[nitzy]

I think many people understand what you are saying and agree that if that is the case it is terrible. I think what they are also saying is that there is a chance that it might not be the case. The most important thing though is that it should be relatively easy to determine one way or the other. It is simply a matter of math.

There are certain generally accepted characteristics that make someone more likely to be audited. The exact percentages of how much more likely are statistics that can be known. We should look at them. If you were to learn that for people who claimed charitable deductions the audit rate went from X% to XX% and then you learned that tea party members were X% more likely to donate to charity then it might make more sense why the tea party donors where audited more. There are many other factors including income, dependents claimed, the type of form used, if filing as a small business, etc...I would assume that tea partiers are more likely to own a business, have children, have higher income and fall into other categories that could make them more likely to be audited. THE POINT IS THAT I DON'T KNOW BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW.

So often, there are those on our side who go off half cocked and look like idiots when the facts end up showing that they don't know what they are talking about.

Do I think Obama would do something like this? --Yes

Do I think that his administration abuses power nearly every chance it gets? -- Yes

Do I think that they did it in this case? -- Probably, but with a little more information we can be sure.

[Democrat_media]

It's already been proven that the IRS was harassing those tea party groups in many ways . then the IRS demands a list of members or “donors” of those oppressed groups . then the IRS also audits 10% of those on the lists the IRS obtained.

the IRS is supposed to look at the whole population and then from that determine who to audit . and you say they did that . bs. then by sheer coincidence the audited end up on the same lists the IRS obtained from the tea party groups the IRS was already oppressing . no way that 10% audited from the general population end up on the same small lists of groups the IRS was ALREADY oppressing and harassing with books of questions. and you defend this tyranny. the IRS audited them because they were on those lists of tea party groups

these were 3 small lists . IRS audits 10% on those lists

The only common denominator was they were on those lists. what other criteria can you prove that caused them to be audited . you can't and are just defending tyranny

The IRS harassed these groups for months with unjust interrogations so you want us to believe the IRS wouldn't also audit them. the IRS was already committing a crime , targeting them , harassing them not letting them organize etc.