Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

If A Group Advocates the Legalization of Shooting SPLC Operatives, Don't You Think the SPLC Would At Least Put Them On A List?

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Bret Cahill

unread,
May 13, 2013, 10:50:40 PM5/13/13
to
Why should the IRS treat free lunch on liberty "anti-tax" groups any
differently?


Bret Cahill




BeamMeUpScotty

unread,
May 14, 2013, 12:18:07 AM5/14/13
to
Because the IRS is suppose to follow the Constitution.


NO one wanted to help the TEA PARTY, the Republicans don't like them and
Obama calls them his enemy. We should all love BIG GOVERNMENT?



So the Political animals in government collectively ignored the law and
allowed the Government to break the law and they collectively did what
Obama wants.... they punished their enemy.


Then Obama has the AUDACITY to tell us all that the government isn't
tyrannical?


NOW the Government is tapping phone lines on the Associated Press....
You Liberal Idiots are getting a little aren't you. Maybe Obama can
tell you some more lies about how you don't need to fear GOVERNMENT tyranny.


Now you can take it up the wazoo with NO lube. It's funny. The IRS and
the Justice Dept will come for you. And they are.



*Rumination*
#26 - When you have more questions than answers.... conspiracy becomes
an option.

Bret Cahill

unread,
May 14, 2013, 12:42:20 AM5/14/13
to
> > Why should the IRS treat free lunch on liberty "anti-tax" groups any
> > differently?
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> Because the IRS is suppose to follow the Constitution.

Where does the constitution say that that gummint cannot keep lists?

> NO one wanted to help the TEA PARTY

Actually they do help get Dems elected.


Bret Cahill


BeamMeUpScotty

unread,
May 14, 2013, 1:08:35 AM5/14/13
to
Like the did in 2010?

We shall see.

Bret Cahill

unread,
May 14, 2013, 1:11:22 AM5/14/13
to
> >>> Why should the IRS treat free lunch on liberty "anti-tax" groups any
> >>> differently?
>
> >>> Bret Cahill
>
> >> Because the IRS is suppose to follow the Constitution.
>
> > Where does the constitution say that that gummint cannot keep lists?
>
> >> NO one wanted to help the TEA PARTY
>
> > Actually they do help get Dems elected.
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> Like the did in 2010?

The future is closer to 2012.

Get used to it.


Bret Cahill

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,
May 14, 2013, 1:15:32 AM5/14/13
to
On 5/14/2013 12:42 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:
>>> Why should the IRS treat free lunch on liberty "anti-tax" groups any
>>> differently?
>>
>>> Bret Cahill
>>
>> Because the IRS is suppose to follow the Constitution.
>
> Where does the constitution say that that gummint cannot keep lists?


The part that says we are equal and have a right to privacy.... if
government is making a list, the question is why?


They don't send out Christmas cards do they?



Why have a list to track or watch people when you have no reason?



if they do have a list, they have to keep it from being used for
illegally discriminating and violating election laws.... and more.

Bret Cahill

unread,
May 14, 2013, 2:01:52 AM5/14/13
to
> >>> Why should the IRS treat free lunch on liberty "anti-tax" groups any
> >>> differently?
>
> >>> Bret Cahill
>
> >> Because the IRS is suppose to follow the Constitution.
>
> > Where does the constitution say that that gummint cannot keep lists?
>
> The part that says we are equal

Criminals are equal?


Bret Cahill

unread,
May 14, 2013, 3:32:38 AM5/14/13
to
> Why should the IRS treat free lunch on liberty "anti-tax" groups any
> differently?

? ? ?

Dare

unread,
May 14, 2013, 9:42:31 AM5/14/13
to
"Bret Cahill" <Bret_E...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:11edf88c-a656-48f1...@w8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
> Why should the IRS treat free lunch on liberty "anti-tax" groups any
> differently?
>
> Bret Cahill

Then why are Obama and IRS officials calling it a mistake
which "will not be tolerated"?

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,
May 14, 2013, 10:00:54 AM5/14/13
to
Criminals are convicted people, until that conviction happens we are all
innocent and yes we are all equal.

In fact a NO fly list that stops someone from flying is unconstitutional
and until they're convicted they are innocent and the government can't
treat those citizens any different than you.


You need to take some time and read that document. It has stuff in it
that will make your hero Karl Marx look like the idiot that he was.




BeamMeUpScotty

unread,
May 14, 2013, 10:51:40 AM5/14/13
to
YOU KNOW they're candy coating their action and minimizing the actual
deed. They are hiding or lying about the actual severity of their
criminal behavior. This is only the tip of the tail..... you'll find
that Obama used the IRS to target donors to the Romney campaign so that
people would be scared to donate to Romney or any Republicans. And that
is a HUGE violation of the RIGHTS of American citizens to participate in
elections, it goes to election FRAUD and we need that to be separately
investigated. Separate from the unconstitutional IRS actions that were
carried out against the TEA PARTY groups.


We have to turn that rock over and see what crawls out. No doubt this
snake is a whole lot BIGGER than they pretend it is.



Obama just told us all..... "that we don't need to fear government
tyranny" and yet he presides over some of the worst examples of tyranny
in many many years.


The man is a bald faced LIAR. Take anything he says and verify it
because it's a lie.



--



*Rumination*
#62 - Democrats have created a Matrix to convince you life is good....
you might call it the Liberal-Socialist "MACHINE" that has created your
Democrat Matrix. So swallow the RED pill in the post above, and see
reality Neo.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,
May 14, 2013, 11:38:58 AM5/14/13
to
On 5/14/2013 2:01 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:
Criminals are convicted people, until that conviction happens we are all
innocent and yes we are all equal.... in the eyes of the law.

In fact a NO fly list that stops someone from flying is unconstitutional
and until they're convicted they are innocent and the government can't
treat those innocent or non convicted citizens any different than you.

Bret Cahill

unread,
May 14, 2013, 12:46:02 PM5/14/13
to
> > Why should the IRS treat free lunch on liberty "anti-tax" groups any
> > differently?

> Then why are Obama and IRS officials calling it a mistake
> which "will not be tolerated"?

Most American administrations don't really reason like a logician.
They simply triangulate between a lot of loud voices, in and outside
of the administration. Since the rich control all the loud voices
Obama is always triangulating between what the rich want and what the
rich want. Not an interesting triangulation -- despotisms aren't
interesting -- but Obama will use that to rationalize it's the only
choice or even the will of the People.

But there's only one olive branch that the teabaggers will accept and
that's tax cuts on the rich.

Clearly the IRS should not generally single out any administration's
political enemies. But when the political enemy wants to abolish the
IRS, why should the IRS be any different than Israel when a Mideast
despotism says it wants to abolish Israel?

Those groups can be reasonably assumed to have a higher rate of
cheating on taxes than others.

Why is it OK for the SPLC to keep lists of "patriotic constitutional
militias" but not the gummint?

Lists are nothing more than free speech.

Why is it OK for the Koch Bros, which can be effectively treated as
the richest man on earth, to have free speech but not the gummint?

That would have been perfectly good with the richest man on earth in
1776.

George III gets free speech but not Jefferson's elected gummint.


Bret Cahill


BeamMeUpScotty

unread,
May 14, 2013, 1:20:48 PM5/14/13
to
0 new messages