WND EXCLUSIVE
James Dobson confirms slam campaign against his group
Family Talk founder says IRS targeted ‘tea party,’ ‘Constitution’ and ‘Christian’
The Internal Revenue Service campaign that put a bull’s-eye on “tea party” groups and those with “Constitution” or “patriot” in their name also took a swipe at Christians.
That was confirmed today when Dr. James Dobson, whose has served as an adviser to presidents and now runs Dr. James Dobson’s FamilyTalk, said his organization’s status was threatened because it didn’t present “all views.”
Dobson has been an outspoken lightning rod standing up for Christian values for decades as an author, broadcaster, speaker and adviser. He has written more than 30 books including, “The New Dare to Discipline,” “Love for a Lifetime,” “Life on the Edge,” “Love Must Be Tough,” “The New Strong-Willed Child,” Bringing Up Boys,” “Bringing Up Girls” and “Head Over Heels.”
He was an associate clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Southern California School of Medicine for 14 years and on the attending staff of Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles for 17 years.
He has advised three U.S. presidents on family matters, and holds 17 honorary doctoral degrees. In 2008 he was inducted into the National Radio Hall of Fame and recently he received the “Great American Award” from The Awakening.
In a statement released through his FamilyTalk Action headquarters in Colorado Springs, it was confirmed the organization was set up two years ago “for the purpose of spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ, of providing Christ-oriented advice and education to parents and children; and of speaking to cultural issues that affect the family.”
The group’s Form 1024 was filed with the IRS requesting 501(c)4 status, which is a nonprofit status but with permission to comment on political issues. Its contributions and donations are not tax deductible to donors. It is not the same status as the ministry itself, where donations are tax deductible, and the arrangement represents a common setup for ministries that want to engage in limited political activity on issues such as marriage, family, abortion, same-sex “marriage,” civil rights and freedom.
FamilyTalk Action said, “The attorney completing this form had submitted scores of similar applications over his 26-year career with none being rejected. In January and February 2013, Family Talk Action’s counsel called the IRS reviewing agent, R. Medley (ID no. 52402), to inquire regarding when there would be a determination of the application. Her voice mail box was full on each of these calls so no message could be left. On March 6, he called Ms. Medley again and got routed to her voice mail again. This time, he was able to leave a voice mail message and requested a return call.
“Ms. Medley did not call back until March 19. Family Talk Action’s attorney asked her when the IRS would issue its determination letter. Ms. Medley responded saying, I don’t think your Form 1024 (application for exemption) will be granted because Family Talk Action is ‘not educational’ because it does not present all views. She continued, saying that Family Talk Action sounded like a ‘partisan right-wing group’ because, according to Ms. Medley, it only presents conservative viewpoints. She then added, ‘you’re political’ because you ‘criticized President Obama, who was a candidate.’”
The organization said it had submitted sample radio programs after the IRS had demanded them, although none was aired during an election year.
“It was the opinion of Family Talk Action’s legal counsel that these samples were not only 501(c)(4) qualified but 501(c)(3) qualified,” the statement said.
“Family Talk Action’s legal counsel had never heard an IRS agent express biased statements like those he heard during the March 19 call. He also felt that the this agent did not understand the difference between 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) entities,” the report said.
“The American people deserve better treatment from its government than this. Christian ministries and others supporting the family must not be silenced or intimidated by the IRS or other branches of the government,” Dobson said.
President Obama fired the acting commissioner of the IRS today over the war against conservatives and Christians, members of Congress demanded that all those responsible lose their jobs and it has been revealed that nearly 500 groups were targeted in the “don’t-disagree-with-Obama” effort.
Documentation suggests the attacks started as early as 2010, shortly after Obamacare, which now is mandating that Christians in business violate their faith and pay for abortifacients, was adopted.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/james-dobson-confirms-slam-campaign-against-his-group/#Q44G0xWqXg5IWq8D.99
IRS Insists That A Pro-life Group Talk Pro-choice values To Receive 501c3 Status
Posted by Joe Wurzelbacher on May 14, 2013
How can the IRS insist that a pro-life group talk about pro-choice options to receive 501c3 status? Legally they can’t.
