 37 million all by itself. You clearly don't know what the fuck you're about. Why do you persist?

[Felix]

c4's are tax exempt. Donations to them are not tax deductible. Mace, moron that he is, fails to understand the differences between c4 and c3 orgs which are barred entirely from partisan campaigning.

Crossroads GPS, which is a C-4 exempt organization raised about 77 million from fewer than 100 donors in about 19 months....when they filed for tax exempt status, they promised the group would dedicate only 30 percent of its activity to influencing legislation and policy making.....50 percent would be dedicated to public communication about specific issues regarding public education, and 20 percent would be for research.....hmmmm, three quarters of a million dollars per donor.....

in 2012, they spent approximately 70 million trying to get republicans elected to office.....
so much for the "barred entirely from partisan campaigning" eh?

[Cuda]

Crossroads GPS, which is a C-4 exempt organization...etc, etc, etc & so forth...in 2012, they spent approximately 70 million trying to get republicans elected to office.....
so much for the "barred entirely from partisan campaigning" eh?

Only C3's are barred from partisan campaining, dumbfuck. C4's can campaign all they want, however they can't coordinate their campaigining with individual candidates.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

This thread could use some C4. Just sayin.

I would not impeach that declaration.

[Terry in Crapchester]

I'd be a little more impressed with the righties' sincerity here if they had been even 1/1000th as outraged over the Bush Administration tapping the phones of innocent American citizens.

Politics as usual. What else is new?

[mvscal]

...the Bush Administration tapping the phones of innocent American citizens.

Why don't you go ahead and link us to that and we'll compare it to OPlatelip's Plumbers rummaging through the phone records of Associated Press reporters.

[Mikey]

I stand corrected as to the deductibility of donations made to 501(c)(4) organizations. But my take, which is that such organizations cannot operate effectively while their tax status is being held in limbo for political reasons, is still valid. Agreed?

Not really. 501(c)(4) organizations don't have to apply for non-profit status. They self-declare so there's no waiting period while their status is confirmed.

[mvscal]

I stand corrected as to the deductibility of donations made to 501(c)(4) organizations. But my take, which is that such organizations cannot operate effectively while their tax status is being held in limbo for political reasons, is still valid. Agreed?

Not really. 501(c)(4) organizations don't have to apply for non-profit status. They self-declare so there's no waiting period while their status is confirmed.

WRONG

[Mace]

I don't think it had too many ill effects on the conservative groups collecting money, as they spent $263 million during the 2012 campaign as compared to $35 million by liberal organizations.

Shut the fuck up, idiot. Majority PAC (a liberal org) spent 37 million all by itself. You clearly don't know what the fuck you're about. Why do you persist?

Why did you start an "impeachment" thread when the only ones calling for impeachment are Michelle Bachmann and the knuckedragging Tea Party idiots? Oh, that explains why. Like I said earlier, Obama is not getting impeached, but there will be some heads rolling at the IRS (and rightfully so).....which is what's happening. Now go fuck yourself.....and maybe try growing up.

[mvscal]

Like I said earlier, Obama is not getting impeached, but there will be some heads rolling at the IRS (and rightfully so).....which is what's happening. Now go fuck yourself.....and maybe try growing up.

Because you know all the facts, right? We now everything there is to know about this, is that your take?

I've already demonstrated that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about here, so you might want to take a walk or fuck a sheep or something before you cause yourself further embarassment.

[Mikey]

I stand corrected as to the deductibility of donations made to 501(c)(4) organizations. But my take, which is that such organizations cannot operate effectively while their tax status is being held in limbo for political reasons, is still valid. Agreed?

Not really. 501(c)(4) organizations don't have to apply for non-profit status. They self-declare so there's no waiting period while their status is confirmed.

WRONG

Sorry, but you are woefully misinformed. As usualm.

Good at covering it up, though, by being a loud mouthed asshole.

[Cuda]

This thread could use some C4. Just sayin.

anything that makes it easier for you to blow it out your ass

[mvscal]

Sorry, but you are woefully misinformed. As usualm.

Good at covering it up, though, by being a loud mouthed asshole.

You are simply and completely wrong. Sure you can incorporate as a nonprofit and not apply for 501 c4 status but you would not be tax exempt until you apply and are approved.

What are you even trying to dispute?

[Terry in Crapchester]

...the Bush Administration tapping the phones of innocent American citizens.

Why don't you go ahead and link us to that and we'll compare it to OPlatelip's Plumbers rummaging through the phone records of Associated Press reporters.

