The IRS Has No Business Vetting Anyone
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Although "Tin-Pot
Donnie" would, as a fan of abusive government, fully deserve the
resulting public rectal exam, I refuse to join the ranks of
intellectually bankrupt conservatives in calling
for him to release his tax returns. As I noted yesterday, Trump
has disqualified himself from serious consideration for the Presidency
by threatening newspapers who might publish things he doesn't
like. (And this is not to say he was a serious candidate before that.)
Here's Mitt Romney demonstrating that since, he can't articulate what's
wrong with Donald Trump, he'd unleash the dogs on him
instead:
"It is disqualifying for a modern-day presidential nominee to refuse to release tax returns to the voters, especially one who has not been subject to public scrutiny in either military or public service," wrote the former GOP presidential nominee in a Facebook post. "While not a likely circumstance, the potential for hidden inappropriate associations with foreign entities, criminal organizations, or other unsavory groups is simply too great a risk to ignore for someone who is seeking to become commander-in-chief." [link dropped]So, rather than consider the ample evidence in the public record and apply our knowledge of what qualifies a candidate in terms of character and worthiness of support, we are to rely on a self-report to a lawless organization, whose head faces impeachment for discriminating against conservative groups -- and which should be abolished anyway. How did the Republic survive so long before there even was an IRS? This unprincipled, uncritical acceptance of state control over our lives not only exemplifies what's wrong with the Republican Party today, it also explains why Romney couldn't find a way to beat an unpopular incumbent, why none of the other candidates could find a way to stand up to Donald Trump, and ultimately, why the GOP essentially gave up any pretense of rationally choosing its candidates long ago.
Not only should Republicans not be calling for examinations of tax returns, the clown they have stuck themselves with isn't giving the proper response to such calls, which is this: "My finances are none of your damned business."
Our luck is running out: Time to rediscover the power of principled thinking.
-- CAV
5 comments:
‘It is disqualifying for a modern-day presidential nominee to refuse to release tax returns to the voters…’
Then don’t vote for him!
Also, that statement implies that if he did release his tax returns, he would be qualified. That holding back this information is his worst sin.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Calling this election a circus is a disservice to all circuses.
If he actually gave your answer;
‘…we are to rely on a self-report to a lawless organization, whose head faces impeachment for discriminating against conservative groups -- and which should be abolished anyway’,
Then he’d actually be qualified for the presidency.
That said, the reason he doesn’t want to release his tax forms is obvious.
I see stuff like this,
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/05/trump_should_abolish_the_department_of_education_.html
And I think; what is that guy smoking if he thinks there is any chance of Trump abolishing the department of education?!
What is that guy smoking, indeed.
Like there is any need for legalizing drugs.
Or drugs.
Gus, I happen to agree with "The IRS Has No Business Vetting Anyone".
Do you likewise believe that the American Bar Association (ABA) has no business vetting nominees for the Supreme Court?
An argument that would accept the ABA's vettings based on its non-governmental organization status neglects the inordinate percentage of its members (lawyers) in Congress, the Executive branch (Department of State, particularly), the Judiciary and of cource, K-Street lobbyist.
I became a trained investigator back when a significant portion of the voting public understood the meaning of both "conflicts of interest" and "concentrations of unchecked authority". Now, too voters can explain much less recognize glaring examples of either.
Vigilis,
Two big points:
(1) You are attributing a conspiracy-like unity of motivation to individuals based on their profession.
(2) On top of that, the ABA, unlike the IRS, can not jail private citizens, harass them with the threat of government force, or forcibly deprive them of their assets.
Soliciting an opinion from a private organization is different in kind from demanding that someone make public records he was wrongly forced to create and turn over to a government entity.
Gus
Post a Comment