The IRS is out of control and needs to be reined in. Many of us believe the IRS to be unconstitutional, and we know that they hinder personal and business growth. As Plato stated over 2000 years ago about the “income tax” that “the just man will always pay more then his fair share and the unjust man will never pay his fair share at all”.
We need tax replacement for many reasons, but one of the biggest reason is the control that they have over the American people. Story below illustrates it perfectly.
The Internal Revenue Service already has confessed to targeting and trying to injure tea party, Constitution and patriot organizations, by demanding answers to arbitrary questions and delaying their applications for a tax status so they could operate.
Now WND has learned that the IRS also put an organization in its bull’s-eye that wanted to do nothing more than share its pro-life message with churches.
Cherish Life Ministries was created to be a non-profit under the IRS 501(c)3 provision so that churches would feel comfortable working together.
Peter Shinn founded the group, because he already was working with ProlifeUnity.com, but as it did not carry the same tax code designation as a religious institution, some churches were reluctant to hear the message from its education materials.
And even more reluctant to participate, Shinn told WND.
The mission of the ProlifeUnity group is to “save the unborn and defend the defenseless, no exceptions, no compromise.”
It organizes pickets, works through email campaigns and takes “direct action” on the dispute.
So Shinn launched Cherish Life Ministries, a separate organization, to offer help to a coalition of churches that supports mothers struggling with unexpected pregnancies, promotes abstinence and advocates for an end to abortion in the community, state and nation.
“Our goal is to assist churches, organize and support a life ministry in defense of life and help function as an outreach to people struggling with unwanted pregnancies in the local community,” the site states.
Read more at WND.
http://joeforamerica.com/2013/05/irs-insists-that-a-pro-life-group-talk-about-pro-choice-to-receive-501c3-status/
THESE QUOTES FROM EDMUND BURKE, APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING POST. “X”
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
Among a people generally corrupt liberty cannot long exist.
Edmund Burke
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/e/edmundburk136431.html
Who Is Holding Whom Hostage?
Posted by Pilgrim on May 15, 2013
There have been so many false narratives getting tossed around by the Democrats that it’s hard to keep up with them. For a while the narrative was that the far right wing whacko Republicans are to blame for all your problems, and that’s why the House needs to flip in 2014. Lately the narrative is that the Republicans are cowards who are afraid of Rush Limbaugh, and that’s who to blame for all your problems. Instead of trying to chase down every narrative that they throw against the wall to see what will stick, let’s look at some data.
Heritage Foundation has an entity, Heritage Action Scorecard, that measures votes to see how conservative members of congress are. Since the Republicans control the House, one might think the Heritage Action Scorecard position on the majority of the key votes would be Aye. This is not the case. Most of the key votes so far have the Heritage position to vote No. It’s not been conservatives that have been in control of the docket of key votes coming to the floor. There is an inherent problem with placing too much trust in the No votes to measure how conservative members are. Nancy Pelosi is voting No on these same floor votes. You know what someone is voting against, but you really don’t know what they are for. One key vote the Heritage position on the vote was Aye occurred back on March 20th.
Bill: H.Con.Res. 25: Establishing the budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2014 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2015 through 2023.
Introduced by Rep. Paul Ryan [R-WI1] on March 15, 2013Amendment: H.Amdt. 35 (Woodall) to H.Con.Res. 25: Amendment in the nature of a substitute sought to insert the Republican Study Committee budget proposal.
Offered by Rep. Rob Woodall [R-GA7] on March 20, 2013This was a vote to approve or reject an amendment.
Result: Failed 104-132
Now the result is a very interesting number. At the time of this vote there were three vacancies in the House, but only 236 of the 432 members voted. There were 14 Democrats who voted No, but their votes did not matter. They could have joined the 171 Domocrats on the floor who voted Present or the 15 Democrats who were not there and didn’t vote. The bill still would have failed.
The Aye votes are 94 out of the 168 Republicans who are members of the Republican Study Committee and 10 out of the 64 Republicans who aren’t members. Obviously there are those who join the Republican Study Committee to leave people the perception that they are conservative. There also those who hold TownHall meeting and interviews with the driveby print media and Sunday morning talk shows so they can be perceived as conservative. Don’t assume by perception. Verify by looking at the vote result.
