We hope your Thanksgiving was great -- and that your conversation with your Tea Party uncle went ok. :)
Today is Black Friday, the traditional start of the holiday shopping season. So we wanted to make sure you saw our progressive holiday gifts.
Click here to check out our limited-edition Elizabeth Warren hoodies, stickers, and more!
Thanks! -- The Bold Progressive PCCC Team
Earlier email:
Due to popular demand, progressive holiday gifts are here!
Give the gift of Elizabeth Warren this season (although we feel like it's Christmas every day she's in office). We've also brainstormed some other gifts -- progressive media, books, and more.
1) Give the gift of Elizabeth Warren. Our limited edition T-shirts, hoodies, bumper stickers, magnets, and onesies are American made and union printed. Shop here. . .
(by codetaco on http://askville.amazon.com/NOELLE-NIKPOUR-LIVING/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=16018793)
Noelle Nikpour is the die-hard-Tea-Party conservatives' go-to gal for consultation and strategy. Not surprising.
Noelle Nikpour is a woman from Little Rock, AR who gets paid to do "Republican political consulting"; the qualifications for such a position are unknown. According to her IMDB profile, her television appearances are limited to Sean Hannity's "Hannity" show (where she has dutifully towed the party line) and "The Daily Show" (where Jon Stewart has poked fun at her the same).
During and interview with Aasiv Mandvi On the October 26, 2011 show she claimed that "scientists are scamming the American people [...] for their own financial gain." When Aasiv asked if she had any evidence or data for such a claim, she responded that "Every American [...] would have a gut feeling that some of these numbers that scientists are putting out are not right."
She complained that "Scientists are the only people qualified to comment on scientific theories"; apparently she saw no contradiction in the fact that she and others on Hannity have incessantly commented on scientific theories (such as climate change) without any qualification to do so. Some theories (such as evolution), require only the application of logic (such as examining the fossil record or observing bacteria in a petri dish). When Aasiv facetiously stated "it should be up to the American people to decide what's true", she wholeheartedly agreed by saying "absolutely!! Doesn't it make common sense?"
Robert Parry (http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/19242-the-white-mans-last-tantrum) presents a fascinating, still not unbelievable hypothesis that the government shutdown and potential default on U.S. credit may very well be a desperate attempt on the part of certain Republican and/or Tea Party members at white supremacy.
Paraphrased, in brief, the diverse makeup of their opposition (Democrats) is eroding the political domains of the 'white conservatives and white racists' of the former. William Buckley's principle, expressed in relation to the southern U.S. states in 1957, says “The white community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically.” Present-day Tea-Party-controlled Republicans are applying the Buckley rule on a national level. Some examples of this are "ballot security", reduction of voting hours, recent gerrymandering, endless Republican filibusters in the U.S. Senate and denial to DC citizens of congressional representations. Right-wing billionaires are establishing and supporting a propaganda machine never seen in U.S. history. . . and now the ultimate solution of government by extortion is the result. Their message, put simply, is . . . "if the American people insist on electing Democratic presidents or enacting federal legislation to “promote the general Welfare,” the Tea Party will respond by making the economy scream. . ."
(Source: http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/17/opinion/colinvaux-irs-taxes/index.html)
Roger Colinvaux, associate professor of law at Catholic University of America and former counsel to the U.S. Joint Committee on Taxation
The noise about IRS 'targeting' procedures should not be misinterpreted. The real issue at hand is disclosure of donors, not tax-exempt status. Something tells me that liberal and conservative groups are equally suspect when it comes to revealing donors, but that's just ME.
The IRS is actually in the 'targeting' business. They are an enforcer and are supposed to go after scofflaws, cheaters and dodgers. The guilt lies in the searching of tax returns for names like "tea party", which is clearly a specific group. What they should have done was searched for all such groups as a class, irrespective of political affiliation.
Roger Colinaux writes, ". . . But the extra scrutiny here is less because of tax exemption and more because of other tax benefits that flow from tax-exempt status, such as the ability to receive tax-deductible contributions. Importantly, charitable organizations are not allowed to engage in any political activity, because Congress long ago decided that charity and politics are incompatible. . ."
It's campaign finance law and NOT tax law that dictates public disclosure of donors for political groups but not for social welfare organizations. Mr. Colinaux again, ". . . After the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, it became possible for a 501(c)(4) organization to engage in unlimited amounts of political spending. It thus also became possible for a political organization to use the tax law to hide the identity of donors. After Citizens United, the abuse the IRS is tasked with policing is whether an organization that claims to be a "social welfare" organization is in reality a political organization in disguise. . ."
So its yet another polarizing issue (guess there wouldn't be so much polarization if we weren't limited to only two poles.) and also again, an issue of many barking up the wrong tree.
