<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nonprofits  Question IRS Probes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/nonprofits_question_irs_probs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/nonprofits_question_irs_probs/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:32:40 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: McGehee</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/nonprofits_question_irs_probs/comment-page-1/#comment-39885</link>
		<dc:creator>McGehee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2005 01:52:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9725#comment-39885</guid>
		<description>Well, there were certainly a lot of &lt;i&gt;complaints&lt;/i&gt; that groups on the right were being targeted disproportionately, back during the last eight years or so of the last millennium...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, there were certainly a lot of <i>complaints</i> that groups on the right were being targeted disproportionately, back during the last eight years or so of the last millennium...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/nonprofits_question_irs_probs/comment-page-1/#comment-39832</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:52:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9725#comment-39832</guid>
		<description>Bryan:  No doubt. The question, I guess, is is the IRS going after similar groups on the Right with equal vigor.  I don&#039;t know from reading the article.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bryan:  No doubt. The question, I guess, is is the IRS going after similar groups on the Right with equal vigor.  I don't know from reading the article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bryan</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/nonprofits_question_irs_probs/comment-page-1/#comment-39831</link>
		<dc:creator>bryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:51:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9725#comment-39831</guid>
		<description>It is more than slightly advantageous to the NAACP to make the insinuation that this is politically motivated, given the current resident of the White HOuse and the troubling questions within their own ranks in recent years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is more than slightly advantageous to the NAACP to make the insinuation that this is politically motivated, given the current resident of the White HOuse and the troubling questions within their own ranks in recent years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/nonprofits_question_irs_probs/comment-page-1/#comment-39830</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:36:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9725#comment-39830</guid>
		<description>That the investigations are ideologically motivated is the charge at the heart of the piece.  As the piece and my excerpt make clear, though, it&#039;s rather hard to tell whether that&#039;s the fact.  Thus, &quot;to the extent that....&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That the investigations are ideologically motivated is the charge at the heart of the piece.  As the piece and my excerpt make clear, though, it's rather hard to tell whether that's the fact.  Thus, "to the extent that...."</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fersboo</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/nonprofits_question_irs_probs/comment-page-1/#comment-39829</link>
		<dc:creator>Fersboo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:29:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9725#comment-39829</guid>
		<description>Mr. Joyner wrote:
&#039;To the extent that the IRS is targetting groups on a particular side of the ideological spectrum while ignoring those with similar profiles on the opposite side of the spectrum, this is obviously problematic. &#039;

I am not sure where you inferred your assumption that the IRS is targetting a particular side.  Given that it is the NYT report, I would be willing to wager that groups have been evenly targetted for investigation.
I have seen the following reported elsewhere; from the article (3 paragraph from bottom of article):

&#039;Last month, the inspector general concluded that political considerations had no role in the I.R.S.&#039;s selection of an organization for review. Of 40 cases studied by the inspector general, 18 were characterized as involving &quot;pro-Republican&quot; organizations, 12 &quot;pro-Democratic&quot; and one &quot;pro-Green.&quot; The inspector general was unable to determine the affiliation of the other nine. The inspector general also looked at 20 cases the I.R.S. declined to review and found 8 were &quot;pro-Republican&quot; and 4 &quot;pro-Democratic.&quot; &#039;

If we give the 9 &#039;unknowns&#039; to the Democrats, their total is 22 (12+1+9) versus 18 Republican; pretty even if you ask me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. Joyner wrote:<br />
'To the extent that the IRS is targetting groups on a particular side of the ideological spectrum while ignoring those with similar profiles on the opposite side of the spectrum, this is obviously problematic. '</p>
<p>I am not sure where you inferred your assumption that the IRS is targetting a particular side.  Given that it is the NYT report, I would be willing to wager that groups have been evenly targetted for investigation.<br />
I have seen the following reported elsewhere; from the article (3 paragraph from bottom of article):</p>
<p>'Last month, the inspector general concluded that political considerations had no role in the I.R.S.'s selection of an organization for review. Of 40 cases studied by the inspector general, 18 were characterized as involving "pro-Republican" organizations, 12 "pro-Democratic" and one "pro-Green." The inspector general was unable to determine the affiliation of the other nine. The inspector general also looked at 20 cases the I.R.S. declined to review and found 8 were "pro-Republican" and 4 "pro-Democratic." '</p>
<p>If we give the 9 'unknowns' to the Democrats, their total is 22 (12+1+9) versus 18 Republican; pretty even if you ask me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
