501(tea)(4) tax-exempt status

Two things before we begin:

1. I realize Internal Revenue Service (IRS) officials aren’t politicians, but I don’t think I need to make a “bureaucrats behaving badly” tag.
2. If you were disappointed that this was not the Fail of the Week on Saturday, Benghazi was absolutely the bigger fail, because it involved death. So, bite me.

On to business. As you’re all by now aware, it turns out senior IRS officials were indeed aware of the fact that some of their underlings were targeting Tea Party and “patriot” groups for extra scrutiny when they applied for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status, normally granted to “social welfare” organizations that only engage in politics less than half the time. These groups had complained about “harassment” from the IRS before; as it turns out, they had a point. Earlier, Lois Lerner, who oversees tax-exempt organizations at the IRS, said this targeting was done for the purpose of “streamlining” due to an influx of such applications between 2010 and 2012.

It’s not the weakest excuse I’ve ever heard. Were it not for the fact that the IRS has a vested interest in making sure they can pump everything they can out of groups that strongly dislike paying taxes, I’d probably buy it. There’s also the small matter of White House Press Secretary Jay Carney dismissing claims of partisanship on the ground that the IRS is an “independent enforcement agency” with only two political appointees. Actually, it’s a bureau of the Treasury Department. I guess “independence” in the Washington sense is in the eye of the beholder.

Further investigation may or may not turn up a directive from then-Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to go after Tea Party groups, which is necessary in order to blame the White House. Until that happens, I would avoid doing so, although some investigation into claims of IRS harassment would have been most welcome. I would also avoid accusing the IRS of pure politics, unless it’s discovered later that a roughly equal amount of Occupy-affiliated groups started applying for 501(c)(4) status within the same time frame and were not scrutinized to the same extent.

But what kind of “social welfare” work do these groups do that allows them to be designated as 501(c)(4)s? Don’t tell me it’s “standing up for taxpayers” or something; by that logic, any lobby group could get the same status for “standing up for” people. I hesitate to call their purpose “educational,” given the explicitly ideological bent. They’d be better off as 501(c)(6) organizations, as chambers of commerce are, or 527 organizations, as political action committees (PACs) and issue advocacy groups are.

But none of this excuses the IRS’s inattention to how this would look when it inevitably came out. Expect Lerner to hand in her resignation at the same time as State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland. Maybe they’ll start a consulting firm.

How do you recognize Sanford’s name?

Republicans were thrilled when then-Rep. Tim Scott (R-SC) was appointed to fill the seat being vacated by then-Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), in no small part due to the fact that it made him the only black senator (and a Republican!). But that leaves South Carolina’s 1st congressional district without a representative. But who is turning out to be the biggest name to express interest in becoming that representative? Oh hai, Mark!

Yes, it’s former Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC), who held that exact seat from 1995 to 2001. It’s expected that he’ll announce whether or not he’s running at some point this week, although it’s already Thursday, so either he’s not planning to run or he forgot that announcements made earlier in the week tend to make more prime-time talk. (Unless he’s trying to avoid that.) Here’s how he retained a small, and I do mean small, measure of viability:

Sanford’s near-universal name recognition, his reputation for fundraising prowess, a staunchly conservative fiscal record and the potential for a crowded field could make him tough to beat. . . . While South Carolina is socially conservative, its GOP voters have shown they’re willing to overlook personal issues.

Well, good for South Carolina Republicans, if they stay focused on a candidate’s economic positions. Bear in mind that they gave the Republican primary to former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), and that’s about as much you’ll get in the way of “personal issues” without committing a felony.

The trouble is that what Sanford did is not a personal issue. I’m not talking about his extramarital affair. (By the way: Jenny Sanford, thank you for not standing by this scum-sucker. Love, women.) I’m talking about the fact that while engaging in said affair, he disappeared for six days and incurred some expenses that taxpayers ultimately covered. He reimbursed them later, but only after pretending there was nothing to reimburse. Furthermore, he was once very proud of himself for sticking to a self-imposed three-term limit. What happened to that?

Careerism, that’s what. I don’t know why he’d want to take the pay cut (he’s been a paid contributor at Fox News since 2011) if not for the fact that he’s not even the most high-profile paid contributor at Fox News. But if he thinks he could accomplish something in Congress, assuming he could get elected, he’s dead wrong. Like former President Bill Clinton, Sanford will forever be known as a guy who cheated on his wife and lied about it. What other congressional Republican would want to be seen with that?

If he’s desperate for a way to exert influence, he might start a PAC like everyone else. If he’s as prodigious a fundraiser as they say, some candidates might not care about his history if they can get his money.

The spy chief who shagged me

(Re: the tag, I’m aware he isn’t exactly a politician, despite Republican efforts, but there really wasn’t a tag that fit better.)

If I weren’t dating an honorable man right now, the revelation that CIA Director Gen. David Petraeus had an affair after 37 years of marriage would be enough to convince me they didn’t exist. Did he think nobody would find out just because he was in charge of the second-most sophisticated spy operation on the planet? (Mossad ranks higher, at least in my opinion.) You still have to make an effort to cover it up, and choosing a non-paranoid girlfriend is part of that.

You could ask why Petraeus is resigning over this; after all, affairs on the part of government officials are nothing new, nor are their subsequent resignations. Someone who betrays their own spouse’s trust in such a fashion can’t count on the public’s trust the way they used to. But it’s not that simple when we consider the following elements of the timeline:

• Why did it take so long for Attorney General Eric Holder, who knew months earlier, to notify the White House?
• Why didn’t anyone seem to remember what a terrible idea it would be for Petraeus to resign just before he was scheduled to participate in hearings on the Benghazi consulate attack?
• Why did some random FBI employees tip off two Republican members of Congress – House Majority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Rep. Dave Reichert (R-WA) and not Congress as an entity?
• Even if the e-mails between Petraeus and his biographer/lover, Paula Broadwell – exchanged via his Gmail account – didn’t breach security, did he send other e-mails that did?

In the future, we might see legislation requiring Congress and the White House to be notified when directors of federal agencies are being investigated by the FBI. That this could merit new legislation is pretty sad.

But the second item on that list is the most important one. Clearly a lot of people involved in this situation weren’t thinking very hard, so it could be as simple as an oversight, although that’s being very fair. Acting CIA Director Michael Morell has been in this position before; I don’t imagine he’d say anything Petraeus wouldn’t have. But it certainly doesn’t look good.

That’s what all of this may come down to: It looks bad. It’s one thing when you’re a loudmouthed congressman; then it’s only your and your family’s problem. But when you’re in charge of a massive organization tasked with securing the homeland, this makes people wonder what else you’ve mismanaged. And up until now, Petraeus had a reputation as a very effective manager. Well, you can kiss that one goodbye, and hopefully the Mrs., too, if she has any spine.

Cue the “We are the 47 percent” headlines

It sucks when my Fail of the Week material happens before Saturday and is too newsworthy to wait. Curse you, former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA). By now, most of you have read that thing he said, but here’s the video just in case, plus a transcribed version for those who prefer taking in information expressed verbally, as I do. Here’s every inference in the “47 percent” bit that’s wrong:

1. Everyone who does not pay income tax will vote for President Obama, which is easily dispelled by the fact that states with the highest rates of said non-payment are red.

2. People who do not pay income tax are inevitably dependent on government and would like to remain so.

3. They pay nothing to the government.

4. They have no reason to vote for Republicans and shouldn’t be bothered with.

5. The deductions that enable these people not to pay income tax were all Obama’s idea, or at least all the ideas of Democrats or economic liberals.

6. People outside the 47 percent don’t benefit from other deductions. (All eyes turn pointedly to Romney.)

7. Romney is a smart and competent manager who knows how to make the things he does and says work for the majority.

Good Lord. I thought his “I’m not concerned about the very poor” was bad. I thought Sen. Rick Santorum’s (R-PA) line about “smart people” not voting for social conservatives was worse. But this? Alienating half the country? Specifically, the half that, by his own admission, could benefit the most from a fiscally responsible, pro-growth administration? Who are the idiots who have his ear, and why do they always forget to aim before they shoot?

There was an opportunity for a legitimate tax discussion here. Romney could have used the income tax numbers to call for replacing deductions with flat rates. He could have suggested keeping the means-tested deductions and introducing a national sales tax. (Not that it would have gotten him any applause, but it would still be better than this hot mess.) He could even have pissed on his own party for allowing this to develop over eight years and pledging to bring back real fiscal conservatism. Instead he walked into another one of his trademark “poor people are lazy” gaffes.

I haven’t even addressed the other controversial part of that speech, in which he suggested Palestinians, as a whole, had little to no interest in peace with Israel and “that Mideast peace efforts would languish in his administration.” With a mouth like his, I’d expect them to be blown to hell first.

Disposal Day #122: Prestige doesn’t buy class

STORY #1: The unexceptional Coffman

I look forward to the day when I can say, in all sincerity, that politicians have evolved beyond attacking each other’s patriotism and perpetuating birtherism. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO) did both. While he did backtrack on the statement that carried a pungent whiff of birtherism, he wasn’t all that sorry for the other thing he said about President Obama: “. . . I don’t believe the President shares my belief in American Exceptionalism. His policies reflect a philosophy that America is but one nation among many equals.”

If you think his policies reflect a bad philosophy, go ahead and say so. But watch your mouth if your idea of said bad philosophy is anything less than love of country. Some of you may think love of country has nothing to do with exceptionalism, but in the U.S., it always does. Accusing another politician of lacking it all but eliminates the possibility of a truly substantive discussion of differences.

STORY #2: We’re not that elusive

Reasons we “elusive independents” would never have fallen for this crap:

• We never bought that Obama agreed with anything Reverend Jeremiah Wright had to say about America. He certainly has never given us any reason to believe so.
• We would have recognized the standard-issue attack ad techniques immediately.
• We understand Obamacare enough to know that it’s not actually “government-run health care.” You want that, go to the UK.
• Many of us actually don’t like Obama as much as these morons think we do; we just have more sophisticated opinions of that worldview than this.
• We’re allergic to the word “PAC.”
• Anyone who needs five minutes of airtime for this sort of thing probably has nothing of value to say.
• Two of your staffers worked with former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK). Checkmate.

STORY #3: Refudiated, BITCH

And, at last, former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) beats back someone who claims to be working in his best interests but isn’t. Sadly, that beat-back couldn’t have sounded more stiff than if he’d dunked it in liquid nitrogen and sprinkled it with cornstarch. Just say “Sorry, I don’t accept endorsements from idiots” and get it over with! (By the way, for anyone who asks, I am using the term “refudiate” ironically and I am well aware that it’s a Palin-brand malapropism.)

Disposal Day #118: Everybody fails (seriously, everybody)

STORY #1: A Lillienfield moment

Only fans of The West Wing will understand who “Lillienfield” is without Googling anything, and if you’re not a fan of The West Wing, please step into the back room; I will join you there after this post and painstakingly explain what an idiot you are. Anyway, Rep. Allen West (R-FL), who I have rarely spoken of positively, had such a moment last week when he accused “78 to 81″ House Democrats of being Communists. He refuses to apologize, as Communism and “progressivism” are, apparently, almost the same thing. You know, if you’re stupid.

Is it? Would progressive Democrats send agents after your grandmother for communicating with relatives in “cosmopolitan” countries, as they did to mine? Would their policies require everyone to stand in line for hours for the possibility of fresh fish? Would they make you try six times before you were permitted to immigrate? If you answered in the negative to any of the above questions but still side with West, please go to hell.

STORY #2: The key word is SECRET

How do people who are hired to protect the president of the United States of America this incapable of protecting their own jobs? Some employees of the Secret Service (three at last count, I believe) have already resigned, been fired or been compelled to retire because of their dalliance with prostitutes in Cartagena, Colombia, during the Summit of the Americas. Most of the flacks in Washington spend more time assuring everyone that President Obama’s security was fine – which, I’m sorry to say, isn’t the priority.

It’s really very simple. If you’re a high-profile employee of the federal government, there are certain groups of people you should never be caught with, and I will list a sample of them right here: anyone in the sex trade, terrorists, drug dealers, people with political ideologies generally regarded as “insane,” people typically featured on the covers of tween magazines and most loudmouthed political bloggers. (I’m clean, though.)

STORY #3: Leaving on a jet plane

I assure you that I have not forgotten about Ted Nugent, and I will offer my take on that tomorrow. A few hours after posting that column, Adam and I will be flying out to spend a week in the Twin Cities, a trip we have been hoping to take for about two years now and have finally managed to plan for next week. So, if you’re in the area and you spot a petite brunette with blindingly white skin and a tanned guy with black hair who always wears a short-sleeved button-down shirt, smile because that’s probably us.

Hands up if you slept with Herman Cain

There are two reasons why I hate political sex scandals: 1. Unless they refer to non-consensual, non-adult-on-adult activity that actually happened (I’ve never been sure about the harassment allegations), they’re not worth discussing outside the immediate circle of the accused party. 2. Everyone discusses them anyway, which tends to keep real stories out of the news cycle. Which brings me to today’s recommendation: Herman Cain, please just quit.

The latest in a long, long line of accusations against him that have nothing to do with his (lack of) qualifications for the presidency was brought to you by Ginger White, who claims to have carried on an extramarital affair with him for the past thirteen years. It’s worth nothing that White has been sued for libel before, and also that the responses from Cain and his proxies have varied somewhat: he flat-out denies it and his lawyer doesn’t. Sigh. Where are all the credible people?

So, do I think Cain did it? Nobody knows enough about this particular allegation to say, except him and White. But I’ll refer you to a couple of quotes, one from political commentator David Frum and another from Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN). Both of them make the same point: There is a reason some politicians attract this many scandals and others don’t, and you can’t blame it all on the media, or your political opponents, or Satan, or whatever the hell else Cain has blamed his problems on.

For his part, he says he’ll quit the 2012 Republican presidential nomination race if his wife, Gloria, wants him to. Frankly, I can’t see how she would at this point. You can bet that she’s been hounded with press inquiries herself; why keep subjecting your family to such scrutiny? Sitting politicians have left their posts for, arguably, lesser offenses. While I personally do not recommend this if it was one time, consensual and adult-on-adult, at some point you have to give up trying to withstand it.

But even that’s not the most compelling reason for Cain to quit. He’s proven his utter absence of foreign policy judgment, much less experience, at least as often as he’s been accused of something involving sex. He routinely speaks as if he’s the only candidate who has ever run a business. (Wrong.) (Additional wrong.) His feelings about abortion and Muslims are at least as jumbled as any feelings former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) has ever had about anything. In what diseased universe would all this make someone presidential?

It’s very simple: If you’re not qualified, accept it and stop pretending otherwise. That Cain has not done this is enough for me not to take him seriously about anything.

He never rocked her like a Herman Cain

Primary season is heading into crunch time and dark secrets are well on their way into our political consciousness. First it was Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and her husband’s clinic; then it was Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) and his goodies for immigrants; now it’s former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain (R-GA) and some very suspiciously timed allegations of sexual harassment.

The allegations come from two women who worked for the National Restaurant Association during his tenure as its CEO. They have complained of “innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature” and “physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made . . . them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.” Whatever in holy hell that means – a fist-pump, perhaps? Of particular interest is a comment from “sources” that the allegations led to payoffs and confidentiality agreements.

Now had the accusations been more explosive, say, if they’d included coercive language, or inappropriate touching, or bizarre usage of Middle Eastern street food, I would assume someone was looking to make a buck off of Cain’s risen star. The comparative levity of these charges gives them more credibility, until you ponder the possibility that these women misinterpreted workplace communication that Cain viewed as normal. That people file lawsuits over words and gestures is a disservice to those dealing with genuine harassment.

Not that Cain and his staff didn’t make their fair share of slip-ups in responding to the news. For example, his campaign said:

. . . we’ve seen this movie played out before — a prominent Conservative targeted by liberals simply because they disagree with his politics.

And he said:

They’re going to come after me more viciously than they would a white candidate. . . . And so, to use Clarence Thomas as an example, I’m ready for the same high-tech lynching that he went through . . .

I must remind you that this is Cain and his people playing both the ideology and race cards before anyone else does. This could be viewed either as a crafty pre-emptive measure, or whining. I’m going to go with whining, personally. And why did the campaign capitalize “Conservative?” Does he have secret Canadian citizenship? (A joke.)

In any event, this is another example of the triumph of gossip in the news media. I was always taught never to quote sources that refused to be identified. This is a much more widespread and problematic media bias than the ideological or racial kind.

I can’t believe it’s not a Democrat!

It’s time once again for The Future American’s FAIL OF THE WEEK! Every Saturday, I name a person or group who has spent the past seven days behaving in a particularly idiotic way. Since it’s my belief that idiocy knows no politics, nobody is safe.

This week’s fail was brought to you by the pack of Wisconsin Republicans who ran as protest Democrats in recent state primaries. This is the second week out of three that a fail has been centered on Wisconsin, which I wouldn’t have expected for a state that prides itself on humility and general niceness. Thanks to that union-busting debacle, those days seem to be over. (Within the two-party paradigm, of course. A third party, if they get one, might renew some hope.)

Wisconsin has an open primary system in which voters do not have to declare a party affiliation, but are only permitted to vote in one party’s primary. Apparently, the same goes for candidates, who in this case were former Republican officials of various levels. The purpose of their candidacies was to create a primary election out of thin air, in order to “punish” the Democratic incumbents. All the fake Democrats lost, most with percentages in the mid-60s. Ha.

This is a fail on two counts. First, hoping that voters in the Democratic primary would be stupid enough to see through this. Few things are more infuriating than politicians who insult the intelligence of their electorate. Considering the divisiveness that arose from Gov. Scott Walker’s (R-WI) budget, I’d think most of those who voted in a Democratic primary would have supported their incumbents already.

Second, wasting valuable resources on primary elections that didn’t need to happen. While I am in favor of switching up politicians, or at least creating the opportunity to do so – a result of Canadian party leaders remaining in that role until they decide to leave – primaries are not as necessary as general elections. Those who want to run in the spirit of serving the constituents best do not need to resort to trickery, even if that trickery goes nowhere. If any taxpayer money went into this election, well, that’s not very Republican!

It’s a sad reflection of our current politics that Wisconsin and Minnesota, both of which tend to be among the most functional of the United States, have made headlines for ridiculous partisan squabbles such as this one. We can only hope that their reputation for functionality extends to the centrists and independents within them.

Disposal Day #72: Weiners and balls

STORY #1: Insert pun here

Of the controversy surrounding Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and a certain photo you may have seen floating around Twitter, I have commented, “This is clearly the prank of a 14-year-old Young Republican who wanted thousands of people to make weiner jokes.” In all fairness, though, it doesn’t have to be any kind of Republican. But I wouldn’t be surprised if, assuming police wasted their time tracking down the source of the photo, it turned out to be.

Apparently they have the capability to find out where the photo came from, as does any skilled computer hacker. (Note: The best way to neutralize hackers is to hire them to beef up your security. Do it.) If Weiner is truly worried about any political or personal fallout from this ridiculousness, he ought to pay a hacker to do the job, instead of making police obtain a court order for it. I know a few who would do it for the right price.

STORY #2: Get to ze chopper!

I wonder if Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) will retain his exalted status among fiscal conservatives after this doozy? He had the state helicopter fly him to his teenage son’s baseball game in the town of Montvale, which, for those of you keeping score at home, is an hour and 34 minutes away from the state capital of Trenton. Normally I’d give him a pass for being there for his son, but I don’t think the kid would mind if Christie skimped on an away game.

The problem is that Christie refused to reimburse the state for the use of the helicopter, which is intended for state business and nothing political or personal, for 48 hours. Democrats jumped on this with glee; Republicans kept quiet. I think they could have agreed to docking the cost from his governor’s salary if it meant never speaking of it again. Also, has Christie heard of a little thing called New Jersey Transit?

STORY #3: You knew this was coming

Another one from the “obvious joke” desk: Richard Land, who is in charge the policy wing of the Southern Baptist Convention, wants former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) to give a speech on adultery. If I were Gingrich’s publicist, I would advise him to give the speech and emphasize that he deeply regrets how he treated his first two wives, and that God helped him see the light. He already has, but in this situation, with evangelical voters casting many judgmental eyes on you, you can’t apologize enough.