-
Jason Chaffetz UT-03
-
Lynn Westmoreland GA-03
-
Ed Royce CA-39
-
Steve Southerland FL-02
-
Tim Walberg MI-07
-
John Campbell CA-45
-
Lynn Jenkins KS-2
-
Michele Bachmann MN-06
-
Virginia Foxx NC-05
- 10 Aye votes by those who aren’t a member of the RSCJo Bonner AL-1
-
Dave Camp MI-4
-
Candice Miller MI-10
-
Charles Boustany Jr. LA-7
-
Lee Terry NE-2
-
John Duncan TN-2
-
John Mica FL-7
-
Tom Rooney FL-16
-
Dana Rohrabacher CA-46
-
Jim Sensenbrenner WI-5
- 8 No votes and 2 who did not vote that may surprise youJeff Miller FL-01
Discovering the details reminds me of something Ronald Reagan often said.
Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.
Our elected politicians are comparable to major league batters in one respect. It’s more important how well you are batting and helping your team now than what your lifetime batting average is. Let’s remind our elected that they serve us, their constituents. We don’t serve them. They are not royalty to hold the power to bequeath us with royal pardons and favors. Conservatives should hold on to the principles of freedom and opportunity instead of going for a bidding war with the Democrats on promising to give away stuff.
Cross-posted at Unified Patriots
America’s swan song? “We are not coming back”
This was sent to me on March 23rd. It needs to be read, and sent to those who still have an ear to hear.
I am forwarding this email but sadly most won’t read it. “Oh boy, Michael is sending another political email.” I haven’t sent any since the election mainly because I realized that most people don’t care about politics, ergo, they don’t care about our nation. Everybody seems to be only centered on themselves these days. But what most don’t realize is what goes for the country goes for each of us. This article sums up the attitude of Americans and how this once great country will no longer be great again. I would just like to thank those who contribute to this. Truth hurts sometimes!
Please take a moment to digest this provocative article by a Jewish Rabbi From Teaneck, N.J.
It is far and away the most succinct and thoughtful explanation of how our nation is changing. The article appeared in The Israel National News, and is directed to Jewish readership. 70% of American Jews vote as Democrats. The Rabbi has some interesting comments in that regard.
Rabbi Steven Pruzansky is the spiritual leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo – for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility. And fewer people voted.
But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.
Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.
That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.
The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff.
Every businessman knows this; that is why the “loss leader” or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama’s America is one in which free stuff is given away: the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who – courtesy of Obama – receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentivizes looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their windfall) surely know for whom to vote. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.
The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation of the secretly-recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which “47% of the people” start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money – “free stuff” – from the government.
Almost half of the population has no skin in the game – they don’t care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children and from the Chinese.
They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else’s expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.
It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a resident who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.
That engenders the second reason why Romney lost: the inescapable conclusion that the electorate is ignorant and uninformed. Indeed, it does not pay to be an informed voter, because most other voters – the clear majority – are unintelligent and easily swayed by emotion and raw populism. That is the indelicate way of saying that too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich.
During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson: “Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!” Stevenson called back: “That’s not enough, madam, we need a majority!” Truer words were never spoken.
Obama could get away with saying that “Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules” – without ever defining what those different rules were; with saying that the “rich should pay their fair share” – without ever defining what a “fair share” is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to “fend for themselves” – without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending.
Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions – in which politicians ply the unions with public money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone.
Obama also knows that the electorate has changed – that whites will soon be a minority in America (they’re already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the US are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America. Obama is part of that different America, knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.
Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his “negative ads” were simple facts, never personal abuse – facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil’s bargain of making unsustainable promises. It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan – people of substance, depth and ideas – to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare – never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups. If an Obama could not be defeated – with his record and his vision of America, in which free stuff seduces voters – it is hard to envision any change in the future.
The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy – those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe – is paved.
For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel. They voted to secure Obama’s future at America’s expense and at Israel’s expense – in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin.
A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the US will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative. The US will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon-and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality.
But this election should be a wake-up call to Jews. There is no permanent empire, nor is there is an enduring haven for Jews anywhere in the exile. The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline. Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations.. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come.
The “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead – years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution. If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone.
And, sad for the world, it is not coming back.”
Rate this: