It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Senator Calls for Using IRS to Curtail Tea Party Activities

page: 4
44
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 11:21 PM
link   

diggindirt
Hmmm, how about this: start a politically oriented group and don't crawl to the IRS asking for recognition. Tell your contributors in plain and simple words that their donations are in no way tax deductible. Use the money you collect as you see fit and don't bow down to the little tin gods. It is simple and it works.
I had the great honor and pleasure of working with just such a group back in the 1990s. The basic government structure of our county had become corrupt and it became clear to some of us that neither party was interested in cleaning up the place, rather they were interested only in the position with the perks. We came together, formed a concerned citizens group and made the decision not to seek the Feds approval for a group that wanted to solve a local issue. We informed our donors that we would be giving an accounting of the expenses on a monthly basis. Our finances were open to the members. We raised and spent about $70k and as a result we got a fruitbasket turnover in our county government. We recruited candidates by approaching people that we felt could and would handle the jobs with dignity and honor. We held candidate forums for every elected office and made them available on radio and TV as well as live. We had about 60 members, of which about 20 of us worked at this cause like it was a part-time job because we could see the future and it looked really dim if we didn't have some drastic changes.
If people are serious about changing government, they must be the change. The IRS can't harass you if you don't play their game. If you have to have a tax deduction in order to make a donation---you're playing their game and you will never win. What we do with our money as private citizens is none of the government's business. What we did is perfectly legal and it works for people who are truly interested in finding solutions to problems.


We are most likely ideologically different but that is awesome. Kudos to you and your fellow get off your assers.




posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


The tea party is not under control of the GOP if they were the GOP wouldn't be trying to marginalize them.

The GOP tried to control them at first but they failed now they are trying to kick the Tea Party out. But too late the infiltration is too deep and most conservatives are waking up to see that the GOP establishment is the problem, and the support for the Tea Party is growing. The establishment Republicans and Demonrats are running scared, so they are throwing everything and the kitchen sink to muffle them.


edit on 25-1-2014 by amfirst1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


Actually your graph is incorrect. It doesn't have anything to defined the difference, it's a common propaganda graph devised by the leftist. My graph is the most accurate based on government size of America's modern parties. That graph doesn't have one common denominator to base the difference on, which all graphs are required to have.

Here is a good definition of a proper graph. However, today's Republican are more leftists.


edit on 25-1-2014 by amfirst1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


If the right wing cannot embrace anarchy. Then why does senate leader Harry Reid always calls the Tea Party anarchists? Plus, he is die hard leftists. Obviously, he knows something that u dont and prob would agree with me. Yet I still think he is an idiot.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Are they really losing, are they really on the run? Not playing devils advocate here, but owing some kind of taxes, has any one in a twist, and whatever side that one chooses is only as strong as the paper that backs it, has the irs taking much of that. I wouldn't call it a loss I would more like call it a Trojan Horse. As the irs is and has become a regulatory entity, quit political swing I would say



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by amfirst1
 


Your graph is a line, and as such cannot accurately represent the differences.

Totalitarian governments exist on the left and right of the spectrum and are independent of economics. Socialism and Capitalism exist along side varying degrees of democracy or dictatorship. It is inaccurate to combine them.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 09:19 AM
link   

tothetenthpower
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Somebody should tell the Senator that Obama is way ahead of him in using the IRS as a weapon, against political opponents.

.

~Tenth


Weird, aint it?



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Leonidas
 


My graph has one thing that has a common denominator across the line: government size. Other fake charts have no common denominator so anyone can make anything up because it's not properly defined.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Flatfish

The Democrats, on the other hand, are "Sick To Death Of The Tea Party." The ignorance and insanity displayed by Tea Party representatives in Congress literally makes us feel the need to puke. The more compassionate among us may feel some pity but that's about it.



Ah "compassion", that is what the democratic party is all about right?



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


What movement? The tea party was very quickly taken over by big money Republicans and now only does the bidding of big money interests.

The "movement" was dead along time ago. Most common folk just don't know it.


edit on 25-1-2014 by fripw because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-1-2014 by fripw because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by fripw
 


The Tea Party is not dead. Part of them have been taken over by the Republicans but it failed. They are not dead and one easy way to tell is that the establishment Republicans hate them and r trying kick them out. Also, they are trying to fund establishment candidates to take out the Tea Party candidate. U guys obviously have no clue what's going on.

A lot of the Tea Party fractions have barely any funding from anybody. They are dedicated to the cause and will work for free. And the reason why they can't get any funding is because the IRS will not grant them exempt status. They are fighting for free for the most part. U just can't hijack a idea buddy.
edit on 25-1-2014 by amfirst1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Why should I care if one branch of the NWO is fighting with another? left, right, tea party, it doesn't make a difference. We will still continue to have interventionist foreign policy, mass surveillance, more bankster crime and bailouts, more globalist free trade, more jobs exported, more illegal immigration, more money printing and dollar devaluation. Nobody in the Tea party or establishment parties is serious about doing anything about that.



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 05:21 PM
link   
So the democrats are finally admitting that if you don't believe what they do, don't want what they want and don't vote for them...you aren't welcome in New York...ummm...I mean the United States of America? This ass-hat wants to use the IRS to attack such people? So...I guess they are DECLARING WAR! Is that what you guys want...WAR? Why else would they first lay out exactly who the enemy is, know where they are and then call for an assault on these law abiding Americans unless they want a fight.

Does this piece of crap along with Cuomo speak for you???? Are you who voted for these people really ready for what they are asking? Taking a segment of the law abiding American people and declaring WAR?

As much as I hope not...I'm ready. Are they? Are you?



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by amfirst1
 



You are mixing political and economic spectrums, that is where your confusion resides.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Leonidas
 


Over time the political spectrum changes. It's not fixated for life.

The liberals use to stand for freedom. Now they are statists.

Republicans used to stand for limited government. Now they stand for progressive big government much like the left.

My graph is a accurate depiction of the modern American parties with a define measurement.

Other graphs like the one presented are all over the place with no clear definition and no measurement.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by amfirst1
 


Very good point.

The definitions within the political spectrum have changed many times.

The definition of Anarchy is one example.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by amfirst1
 


It is not the spectrum that changes it is the parties values and actions that change.

The Republicans and Democrats have switched roles a number of times during America's history.

The spectrum is the measuring stick that stays static, what the parties believe is what shifts to-and-froe.
edit on 26-1-2014 by Leonidas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Leonidas
 


I would be interested in seeing your "spectrum" along with definitions.

TIA



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


The economic and political spectrum are separate. Dictatorships exist or have existed on top of two very different types of economy. A totalianistic government coupled with a socialist economy is Communism. At the other end of the economic scale, a Capitalist system joined with totalitarianism is Fascist.

Hobbes "Leviathan" is on the opposite side of the scale from "Anarchist".

Words get loaded with meanings not initially intended. Anarchism and Socialism are two perfect examples of words that have had their meaning amended in common usage.

Socialism exists in degrees by definition and in common usage.

The spectrums that describe political systems are best depicted with a circle, while economic gradients can somewhat accurately be described with a line.

Socialism is not a governmental style, it is an economic model. Both an elected official and dictator can believe in socialist ideas or in a strictly capitalist system.

The reality, as with most things is in the middle. The labels on political parties often evolve to sometimes be unrecognizable.
edit on 26-1-2014 by Leonidas because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2014 by Leonidas because: I cant spell apparently




top topics



 
44
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join