You're either a dumbass or an unapologetic shill for the Bush Administration. From a google search that took me all of 15 seconds, if that . . .

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bush- ... ts/209064/
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1222-33.htm
http://www.katu.com/news/local/89635317.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/polit ... d=all&_r=0

[mvscal]

Why are you attempting to compare limited warrantless wiretapping (duly authorized by law) of foreign terrorist suspects and their US contacts to the brazenly unauthorized encroachment on an allegedly free press in order to do political damage control?

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Why are you attempting to compare limited warrantless wiretapping (duly authorized by law) of foreign terrorist suspects and their US contacts to the brazenly unauthorized encroachment on an allegedly free press in order to do political damage control?

If the government says they're not breaking the law, then...they're not?


Your hard-on for government just set a new record in dong slurping.

Seriously...are you just re-typing press releases at this point?

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Obama can "claim" to have "evidence" from "unnamed sources" that the Teabaggers are "terror suspects"...and then you're okay with breaking out the car battery to the nipples?

[mvscal]

Chimpy didn't need to "claim" to have "evidence" from "unnammed sources" that Islamic terrorists are "terror suspects." Their bombs told the story.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Chimpy didn't need to "claim" to have "evidence" from "unnammed sources" that Islamic terrorists are "terror suspects." Their bombs told the story.

So...every detainee at your "black sites" is a terrorist? Every drone victim is a legitimate target?

Why don't you take the mask off and proclaim to the world that you're the Mongols and kill anyone you like? Why trouble yourselves with pretense?

[Mace]

Like I said earlier, Obama is not getting impeached, but there will be some heads rolling at the IRS (and rightfully so).....which is what's happening. Now go fuck yourself.....and maybe try growing up.

Because you know all the facts, right? We now everything there is to know about this, is that your take?

So it makes more sense to call for impeachment without "knowing all of the facts?" Who are you? Michelle Bachmann's retarded little brother? Stop spinning, you ignorant moron, and just go fuck yourself.

[mvscal]

Why don't you take the mask off and proclaim to the world that you're the Mongols and kill anyone you like? Why trouble yourselves with pretense?

That would solve a lot of our problems.

[R-Jack]

a new record in dong slurping.

Please.

Every one of these left vs. right threads reads like the same gaggle of cocksuckers claiming bode on each other because they think the throat yogurt they gargle is less salty than the others.

This one is no different

[Felix]

Why are you attempting to compare limited warrantless wiretapping (duly authorized by law) of foreign terrorist suspects and their US contacts

uh maybe you should read the third story down, because District Court Judge Vaughn Walker declared it was illegal.....and exactly how did the bush administration go about determining the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation was a "terrorist" organization....of course nobody knows because whatever evidence they had was classified as "state secrets" and as such, the contents couldn't be disclosed.....

brazenly unauthorized encroachment on an allegedly free press in order to do political damage control

what political damage were they trying to control?
in any event, whoever authorized obtaining the phone records of AP reporters should be sent straight to jail.....
do you think people that break the law should be imprisoned for such violations?

[Toddowen]

This one is no different

Except that you're claiming to be indifferent.

[Cuda]

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

[Screw_Michigan]

Didn't Obummer say "we'll make them look good" or some shit like that?

[LTS TRN 2]

The real scandal isn't the darting and tagging of the Tea Baggers by the IRS. After all, what is the Tea Party? Some fake non-organization of brain-dead cowards funded ENTIRELY by shadow groups like the Koch brothers and similar corporate scum. Who cares? The actual dangerous Orwellian move by Barry is the crackdown on the Associated Press. Wake the fuck up.

[LTS TRN 2]

Well, until very recently--including the (un-elected) terms of the Chimp, the press in fact enjoyed a loose policy of info sharing and dispersing with the White House and members of congress, etc. This recently revealed move by Barry is a distinct and very dangerous new development. I'm down with impeachment, btw.

[War Wagon]

I'm down with impeachment, btw.

Has the Daily Kos approved of this message?

[Terry in Crapchester]

http://www.nationofchange.org/civil-lib ... 1371307019

On Civil Liberties, Comparing Obama With Bush is Easy, and Mostly Wrong

Nearly a dozen years after the passage of the Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in an atmosphere of fear and intimidation, informed debate over the balance between liberty and security is long overdue. That includes a public examination of how widely and deeply the National Security Agency (and other elements of the "intelligence community") may monitor Americans' telecommunications without violating the Bill of Rights.

