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.

 

Love or Hate him, Ted Cruz just tried to protect the First Amendment & got rejected by Democrats!?!?

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 


My point is in response to the OP's claims that Ted Cruz is somehow a "hero" for "defending" the first amendment. BS.

My point being is, that the only reason these political clowns even care about the IRS scandal is because it attacked their political base. If it attacked the other side, Ted Cruz wouldn't give a rat's. Would probably even quietly support it. It would have been the same had liberal groups been attacked by the IRS, and Hilary Clinton was the one doing the sqwaking. She wouldn't be doing it because she some how cared about the 1st amendment, she'd be doing it because liberals were being targeted, and Ted Cruz wouldn't be care. She isn't saying anything right now, however, because it was the other side getting audited and harrassed.

The fact that the IRS is involved in anything besides raping your paycheck is not shocking. The IRS has been been terrorizing and abusing power with impunity since they were created. Hell, I remember back in the 90's when congress ended up complaining about the strong arm tactics of the IRS. You want to stop this, or protect any of your rights? Get rid of the freaking IRS. Or reduce its power and reach down to a very minimum.




posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 09:35 PM
link   

whyamIhere

buster2010
Cruz needs to really start paying better attention to what he is talking about. Both groups were at fault the IRS and the groups that were violating their groups tax classification. If they want to get involved in politics all they have to do is change their groups tax classification. Making groups tax free so they can buy elections is just plain wrong no matter who you support. Too bad he wasn't in office when Bush was in charge because Bush also used the IRS to target Democrat groups. But I bet he wouldn't have said a thing about it.


Not calling you a liar...

Can you show me where Bush used the IRS?


Here you go.

Bush used IRS to target opponents

All presidents have been using these organizations to target their opponents.



posted on Feb, 27 2014 @ 10:34 PM
link   

buster2010

whyamIhere

buster2010
Cruz needs to really start paying better attention to what he is talking about. Both groups were at fault the IRS and the groups that were violating their groups tax classification. If they want to get involved in politics all they have to do is change their groups tax classification. Making groups tax free so they can buy elections is just plain wrong no matter who you support. Too bad he wasn't in office when Bush was in charge because Bush also used the IRS to target Democrat groups. But I bet he wouldn't have said a thing about it.


Not calling you a liar...

Can you show me where Bush used the IRS?


Here you go.

Bush used IRS to target opponents

All presidents have been using these organizations to target their opponents.


Very reputable and unbiased reference you used there. I would wholly discount it except it refers to unbiased sources such as the LA Times.

All presidents? Really? I have noticed you are quite accomplished at making wide sweeping generalizations about various groups of people. Good job!

If this was, indeed, being done by Bush (and presumably Clinton before him) then why did it not make the news? Are you going to claim that all the news outlets are conservative?



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 05:39 PM
link   
I suppose I forgot to post my other opinion, which was that this whole "charade" of protecting 1A is not even necessary, the 1A already exists and there does not need to be anymore laws stacked on top of it. If we can't enforce the bill of rights, what the heck CAN we enforce?

But let's not pick and choose between 1, 2, 3, etc...all amendments in the bill of rights shall have equal protection.

This of course does not excuse Democrats, who are supposedly the champions of free speech, to block this.

Lastly, if Bush and/or his administration used IRS to target political groups, he should be at fault for it, you won't see me trying to protect the guilty. On top of that, I have not named Obama in my OP so if you guys want to bring up Bush, are you automatically bringing Obama into the fold? Is he also to blame? Democrats, if you want equality, you got it.
edit on 28-2-2014 by eLPresidente because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 05:41 AM
link   
The First Amendment doesn't NEED any protecting. The fact that the First Amendment part of the Constitution IS all the protection it needs.

Silly, fake attempts to 'protect' Constitutional provisions like this do more to damage the Constitution than protect it.

The Constitution is SUPERIOR in every way to mere legislation.

Pretending that mere legislation can somehow 'protect' the Constitution is just a cynical attempt to fool vulnerable people into thinking that Congressional action is of higher authority than the Constitution.

Having said that, Cruz' attempt at comedy cannot in any way, shape, or form, be construed as an attempt to 'protect the 1st Amendment'. What it was was an attempt to allow big money to buy politicians in secret. The IRS did EXACTLY what it was supposed to do; Cruz and friends don't like that so they are trying to get them to stop. Issa spent 14 Million dollars trying to intimidate the IRS and failed, so Cruz is trying to legislate the problem away.

Giving crappy undemocratic bills high-faluting names does not make them any less crappy; it just makes vulnerable people talk about the smoke and mirrors instead of the substance.
edit on 1/3/2014 by rnaa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2014 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
 




OF COURSE NOT. HE IS ONLY GRANDSTANDING BECAUSE THE TARGETED GROUPS WERE CONSERVATIVE.


Except of course the targeted groups were just about exactly 50% conservative and 50% liberal. Each and every one of the 'targeted' organizations had something in their name that indicated that they were primarily a political action organization, not an education organization.

The tax exemption they were applying for requires them to be an educational organization; not a political organization.

Not one of the 'targeted' organizations was inconvenienced in any way what-so-ever. They were free to continue to solicit donations during the application process.

Exactly ONE organization was denied. ONE. It was a LIBERAL oriented organization.

Cruz is Grandstanding, for sure, but it is grandstanding based on one lie after another.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
More Cruz PR for his presidential run. what else is new.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join