Add our voice to the chorus of condemnation of the Internal Revenue Service’s inexcusable mistreatment of tea party groups. The federal tax agency abused its considerable power by targeting conservative nonprofits for greater scrutiny.
The revelation of the IRS’s blatantly unfair criteria for nonprofit reviews has prompted swift and justified denunciation from the right, the left and the center. The interim IRS director, Steven Miller, has resigned, and Joseph Grant, head of the agency’s tax exempt and government entities division, is retiring. Investigations, including a criminal probe by the Justice Department and the FBI, are piling up faster that tax returns on April 15.
The IRS has maintained the improprieties were confined to its Cincinnati office, where a team is responsible for determining tax-exempt status. President Barack Obama has vowed to hold the IRS accountable. He must follow through.
The Inspector General for Tax Administration issued a report Tuesday that found the IRS inappropriately targeted applicants for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status with words and phrases such as “Patriot” and “Tea Party” in their names. The agency sought inappropriate information from the groups during an overlong process.
The Inspector General reviewed 296 applications. As of Dec. 12, 2012, none had been denied, though 28 had been withdrawn by the applicant and 160 were open. Some of them had been languishing for longer than three years.
“It was pretty much a proctology exam through your earlobe,” Karen L. Kenney, the coordinator for the San Fernando Valley Patriots, a tea party group in Southern California, told the Washington Post. The group dropped its application out of frustration.
At least one East Tennessee group was put through the IRS wringer, too. The IRS took about 37 months to grant the Roane County Tea Party tax-exempt status, said Gary Johnston, the group’s co-chairman. The process normally takes roughly four months. A few months after he submitted the paperwork in 2009, Johnston got a package from the IRS demanding answers to roughly 80 questions. The agency sought information about members, their relatives, their occupations, their political activities and more.
After showing the package to an accountant, who told him the probing was illegal, and going more rounds with the IRS, Johnston gave up. Last month the IRS surprised him with the news that the Roane County Tea Party’s application had been approved.
While the IRS is clearly the culprit here, part of the problem lies in the tax code’s 501(c)(4) provision itself.
These organizations — dubbed “social welfare” groups because their primary mission is to support the common good — exist in the political shadows. They are allowed to engage in some limited political activities, and their donor lists are private. That is a recipe for illegally funneling untraceable money into campaigns.
The IRS is supposed to determine whether these organizations are jeopardizing their nonprofit status by engaging in too much political activity. The danger is that it would be easy to conduct a political witch hunt, which is exactly what the Cincinnati office’s targeting looks like.
We agree with the Inspector General: “We believe all applications should be reviewed prior to approval to determine whether tax-exempt status should be granted,” a memo included in the Inspector General’s report states.
The IRS wields tremendous power, but with that power comes the responsibility to enforce the tax code in a fair, nonpartisan manner. On this occasion, the agency failed miserably. The congressional and criminal investigations should follow the evidence wherever it goes. Those responsible for this abuse of power must be held accountable. Americans cannot and will not tolerate a rogue IRS.
Mile-wide tornado rips through…
Stars shine for Billboard Awards
Prom 2013
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 279
tnhiker writes:
I think any organization with "church" or "religion" in their business description should have their tax exempt status revoked. Just imagine the outrage in the country if that happened. Better still, just imagine how much less our sales, income and property taxes could be if all of those bible-thumpers had to pay their fair share....
MaryQueen writes:
The IRS targeted the Tea Party groups for one reason. They were asking all funds coming to them be tax exempt. How can that be targeting if the group asked for it? Where the IRS failed was not applying the 501c4 status to all political groups and not making a determination, yea or nay in a timely manner. The Tea Party, as well as Progressive groups, have no business getting 501c4 tax status.
American Cross Roads, Carl Rove's so called 501c4 group spent over 70 million dollars last year on political ads. Not one dime was collected in taxes on this money sent to ACR. Soros has a tax exempt groups also & the same goes to his group, although not near as much money was tax exempt. The rule to follow should be straight forth. If 50% or more of a groups activities is for political advertising it shouldn't get the 504c4 status, plain & simple. Of course the GOP is trying to find out if the President order this to be done, much like GOP President Nixon done. Where was these same GOPers in 2004 when W Bush had the NAACP investigated by the IRS?
As usually the GOP fails to take a stand on todays issues & uses this to smear the President. Just another case of the barking dog.
If a group is practicing tax evasion, as the Tea Party has shown, then its not targeting. The same is true for government law enforcement agencies. If a group has shown they are willing to kill people, such as a few Muslims have, how is it illegal to start an investigation with those groups? Call it targeting or not, if their acts are illegal I fail to see the governments crime.
Blut_und_Ehre writes:
Two words come to mind after reading your post-clueless and semi-literate. Even Obama pretends to be outraged by the monstrous actions of the IRS and both Democrats and Republicans in Congress are calling for IRS heads to roll and any other heads associated with this atrocity. Why not write the President and Congressional leaders and demand they back off as, in your opinion, the IRS has done nothing really wrong. Again, you are clueless.
olejake42 writes:
The press was well aware of the reports of abuse 3 years ago and did nothing to investigate them. Their silence reveals their tacit approval. To now trumpet their disapproval when the should have been doing their job years ago rings hollow. The fact that they disagree politically with those who were victims caused them to conveniently look the other way. They are part of the problem.
This administration knew about the abuse months before the election and did nothing about it. It is time to consider "high crimes and misdemeanors."
woodcutter writes:
Your editorial is correct, however most of the Tea Party groups are purely political and should be "527" organizations, which, by the way, are also tax exempt.
Scull10k writes:
Bureaucracy rules.......
TVA's Watts Bar Nuclear mistakes and cost overruns
TDOT cost overruns
FBI's Fast & Furious
State Department's Benghazi fiasco
Tenncare fraud
Defense Department hammers.....
Just wait for our newest bureaucracy-healthcare
These things happen in every government administration, local or national. After the fact a few hands get slapped and the bureaucracy just keeps on growing.
rauchy writes:
The question I ask is if the IRS did in fact target conservative groups then what was the benefit to the IRS or an IRS employee?
Assuming there is no benefit economic or otherwise then someone else pulling the strings was the beneficiary. The entire government is corrupt and exists solely for the benefit of those capable of pulling the strings.
MaryQueen writes:
In fact I have wrote both Congress & the President. When you ask for something do you expect not to be questioned about its use or reason? Oh sorry, I forgot your mental status. But since you seem easy to convince these groups met the letter of the law, maybe you should pay everyone else's taxes for them because they want you too. Now go back to your crayons & coloring book.
Archer writes:
“These organizations — dubbed “social welfare” groups because their primary mission is to support the common good — exist in the political shadows. They are allowed to engage in some limited political activities, and their donor lists are private. That is a recipe for illegally funneling untraceable money into campaigns.”
Is this why conservative nonprofits were harassed at length and liberal groups were rapidly approved? It appears the IRS wanted this “untraceable money” to flow in one direction only. The IRS has chosen political sides as we flirt with banana-republic elections. For the moment liberals should rejoice for they currently enjoy the full support and approval of a much feared government agency. That’s a very powerful, and dangerous, friend to have.
ac1957 writes:
Good Lord! Slow down. Take your meds. George Soros has more than one group. Where is your information to prove your assertion regarding the amount of money Soros' groups collected? Second, Nixon did not order the IRS after anyone. If you have evidence otherwise, present it. Third, if you honestly think Republicans "fail to take a stand" you're simply not paying attention. Nobody is "smearing" the president. He's doing that all by himself.
And what in the world is this "tax evasion" you're claiming the Tea Party "has shown?" Evidence please???
Seriously, Mary, you are off your rocker! There's simply no basis in reality for the nonsense you spew. It's beyond comical, moved into the realm of pathetic.
knoxdad45 writes:
Limited to Cincinnati? You are about a week behind on your facts. There is now plenty of evidence that it involved offices in DC and California also. The "few rogue employees" excuse was a poor attempt at damage control by the Obama administration.
ac1957 writes:
Mary, this response you made to Blut_und_Ehre makes absolutely no sense. It's virtually incoherent. Seriously, read it again and see if you can't clarify it some.
And if you have, in fact, written both Congress and the President, and you didn't have someone edit your letters before you sent them, don't be surprised if and when the men in the white coats come knocking at your door.
In case you haven't been following along, it has already been established that the questions asked and the information demanded by the IRS of these groups were inappropriate and unnecessary and overly-burdensome.
