Obama’s Tyranny Speech

…hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some seperate sinister entity that’s at the root of all of our problems Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works.  They’ll warn that tyranny is just around the corner.

You should reject these voices.

Obama is talking about conservatives in general.  Republicans in congress and Tea Party republicans in specific.

He is referring to people who feel that we must ever be careful that government is only one day away from becoming a tyrannical mechanism that will restrict liberty.  He is referring to people, specific people.

Think those voices need to be rejected now?

IRS

7 responses to “Obama’s Tyranny Speech

  1. Obama’s right though – that fear of tyranny is vastly overstated. Personally, I think the IRS was right to look into all these suddenly appearing political groups claiming non-profit status. It would be wrong for them not to – they should do so for groups of both parties but it so happened that conservatives were the ones suddenly forming groups, many with dubious tax practices. It is pretty clear this was not done for partisan purposes, but because these groups appeared shady to begin with (in terms of their tax status claims). The IRS has to protect us all from tax cheats.

    Of course, the example also shows why there should be no fear. If government does something people find questionable, it comes out. The IRS got in trouble awhile back for targeting poorer folk for audits since they wouldn’t hire attorneys.

  2. Personally, I think the IRS was right to look into all these suddenly appearing political groups claiming non-profit status.

    You stand along on that one Scott. I’ll look at the lefty sites to see if I can find one that agrees with you.

    • You stand along on that one Scott. I’ll look at the lefty sites to see if I can find one that agrees with you.

      I have a number of friends who agree with him. Personally, I would agree that a group whose avowed purpose is to defund the government and eliminate taxes probably ought to be looked at closer; the methods used, however, far exceed a normal audit, and thus I think it was wrong.

      • I have a number of friends who agree with him.

        I wonder if they would be surprised to find that people find them as kooky as they find the Tea Party to be kooky.

        Personally, I would agree that a group whose avowed purpose is to defund the government and eliminate taxes probably ought to be looked at closer

        I think that’s a relatively extreme take on Tea Party policy. Smaller government <> no government.

        Further, a smaller government argument is not invalid, in fact, it is more similar to the founding than a large government.

        • I think that’s a relatively extreme take on Tea Party policy. Smaller government no government.

          The Tea Party wants to get rid of the income tax, the IRS, property taxes, etc. Can you draw a line for me about how limited the government will be if the Tea Party gets its way? It sounds to me like less government is always better in their minds.

          I wonder if they would be surprised to find that people find them as kooky as they find the Tea Party to be kooky.

          You really think it’s unreasonable to focus IRS attention on groups who oppose taxes? What about people who have publicly said they take aggressive tax sheltering techniques? It seems absurd to say the IRS is wrong to pay more attention to groups who publicly oppose federal taxation. Again, I disagree with the methods used and I support an investigation, but the original targeting doesn’t seem to be the real problem.

          I don’t think a group should ever be targeted for political beliefs, unless that belief happens to be directly indicative of a tendency to evade taxes out of a sense of moral indignancy.

          • You really think it’s unreasonable to focus IRS attention on groups who oppose taxes? What about people who have publicly said they take aggressive tax sheltering techniques? It seems absurd to say the IRS is wrong to pay more attention to groups who publicly oppose federal taxation.

            I’ve thought about it and I think you’re right.

            If there is evidence to suggest that Tea Party groups are abusing tax laws, they should be audited.

            However, does it strike you that the only time you seem to support profiling is when it’s done against a group of people who have opposite political views than you have?

            Are you equally willing to profile perpetrators of gun crimes or terrorist acts? Would you be willing to allow profiling of passengers on an airplane?

            I am. And as such, have to admit that profiling the Tea Party is probably good business.

  3. Pingback: Legit Scandal | Tarheel Red

Leave a Reply to Pino Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *