IRS targeting included Liberal groups: terms "occupy" "progressive"

[Jaskalas]

Given the context of political groups, I'm assuming the difference is roughly the nil.

Really, the number of groups applying would not be different? Could not be different?

Let's see... 2010... midterm elections for Obama's first term, right after Obamacare passed and the Tea Party got fired up... came into existence. They wouldn't be the majority of new political activity at the time?

 

[zinfamous]

To play devil's advocate:

I'm wondering why this is coming out now. If I was head of the IRS, would seem common sense to say "hey, we did it to liberals too." on day one.

We also don't have hard numbers yet. If 96 Conservative groups were targeted and only 20 liberal groups, that's still pretty clear bias.


Still, would be nice to learn the IRS was at least playing it fair.

well I believe the reality is that the IRS was conducting their own internal investigation as the story from them has been that this was more or less an isolated incident.

I know it's the first reaction for us to assume conspiracy and lies from the start, but the reality is that the truth is often what he are seeing....albeit in a diluted manner.

basically--we are seeing this come out now (this was reported about two weeks ago, to be honest), because the IRS is in the process of confirming what they are learning.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Fox News and Nazi doctrine are two very different things.

"Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people. (...) All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed. (...) The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will arrest the attention and appeal to the hearts of the national masses. The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another. (...) The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood."[5]

"Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and, in so far as it is favourable to the other side, present it according to the theoretical rules of justice; yet it must present only that aspect of the truth which is favourable to its own side. (...) The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials and those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward. (...) Every change that is made in the subject of a propagandist message must always emphasize the same conclusion. The leading slogan must of course be illustrated in many ways and from several angles, but in the end one must always return to the assertion of the same formula."

-Mein Kampf

Fox News is nothing but a page right out of it.

 

[ivwshane]

"Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people. (...) All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed. (...) The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will arrest the attention and appeal to the hearts of the national masses. The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another. (...) The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood."[5]

"Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and, in so far as it is favourable to the other side, present it according to the theoretical rules of justice; yet it must present only that aspect of the truth which is favourable to its own side. (...) The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials and those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward. (...) Every change that is made in the subject of a propagandist message must always emphasize the same conclusion. The leading slogan must of course be illustrated in many ways and from several angles, but in the end one must always return to the assertion of the same formula."

-Mein Kampf

Fox News is nothing but a page right out of it.

Holy shit that's scary! It describes fox news to a Tee!

 

[BlueWolf47]

Fox News and Nazi doctrine are two very different things.

Ya its mostly the fearmongering that resembles the nazis.

 

[Fern]

Its more than likely more conservative groups were targeted. There were far less liberal superpacs during the election because most liberals disagree with their use. So just be shear number, the conservatives will have been targeted more.

What do "super PAC's" have to do with this?

Super PACs are not 501 (c)(4)'s.

Fern

 

[Fern]

To play devil's advocate:

I'm wondering why this is coming out now. If I was head of the IRS, would seem common sense to say "hey, we did it to liberals too." on day one.

We also don't have hard numbers yet. If 96 Conservative groups were targeted and only 20 liberal groups, that's still pretty clear bias.


Still, would be nice to learn the IRS was at least playing it fair.

Congress long ago requested (possibly subpoena) the list of groups that were targeted.

They missed their deadline.

When they provide that list we'll know who was targeted.

Those reading the IG's report would know that the IRS changed the list a number of times because they recognized how inappropriate it appeared.

Those reading the IG's report would also know his office made no mention of liberal groups also being targeted. If investigating this wouldn't that have been something important to note? Wouldn't the IRS personnel have pointed that liberal groups were also targeted, wouldn't that been in their favor?

When the IRS finally provides the list we'll know. I can't imagine why it's taking this long to provide it.

Fern

 

[woolfe9998]

We also don't have hard numbers yet. If 96 Conservative groups were targeted and only 20 liberal groups, that's still pretty clear bias.

That would depend on how many of each type applied, would it not?

The correct methodology is to look at percentages of each group of applicants, not just the total numbers.

 

[Steeplerot]

"Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people. (...) All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed. (...) The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will arrest the attention and appeal to the hearts of the national masses. The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another. (...) The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood."[5]

"Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and, in so far as it is favourable to the other side, present it according to the theoretical rules of justice; yet it must present only that aspect of the truth which is favourable to its own side. (...) The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials and those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward. (...) Every change that is made in the subject of a propagandist message must always emphasize the same conclusion. The leading slogan must of course be illustrated in many ways and from several angles, but in the end one must always return to the assertion of the same formula."

-Mein Kampf

Fox News is nothing but a page right out of it.

In other words "fair and balanced" "right to work" "pro-life" "national-socialism" etc etc

All disingenuous misinformation and mindfuck propaganda focused on the ones too ignorant to look out for their own best interests. Or idealists who are fine with being willfully ignorant for their cause.

Fascist propaganda never changes, you just adjust a few words to keep up with contemporary populist messages and dimwit suckers eat it up.

 

[michal1980]

In other words "fair and balanced" "right to work" "pro-life" "national-socialism" etc etc

All disingenuous misinformation and mindfuck propaganda focused on the ones too ignorant to look out for their own best interests. Or idealists who are fine with being willfully ignorant for their cause.

Fascist propaganda never changes, you just adjust a few words to keep up with contemporary populist messages and dimwit suckers eat it up.

like pro-choice, marriage equality, 'undocumented' immigrants. etc etc.

 

[Bowfinger]

Except Shadow talks about virtually nothing else. Anytime someone uses the term liberal he jumps in and is all "ZOMG DAT PERSON ISN'T A LIBERUL!!! REAL LIBERULS IS IN EUROPE!" I was chastising him for it.

I couldn't care less about your spats with Shadow9D9. Perhaps you should consider couples counseling.

The irony is I'm not defining anything, I'm not arguing anything. I'm affirming professionally recognized definitions and chastising Shadow for his dumb posts.

Right. You're not defining anything, you're simply claiming that those hypothetical "professionals" who agree with you have the right definition. Which is exactly the point I addressed, that not everyone uses your definition, your appeal to (imagined) authority fallacy notwithstanding.

Apparently that gets a lot of P&Ners panties in a twist. I also never called Obama a liberal by the way. Stop making up up arguments, I have better things to do then serve as someone's imagined validation.

That is how this particular tangent started, and of course it is a frequent comment here ... which once again is exactly what I said. I did not say that you personally said it. Perhaps you could make a better effort to follow along.

 

[Bowfinger]

I'll post Jonah Goldberg's response:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/349741/bob-doles-parlor-game-jonah-goldberg

So you found an op-end by a like-minded party flak who is equally in denial about today's GOP shifting to the far right. To "prove" his point, he offers a moronic straw man about the Soviet Union, openly admits "Nixon was a screaming liberal by today's standards", then meanders off into a digression having nothing to do with his topic. Did you really read that and find it somehow persuasive? More do the point, do you really think any of us are dumb enough to be fooled by such noise? Try harder, or better yet man up and accept the fact that your claim was wrong. Many of today's Republicans would consider Reagan to be liberal.

 

[Jaskalas]

Ya its mostly the fearmongering that resembles the nazis.

Oh noes, the weather outside has changed! Quick, let's destroy a nearby power plant!

Yup, Americans are familiar with fearmongering. We used to burn witches, now we burn industry.

 

[BlueWolf47]

Oh noes, the weather outside has changed! Quick, let's destroy a nearby power plant!

Yup, Americans are familiar with fearmongering. We used to burn witches, now we burn industry.

What industry's have been burned so far?

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

like pro-choice, marriage equality, 'undocumented' immigrants. etc etc.

And where are these terms pushed as propagada to the level that they are at fox "news?"

 

[michal1980]

And where are these terms pushed as propagada to the level that they are at fox "news?"

nice deflection.


But to answer your question. Those terms are pushed as propaganda by the rest of the lmsm.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

nice deflection.


But to answer your question. Those terms are pushed as propaganda by the rest of the lmsm.

Again can you show that the magnitude is anywhere near fox's?

 

[Fern]

Well, the IG just blew this claim out of the water:

The IRS‘ auditor told Congress this week that it stands by its determination that conservative groups were uniquely singled out for special scrutiny by the tax agency, rebutting Democrats’ contention that liberal groups also were targeted.

“TIGTA concluded that inappropriate criteria were used to identify potential political cases for extra scrutiny — specifically, the criteria listed in our audit report. From our audit work, we did not find evidence that the criteria you identified, labeled “Progressives,” were used by the IRS to select potential political cases during the 2010 to 2012 timeframe we audited,” Inspector General J. Russell George said.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/27/irs-auditor-reaffirms-conservatives-not-liberals-w/

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

Well, the IG just blew this claim out of the water:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/27/irs-auditor-reaffirms-conservatives-not-liberals-w/

Fern

Hmmmm. Did he?

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mon...irs-ig-says-audit-limited-to-tea-party-groups

 

[Fern]

Well, we'll know for sure when the IRS finally gets around to releasing the list.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

Well, we'll know for sure when the IRS finally gets around to releasing the list.

Fern

If what the spokesman said is correct, that means that the entire investigation had a predetermined result from the start. That's a scandal for congressional Republicans, not the administration.

 

[Jaskalas]

Well, the IG just blew this claim out of the water:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/27/irs-auditor-reaffirms-conservatives-not-liberals-w/

Fern

Hmmmm. Did he?

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mon...irs-ig-says-audit-limited-to-tea-party-groups

http://washingtonexaminer.com/treas...ups-just-6-progressive-groups/article/2532456

The scale is 48 to 1. Not sure anything else explains such great disparities.

 

[fskimospy]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/treas...ups-just-6-progressive-groups/article/2532456

The scale is 48 to 1. Not sure anything else explains such great disparities.

Your link also notes that there were only 20 progressive groups that applied total. Also, it appears that the IG perjured himself in his previous testimony when he said that no progressive keywords were used.

 

[Fern]

If what the spokesman said is correct, that means that the entire investigation had a predetermined result from the start. That's a scandal for congressional Republicans, not the administration.

That doesn't make any sense.

We're to believe that the Republicans lied about this, and at the exact same time requested the IRS to provide a list of the targeted group. A list that would have proven they lied. If they lied, why in the heck would they request the thing that would prove they lied?

That makes no sense.

Fern

 

[Bowfinger]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/treas...ups-just-6-progressive-groups/article/2532456

The scale is 48 to 1. Not sure anything else explains such great disparities.

I already pointed out in the DC thread that your link is factually wrong:

Your second link is factually wrong, and grossly so. The author made a bad assumption, something he could have easily avoided had he done even minimal research into the IG's findings. The author assumed all 298 of the targeted groups were selected via the partisan keyword matching, and that if six were progressive, the rest must be Tea Party. False. The IG explains in the report that only about one-third of the selected groups contained the targeted phrases like "Tea Party", while the rest were picked using other criteria. The IG still declines to characterize the political ideology breakdown of the other ~200 groups, stating that would be inappropriate in his non-partisan role.

That you repeat it here anyway suggests willful dishonesty.