But that needed discussion isn't enhanced by hysteria or the partisan opportunism it encourages. As others have noted already, the supposed revelation that the NSA is collecting metadata on telephone use in this country isn't exactly startling news. The fugitive ex-CIA contractor Edward Snowden, who leaked documents concerning that program to the London Guardian and The Washington Post, may yet unveil more startling revelations from his peculiar refuge in China. But anyone paying attention has known about this program since 2006, when USA Today first disclosed its existence.

The most important difference today is that Americans are no longer too frightened by the constant "terror alerts" of the Bush administration to consider the boundaries of surveillance and security. Rather than hyping the terrorist threat, like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, President Obama has repeatedly framed a calmer — if equally resolute — attitude toward Islamist extremism.

So while facile comparisons between the Obama and Bush administrations now appear every day in the media, they are quite misleading. Uttered by Republicans and their mouthpieces on Fox News, such arguments are hypocritical, as well.

Consider the single most important surveillance controversy of the Bush era, namely the warrantless wiretapping undertaken on the president's orders. In December 2005, The New York Times revealed that Bush had authorized the NSA to monitor phone calls and emails originating on U.S. territory, without obtaining warrants as required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or FISA. (That's why it was called "warrantless.") For the first time since Watergate — and the intelligence reforms resulting from that true scandal — the U.S. government had eavesdropped on Americans' conversations without seeking the permission of a judge.

Only months before, Bush had claimed publicly that he was a steward of civil liberties and that his agents always got a court order before implementing a wiretap.

But his administration had been using warrantless wiretaps ever since the 9/11 attacks.

Those trespasses against liberty went considerably further than the collection of metadata by the NSA. No reports indicate that the Obama administration violated existing law to eavesdrop on any American — or listened to any calls without the sanction of the special FISA court.

Yet reaction to the recent stories about the NSA's policies has been far more intense than eight years ago. Pundits and politicians have compared Obama unfavorably with Richard Nixon, berating him as a tyrannical betrayer of civil liberties. A few prominent Republicans even seem determined to ruin the NSA, solely because they wish to embarrass the president — a motive that other Republicans attribute to Snowden, whom they vilify as a traitor.

Not a peep was heard from Republicans on Capitol Hill when Bush, his Vice President Dick Cheney and their lawyers were practicing and promoting the theory of the "unitary executive," under which any act ordered by the president in wartime, including warrantless wiretapping, is deemed inherently legal and exempt from judicial review. What exercised the Republicans in those days was the temerity of the Times in revealing what Bush had done.

As for Obama, the complicated truth is a mixed record on civil liberties. He tried and failed to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, and he supported the renewal of the Patriot Act without changes. But he also substantially reformed the use of military commissions and abolished the use of torture, renditions and secret prisons. In ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, he has rejected the "permanent war" ideology, which the Bush regime deployed as a political weapon against dissent.

So far there is little evidence that Obama shares the dangerous theories of Bush and Cheney — but no president should enjoy the kind of exemption from Congressional scrutiny that his predecessors exploited. Whatever Snowden's intentions may be, he has inspired members of Congress to provide stricter oversight of the government's gargantuan data gathering efforts, which are inherently prone to overreach even under the most responsible supervision. At the very least, Congress and the public need to know how the government wields its powers under the Patriot Act — an interpretation that remains classified and thus precludes democratic oversight.

The president's response to that question will test his commitment to the Constitution he swore to uphold.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

No reports indicate that the Obama administration violated existing law to eavesdrop on any American — or listened to any calls without the sanction of the special FISA court.

In a just and free society, every lamp-post on Pennsylvania Avenue would be decorated with one of these nauseating shills.

[Terry in Crapchester]

The article I quoted is hardly a shill for Obama.

As for Obama, the complicated truth is a mixed record on civil liberties.

If you need me to further dumb it down for you, on civil liberties . . .

Obama > Bush. By a wide margin.

Ideal situation > Obama. By a wide margin.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

The article I quoted is hardly a shill for Obama.

Oh...okay...

...a mixed record on civil liberties.

Yeah, that's some mix you got there...

One part state terror...one part totalitarian repression...add water(board)...stir and serve.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Uhhh, you do know that Obama actually banned waterboarding, don't you? http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-b ... s-military

Funny, but you never had a problem with anything Bush did on civil liberties. Why bitch now, when there are actually signs, albeit minor ones, of improvement?

[Sirfindafold]

Its difficult to waterboard a motherfucker when's he's been blown up by a drone strike.

[Python]

Eh, just turn on the sprinkler.