Rodeo Clown impersonates Obama - Banned for Life

So now you're claiming the majority of IRS employees are Democrats? What do you base your statement on?

Officials at the Internal Revenue Service were encouraged to flag groups with the word "emerge" in their names as well as potential successors to the anti-poverty organization ACORN, according to documents released by Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday.

The documents add another complicated layer to the ongoing (albeit diminished) controversy surrounding the IRS screening of Tea Party groups in 2010 and 2011. They also take additional steam out of the Republican Party's insistence that the tax agency was politically motivated against conservative groups when it considered whether or not to grant tax-exempt, 501(c)(4) status.

Groups with the word "emerge" in the name tend to lean more Democratic. As The New York Times previously reported, three such organizations -- Emerge Nevada, Emerge Maine and Emerge Massachusetts -- all were denied tax-exempt status because the IRS determined that they existed strictly to benefit Democratic candidates.

"Once again it is clear that the Inspector General's report left out critical information that skewed the audit's findings and set the stage for Republicans to make completely baseless accusations in an effort to tarnish the White House," said House Ways and Means Committee ranking member Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.) in a prepared statement. "These new documents make it clear the IRS scrutiny of the political activity of 501(c)(4) organizations covered a broad spectrum of political ideology and was not politically motivated."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/2 ... 85717.html

What do I base my statement on? Conservatives don't like the idea of taking peoples income at gunpoint, liberals think goverment knows better than the individual on how to spend what they earn. So liberals would want to work for the bureau that does that. And conservatives would be horrified to work for such an organization.

Why are you worried? Obama has now labeled it a phony crisis despite the IRS execs taking the 5th. If they did nothing wrong, why aren't they eager to tell their side of the story and prove their innocence?

That's what I though. You're just making it up as you go along.

John Shafer, who described himself as "a conservative Republican," told congressional investigators he sought advice from his boss on how to handle the first Tea Party application he and a lower-level agent came across in February 2010 because it was a new, high-profile issue.

Asked if the lower-level agent sought to elevate the case to Washington because he disagreed with Tea Party politics, Shafer said this was not the case.

"We never, never discussed any political, personal aspirations whatsoever," he said, according to a transcript of his testimony reviewed by Reuters on Tuesday.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/ ... BV20130618

So you have one anedotal story. Wow. That proves your case for sure.
I think I will stand by my pleading the Fifth. Mobsters hide behind the Fifth, not bureaucrats who think they have done nothing wrong.

"WATCH: Obama Rodeo Clown Finally Speaks Out"

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/08/75467-v ... peaks-out/

The 'rodeo clown' incident has been blown totally out of proportion, IMO.

It was simply a stupid, bigoted act. The reaction of the crowd also perfectly framed the bigotry of many of those in attendance. No apologists of racism can erase that fact.

I do not believe that either racism or bigotry were involved in the initial act, but they certainly have been in the responses.

It's amazing how much the story changed since the clown found out he's been banned-for-life from the State Fair...(and possibly in other states and other venues...) Dang...All of a sudden, it was "all a misunderstanding." I guess he figured out that actions-have-consequences....

Especially since he's been doing that bit for going on 20 years now. If it is so wrong, why didn't he face consequences like a lifetime ban when he lampooned Reagan, Bush and Clinton? Or does the left truly believe that the color of one's skin is so important that it overrides treating all people, and presidents, the same regardless of their skin color?