OldMP2 writes:
IRS Vendetta is just one of many Obama scandals.
IRS Vendetta – IRS agents given free reign to harass and persecute Obama’s enemies --
conservative Tea Party and Patriot groups, among others, for special scrutiny when they sought to apply for tax-exempt status.
IRS chief knew about these attacks as early as May 2012 and other officials in Washington were clued in more than a year before that. The IRS is facing a criminal investigation for targeting conservative groups.
The NAACP says that the harassment of TEA Party groups was justified. The NAACP sees the harassment as justifiable punitive revenge against Obama’s enemies.
The EPA Targeted Conservatives. The partisan pattern established by the IRS scandal -- conservative groups being singled out for mistreatment – is also practiced at the Environmental Protection Agency.
Benghazi – US embassy attacked by a militia that the US government was funding. White House ordered stand down and allowed the ambassador and three others to die. White House and State Department lied about the events for months.
Associated Press Spying – The Obama administration illegally spied on the Associated Press to hunt for Federal whistleblowers.
Jay Carney stated that the official DNC and White House position is that such use of federal agencies is appropriate.
Fast & Furious – Obama administration facilitated the arming of the brutal Sinaola Mexican drug cartel. Two members of American law enforcement and scores of Mexican Citizens have been killed as a result. The purpose of Fast & Furious was to ban guns and destroy the Second Amendment.
Boston Bombing – Multiple Federal agencies ignored warnings from Russian and Saudi Arabia that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was actively planned to commit terrorism. Tsarnaev was even included on a list of people whom Saudi intelligence believed to be the top four most dangerous terrorists in the United States. No one in the Obama administration even bothered to notify the Boston police.
Several News organizations reported that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has been reaching out to private-sector executives seeking donations for nonprofit organizations that help enroll people in ObamaCare.
Then there are the scandals with gun control and immigration – violating the Constitution and not protecting the Country.
The Obama administration has gone openly Rogue and is destroying America.
OldMP2 writes:
Why are Democrats supporting Obama?
The point that is so interesting to me is that Mr. Obama is destroying the Constitution and taking Freedom from Americans and the Democrats still defend him and his actions.
He and his administration have violated every Amendment comprising the Bill of Rights except for Amendment III.
Obama is siding with the Muslims to violate Freedom of Speech – Amendment I.
During the last few months, Obama has tried to disarm the American People thus violating Amendment II.
Obama legalized collecting and using your personal information contrary to Amendment IV.
Obama allows his administration to condemn land without the consent of land owners, a clear violation of Amendment V.
Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and supports this Act that allows American citizens to be held indefinitely without proving them guilty of any crime – violating Amendment VI.
Obama is destroying the Bill of Rights and the Democrats – supposedly they are Americans – are supporting Obama in this destruction.
Obama is destroying American’s Liberty and the Law. Obama’s actions will not impact JUST the Republicans, but all Americans.
Yet, the Democrats are supporting Obama. Why?
If Obama has his way America’s Freedom will be gone – never to return – not for just the Conservatives; but for All Americans.
Will any Democrat tell me why you are supporting Obama?
I need to understand your reasons.
OldMP
HATEBAMA writes:
Well, Blut, guess we need change semi to il.
southernbelle79 writes:
Wait a second, this article cannot possibly have appeared in KNS, because it is a socialist rag that only goes after Republicans. . .
Scull10k writes:
Esau, OldJake is calling you.......please, answer.
southernbelle79 writes:
I can't say why Democrats are supporting Obama, but this Republican leaning, independent (who voted Republican in the last 4 presidential elections before this one) is supporting Obama because my 401K is back up higher than it was before the Bush fueled crash of '08, and I am optimistic about the future. And really, Republicans, until you stop hating everyone but rich, white males (Your code word: real Americans), you will continue to lose national elections.
The enlightened members of your party know you are on the wrong side of immigration, women's rights, gay rights, and opportunity based programs such as the support of education. Unfortunately, they can't make it through your primaries, where the far right dominates.
WeMovedHere writes:
The record keeping and/or reporting requirements for 501c4 are probably easier to deal with than section 527. Even so, an organization with a primary purpose of impacting elections should register under the correct section of the law.
