When you are finished reading the speach, do a search on how many anti-Kerry remarks the Catholic Church made. Is the IRS probing the Catholic Church. And while you are at that, look into the new Pope’s relationship with Bush, or rather his campaigning for Bush. The IRS is being retaliatory and Bush is behind it. Nixon did it when he was in office and Bush is doing it now.

They keep talking about how they need to get their message out. What they don’t realize is that it has been dilvered loud and clear. Afterall, they have the MSM and 527s to peddle their tripe, and ever increasing Americans said no thanks.

They have been able to get away with it for far too long and they seem to think they are above the law.

Sure Bond should step down. But the NAACP should have it’s tax exempt status removed until for a whole year they can prove they can stop with the specific candidate communications and literature and commercials. I know they can’t do it because it’s in their blood.

Just like it’s in a liberals blood to instead of debate the issues call conservatives names and accuse them of things. Liberals feel like they are above having to debate a conservative and they will keep losing election cycles as long as both of these disparities (how liberals and the NAACP think they don’t have to treat us fairly) exist.

What is fair is that there may be some other “faith-based” organizations who do partisan politics with specific candidates in their verbal or even written literature.

That’s against the law and the IRS should inform them of such and it shouldn’t happen again or it’s tax exempt status should be taken away.

I’ve been to churches where issues are discussed but NEVER have I been to churches where specific candidates were on literature or in discussions or anything else.

YOU HAD “RECEIVE” in caps. That fact shows that you had a problem with “faith based” organizations recieving funds for some reason based on your word “fear”.

You’ve missed my point. La Shawn’s post was about the NAACP being tax-exempt. However, that status has come under scrutiny because of some harsh partisan speeches given by its leader, Julian Bond. I think it would be silly to retaliate for some dumb political speech by abandoning a group’s tax-exempt status, but the point I was making was that I believe if one group is to go down then a sufficient investigation must be done for other organizations who receive tax-exemptions but drive party-line politics into its audience. Included in these other groups, yes, are religious organizations that spout political doctrine like it’s gospel.

Baklava, I’m simply being fair. Can you not see that and at least give me some credit where it’s due?

The slam you made was by saying the NAACP was a “racist organization.” You didn’t qualify that statement by saying “when” the NAACP was or is a racist organization.

What I am saying is that the NAACP was a needed body to ADVANCE the plight of blacks at the turn of the 20th century. I would perhaps AGREE WITH YOU in saying that I feel the organization is somewhat outdated today as its core principals seemed to have been left by the wayside for hardcore partisan politicking.

But, at one time, the NAACP served a worthy cause to bring justice to the millions of blacks still suffering under “Separate but equal” and Jim Crow laws.

How else do you believe blacks would have eventually been able to vote or go to schools wit white children? They had to congregate and formulate their own platform of advancement. It wasn’t racism then and I don’t believe it’s racism now. Just terribly outdated.

I am making the point that I am taking issue with what you wrote in this paragraph:

“This is exactly why I fear Bush’s “faith-based” initiatives are wrong because many of these church organizations will take VERY partisan stands on issues and remain not only tax-exempt, but actually RECEIVE additional funds from the government.”

Oh no…. organizations who are religious actually receiving funds to perform services for the poor. We can’t have that because Mike M. “FEARS” this.

You display an attitude that doesn’t deserve a respectful reply. Your attitude about “religious organizations” is one that I find extremely insulting coming from liberals. Liberals who find “FEAR” in something inane to find “FEAR” in.

Sometimes it isn’t a matter of truth. I could tell some “truth” and you would still accuse said “truth” of being liberal BS.

I’m gonna stop now. I don’t want to use La Shawn’s blog as a place to deal out animosity.

All I will say is that can you at least put forth a bit of an effort in trying to be civil? I’m one of a few liberals on here…shouldn’t I be the one to be all uppity?