IRS targeting of “progressive” groups versus conservative, Tea Party and “patriot

If progressives experienced similar targeting, why didn’t they make any notable contemporaneous complaints? After all, conservatives raised the issue well over a year ago, members of Congress asked the IRS commissioner about it directly, and the New York Times was even moved by the complaints to write its now-clownish March 7, 2012, editorial claiming the IRS was merely “do[ing] its job.”

Perhaps progressives didn’t complain because their targeting experience involved seven groups that were asked an average of just five additional questions (rounded up to be generous) and were approved at a 100 percent rate.

By contrast, 104 ”phony scandal” conservative groups experienced an average of 15 additional questions (14.9 to be exact), only 46 percent were approved, and 56 groups are either waiting for a determination or have withdrawn in frustration. There is simply no comparison.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-gr...ng-out-irs-harassment-tea-party#ixzz2b64tRdMF

7-30-13-irs-targeting-statistics-of-files-produced-by-irs-through-july-29-2-_wide-4a94ba3402b5f5a78972606de4939ffd44619375-s40.jpg
 
Quote from piezoe:

What is the starting date for the data in the Table above, please?

Check propublica im sure they posted this chart in their unbiased search for the truth.
 
There were actually almost three hundred conservative groups applying (292 I think) and twice as many progressive groups (15 I believe) applying in the period under investigation. I wonder why the Table doesn't include those other groups . Why only 1/3 the conservative groups and half the progressive groups. Is there some "cherry picking" going on? Why do you use clearly politically biased sources for your information? Why not look at the facts? All the facts. Can't help but wonder what there criteria was for choosing this particular subset.
 
Quote from piezoe:

There were actually almost three hundred conservative groups applying (292 I think) and twice as many progressive groups (15 I believe) applying in the period under investigation. I wonder why the Table doesn't include those other groups . Why only 1/3 the conservative groups and half the progressive groups. Is there some "cherry picking" going on? Why do you use clearly politically biased sources for your information? Why not look at the facts? All the facts.






Can't help but wonder what there criteria was for choosing this particular subset.
Because it represents the facts maybe?

:D
 
Back
Top