MaryQueen writes:
I suppose the Nixon tapes asking George Shultz's to use the IRS didn't exist. Quote, "He doesn't have that job because he has blue eyes"
After that I stopped reading anymore of your post because you obviously don't have a clue on something that is so easily available to back up.
letsdebate writes:
Im not sure why they support ChicagObama.Sheeple I guess.(which I will admit either party can have) What I dont understand is blindy supporting corruption and law breaking and destroying the constitution and NOT understand anything one political party is allowed to do,the opposing party will be able to do when they are in power. If you are allowed to hold a hostage when you have the gun,expect to be held hostage when the other person has the gun.I refuse to stand by ANY party when they are wrong,corrupt or unlawful.Doing so is not just being sheeple,its inviting wrong no matter which party is in office. Our founding fathers had wanted oversight and checks and balances for a reason. They just never expected w all our advancement and education,that we would blindy support our party regardless which side it is,and regardless of how wrong. We would rather win our arguments at the water cooler and in these forums then understand the brilliance of those founding fathers and their foresight about checks and balances and oversight. Somehow in general,the smarter we get,the less we are...
OldRedneck writes:
The IRS did not abuse squat.
Anyone who applies to establish a 501c(3) or 501c(4) organization must be prepared to justify why they deserve to be tax exempt or not identify their donors.
After President Obama's election, 501c(4) applications to establish "social welfare" organizations QUADRUPLED. Many of these had "Tea Party" or "Constitution" or "Patriot" in their names. Every one of them had nothing to do with social welfare or education. They were GOP-supported front organizations whose sole purpose was to attack the president.
The IRS was right to require them to prove they were eligible for 501c(4) status.
Interesting to note that several DEMOCRATIC PARTY organizations were denied status . . . something you conveniently forgot to mention.
Columbo writes:
Really? You vote for a President based on your 401 K performance?
Columbo writes:
Actually, redneck, the I.R.S. required answers to questions of certain groups that they had no right to ask. Why do you not see that as an abuse of power?
SpeakUp writes:
Yes, shame on the IRS for closely examining applicant groups that put words and phrases in their names that in modern usage suggest commitment to anti-American, nut-job extremism and anti-government violence with a real big dose of racism, homophobia, and anti-Semitism.
And of course don't expect Fox Sentinel to ever ever add its voice to the chorus that condemns the largest most dangerous ACTUAL scandal going on in our country: GOP extremism and obstructionism. That's what really threatens our country's safety and future. And that's what Fox Sentinel endorses and supports every time it endorses a GOPer for any public office.
Columbo writes:
I agree. Words in a group's name can be a red flag. I think the uproar is why conservative sounding titles were singled out, while words such as progressive, liberal, etc... were completely ignored. Do you have an explanation for that?
OldMP2 writes:
Thank you for telling me why you voted for and support Mr. Obama; especially since you are a “Republican leaning, independent”.
I certainly appreciate one of the reasons you voted for Mr. Obama, because your 401K value is up. It is reasonable to vote your own self interest.
My point of view is not much different. I, too, vote my self interest – I vote for Freedom. I value Freedom above all else.
In fact, I have pledged my Life, my Fortune and my Sacred Honor, just as the Founders did, to fight all who would take our Freedom – as Obama is doing.
Mr. Obama has and is violating our Constitution. In fact, his violations are so flagrant that he refuses to abide by the Court’s ruling that his actions are unconstitutional. He ignores the Court.
He and his administration have violated every Amendment in the Bill of Rights except Amendment III.
You then wrote: “you are on the wrong side of immigration.”
When you condone illegal immigration, you are condoning things that harm America.
First, illegals are taking jobs from Americans.
Second, they are overwhelming our medical facilities, because the illegals will not be denied medical attention.
Third, they are overwhelming our welfare programs and are taking much needed services from our own needy.
Fourth, many illegals are criminals and drug traffickers that make our Country less safe.
Fifth, illegals vote their own self interest and vote for Democrats that pledge to give them more “free” things. Illegals harm American.
I do not understand what you mean by being on the wrong side of women's rights.
I have Loved and been married to my best friend for over sixty years and She and I have equal value. We both have the same Rights – guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. I fight for her Freedom exactly as I do for mine. I told her on the day we married that I would “Love and Honor Her” – I keep my word.
