I think the IRS story has the potential to be very damaging to the Obama presidency -- but not if this is the right's idea of a victim with a tear-jerking story:
... Mr. Obama now professes shock and outrage that bureaucrats at the IRS did exactly what the president of the United States said was the right and honorable thing to do. "He put a target on our backs, and he's now going to blame the people who are shooting at us?" asks Idaho businessman and longtime Republican donor Frank VanderSloot.First of all, what's being alleged here (by Kimberly Strassel of The Wall Street Journal) is that Obama merely has to say a harsh word about someone and he's automatically responsible for anything bad that subsequently happens to that person -- people listening to his words have no independent agency. Fine. Then let's hold everyone to the same standard. By that standard, Sarah Palin should literally be indicted for murder and attempted murder, and be standing in the dock right next to Jared Loughner.
Mr. VanderSloot is the Obama target who in 2011 made a sizable donation to a group supporting Mitt Romney. In April 2012, an Obama campaign website named and slurred eight Romney donors. It tarred Mr. VanderSloot as a "wealthy individual" with a "less-than-reputable record." Other donors were described as having been "on the wrong side of the law."
This was the Obama version of the phone call -- put out to every government investigator (and liberal activist) in the land....
But seriously, righties -- you want us to shed tears for Frank VanderSloot? Yes, he was one of several high rollers mentioned on an Obama campaign Web page under this paragraph:
A closer look at Romney's donors reveals a group of wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records. Quite a few have been on the wrong side of the law, others have made profits at the expense of so many Americans, and still others are donating to help ensure Romney puts beneficial policies in place for them. Here’s a look at just a few of the people Romney has relied on....And why might that be? Could it be because of the history of his company Melaleuca?
Melaleuca's get-rich pitches have in the past caused Michigan regulators to take action, resulting in the company's entering into a voluntary agreement to "not engage in the marketing and promotion of an illegal pyramid"'; it entered into a separate voluntary agreement with the Idaho attorney general's office, which found that "certain independent marketing executives of Melaleuca" had violated Idaho law; and the Food and Drug Administration previously accused Melaleuca of deceiving consumers about some of its supplements.That's from Glenn Greenwald, who has much more about VanderSloot's "chronic bullying threats to bring patently frivolous lawsuits against his political critics -- magazines, journalists, and bloggers." Hell, even a somewhat admiring journalist, Phyllis Berman of Forbes, refers to Melaleuca as "a pyramid selling organization, built along the lines of Herbalife and Amway."
He's your poster child, righties? He's your aggrieved innocent? Well, good luck with that.
Oh, and did I mention that VanderSloot says that, yes, he was audited, but the audits actually saved him money? Yeah, tht's going to make him a really sympathetic figure to Joe and Jane America.
*****
ALSO, TOO:
GOP donor Charlie Moncrief telling ABC he was audited because he raised for Romney. Not his first time at the rodeo: nytimes.com/1998/08/02/bus…
— Nick Confessore (@nickconfessore) May 15, 2013
Poor, poor, wealthy white older Christian Conservatives, nobody know, the troubles you've seen.
ReplyDeleteNot the really living in poverty poor, the indigent old and young, the disadvantaged, the disabled, black and brown people, people of other religions, or gay people - no one knows victimization from the perspective of the victim, like our poor, poor, victimized wealthy, white, older, Christian, Conservatives.
Ready everybody?
Let's sing:
"Nobody knows the troubles they've seen..."
And then there's the "Catholic Activist" who claims she was targeted and her husband was not even though they always file joint returns. Seems to me if you're gonna' lie bald face you ought to at least know something about what you're lying about.
ReplyDeleteI went a couple rounds with the IRS back in the Raygun years, the early Raygun years. About the time I became convinced he was going to start tossing nukes and moved my wife and children into an old school bus up on the high cascade, withf guns and dogs and three years of dried goods. It's another one of those things that I have quite unfortunatly come to know more of which than I care to share.
Every approach to this is the wrong approach..
It's unconstitutional, and contrary to The Founder's intent.
No fear.
The mistaken assumption of this post is that the GOP is trying to highlight these cases to appeal to the average independent or low-information conservative voter, when in reality, they're appealing to their real base of corporate donors and movement conservative hucksters, who will then launder this message to appeal to the rubes. It won't be about Vandersloot or any of the other persecuted millionaires, it'll be about Joe the Plu--er, I mean, Taxpayer. They'll make the switch long after anyone remembers the details of the scandal, history will be whitewashed, and it will have always been about Obama punishing the little guy.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure their Republican audience is ready for a rehabilitation of a guy named Vandersloot. Let's just hope he isn't dumb enough to have a bank account (or girlfriend) in Aruba.
ReplyDelete