Then you mention “gay rights” -- gay Americans have the same Rights as all other Americans – no more, no less.
Then you mention “opportunity based programs.” These “programs” simply take from one group and giving to another where the decision is made by an uncaring and biased government – absolutely nothing fair about that.
Then you mention the enlightened members of your party that can't make it through your primaries, where the far right dominates.
Yes, thank goodness for the “Far Right” or we would all be doomed to living in a country that is over run by illegals, facing more debt than we can possibly repay, stripped of our Right to self defense and all other Rights that the Left want to take from us.
One other point, if it were not for white males and the brave American Ladies, you certainly would not be enjoying the Freedom that you now have.
You then state: “you will continue to lose national elections.”
Conservatives did not loose an election, that election was stolen by a usurper who is not eligible to be president.
Axemanagain writes:
“It was pretty much a proctology exam through your earlobe,” Karen L. Kenney, the coordinator for the San Fernando Valley Patriots, a tea party group in Southern California, told the Washington Post."
Maybe the IRS was going about this the right way after all?
Columbo writes:
Anti-government violence? A tea party group? Example please.
Billy10 writes:
Are you just a week behind on the news or you just unwilling to face the truth? The Inspector General identified illegal targeting of Conservative groups who disagreed with Obama. The head of the IRS and the President are now admitted that they occurred.
Billy10 writes:
Got it. According to you it is okay for the IRS to illegally terrorize anyone who does not agree with far left extremist.
Axemanagain writes:
Actually what "OldRedneck" said is the truth and you're having a hard time facing it. There's a fantasy out there that Obama, in the middle of trying to end two wars and pull us out of a recession, conspired with the IRS guys in Cincinnati make "tea party" groups file extra paperwork. You guys really need to work on your paranoid fantasies, I miss the old days when Obama's family planted his birth announcement in the Hawaiian newspaper to cover up that he was born in Kenya. You know, because him running for president was in their master plan. Of course if they had a master plan you would think they would know not to travel to Kenya when his mom was about to give birth.
ac1957 writes:
Good God, you get worse as the day wears on, don't you? Take the meds!
Was Nixon convicted of improper influence on the IRS? Where's your evidence? I asked before, and I'll ask again. But of course you got yourself all side tracked by the color of somebody's eyes or some such nonsense. Stay on task. Read the whole post. Provide evidence to support your crazy assertions. In other words, put up or shut up.
WHERE is your evidence of Tea Party "tax evasion?"
ac1957 writes:
Actually, that's not true. They did not quadruple after Obama's election. That's merely what you've been fed, and of course, you swallowed it whole, didn't you.
Go find a reliable source. And, offer up the names of the "several" Democratic party organizations that were denied status.
Are you aware that a substantial number of the conservative groups are STILL awaiting approval? Yes, still, after years and years . . .
Billy10 writes:
"Tyranny - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster …
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tyranny
Definition of TYRANNY. 1: oppressive power <every form of tyranny over the mind of man — Thomas Jefferson>; especially: oppressive power exerted by government <the ...
Tyranny | Define Tyranny at Dictionary.com
dictionary.reference.com/browse/tyranny
noun, plural tyr·an·nies. 1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. Synonyms: despotism, absolutism, dictatorship."
Obama is guilty of the tyranny that the reason the constitution was written to protect American citizens against being terrorized by their government.
He has used agencies to target those he disagrees with politically. This violates our constitutional right to express our disagreement with our government.
He has used agencies to enact laws that the congress would not pass. This violates the constitutional requirement that all laws must be passed by congress. Congress is collectively our representatives even when we disagree with them. When the President by passed congress he was acting as a dictator and denying us the representation we are given under the constitution. This is my biggest problem with Obama. When the constitution and laws disagree with his political agenda, he ignores and violates them.
All of those defending abuse by the IRS are oblivious to the truth that has been revealed or just don't care.
Guday2die_1 writes:
And as soon as groups like the Sierra Club, PETA, and Media Matters give up theirs, I'll agree with you.
Guday2die_1 writes:
Here ya go MaryEllie...
"Want Approval from IRS for Your 501(c)3? A Liberal-sounding Name Helps, Conservative Watchdog Group Found"
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shep...
"Targeting" does bother you at all, does it?
Guday2die_1 writes:
Put DOWN the mason jar, redneck.
Seriously, you believe Democratic Organizations have been denied?
Blind squirrel syndrome will give you one, I'll give you that.
Name TWO.
Guday2die_1 writes:
Show me the college transcripts...
Seriously.
twicevolalum writes:
"Add our voice to the chorus of condemnation of the Internal Revenue Service’s inexcusable mistreatment of tea party groups. The federal tax agency abused its considerable power by targeting conservative nonprofits for greater scrutiny."
You see it's right there, even the news sentinel is confused about political orgs and nonprofit orgs in the phrase "conservative nonprofits." If you're truly tax exempt public service organization, then you are not a political organization or a "conservative nonprofit." Some PACs do have components of their organization that do public service but in many cases trying to find that line and draw that line truly is like trying to find a needle in a haystack or separate mud. The waters are murky because those who ultimately benefit from these organizations (congress) get to write the laws regulating the organizations.
burpee_von_rotweiler_IV writes:
True. The press took a hands off stance with their "Golden Child" until the Justice Department's illegal Associated Press witch hunt. The charm is wearing off and their darling has now become fair game.
The person who headed up the IRS tax exempt division from 2009-2012, Sarah Hall, is now the person heading up enforcing The IRS ObamaCare laws, including the "individual mandate." Sweet!
OldRedneck writes:
Okay, boy, you asked for it:
Maine chapter of Emerge America
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/15/meet_...
Progress Texas
and
Clean Elections Texas
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05...
What's your next stupid question??
Fox_on_the_Run writes:
President Obama, AG holder and the IG disagree with you but hey keep burying your head in the sand denying facts. You libs are great at that.
Fox_on_the_Run writes:
In fact, applications were declining, data show.
Top IRS officials have been saying that a “significant increase” in applications from advocacy groups seeking tax-exempt status spurred its Cincinnati office in 2010 to filter those requests by using such politically loaded phrases as “Tea Party,” “patriots,” and “9/12.”
Both Steven Miller, the agency’s acting commissioner until he stepped down Wednesday, and Lois Lerner, director of the agency’s exempt-organization division, have said over the past week that IRS officials started the scrutiny after observing a surge in applications for status as 501(c)(4) “social welfare” groups.
The scrutiny began, however, in March 2010, before an uptick could have been observed, according to data contained in the audit released Tuesday from the Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration.
The number of 501(c)(4) applications for all of 2010 was actually less than in 2009.
According to the audit, 1,735 groups applied for 501(c)(4) exemption for the federal fiscal year that ended September 30, 2010—six months after the IRS began its scrutiny. That was down slightly from 1,751 the prior year.
http://philanthropy.com/article/IRS-R...
Game, set, match!
Billy10 writes:
They had Texas in their names. To a liberal that is like waving a red flag in front of a charging bull.
whizkidtn writes:
from the Editorial:
"The congressional and criminal investigations should follow the evidence wherever it goes. Those responsible for this abuse of power must be held accountable."
EXACTLY! Heads should roll (figuratively) and several people need to GO TO JAIL over this!!
What I wonder is just how much of a stomach for this will the liberal lap-dog press have when the "wherever it goes" heads to the White House (where it very well might)??
whizkidtn writes:
Wow, just wow.
Under this regime, we have record numbers of people on food stamps, record numbers of people of all ages dropping out of the work-force because they can't find jobs or meaningful/gainful work and you want to support this feckless party in power because YOUR 401K is up in this Sucker's Rally (you should look that up)?? Amazing!
How extremely SELFISH of you! Shame on YOU!
It really is ALL about you, isn't it??
Grow up. Open your eyes. Think about your neighbor or your own children's future for a change.
Cliffhanger writes:
No you are wrong. The press was well aware of the reports of abuse almost TEN years ago. And they did nothing to investigate them.
The administration at the time TEN years ago did nothing about it. That actually was the time to consider 'high crimes and misdemeanors'
Ask Michael E Dyson about Bush's directives
It's still not too late...GW Bush is still alive
Fox_on_the_Run writes:
Actually what dumb old redneck said was contradicted by the Inspector Generals report.
Esau writes:
Not at all we libs love Texas we enjoy watching the state slowly but surely turn blue.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.