Also, note that IRS scandal was revealed by a planted question in a press conference, not long after any such shenanigans were denied in congressional hearings. The scandal is supposed to run it's course before it can have any real impact on the 2014 elections.

Since the IRS is the "agency-in-charge" of the rapidly approaching disaster that is Obamacare, they need to APPEAR to be riding close herd on any malfeasance in the organization. As soon as they find something else to focus on, the media furor will quickly fade.

It was not at all necesssary for Obama to provide even the slightest direction to the functionaries who engaged in the selective stonewalling of applications from the "wrong" side of the political spectrum. "People who disagree... are fevered, illegitimate, weird, creepy, dangerous, stupid, confused, ignorant..."; this is the prevailing view of The Left. Combined with their win-at-any-cost mentality, the "proper" action to be undertaken under the circumstances was nearly automatic.

OK, bad idea. Selective enforcement is bad enough now- the leadership of MoveOn.org should have been jailed a decade ago. The whole IRS scandal (and everything else, to a lesser extent) is the best argument yet for replacement of the income tax with the Fair Tax or some other largely automatic consumtion tax. An accepatable alternative MIGHT be an amendment modifying the 16th, specifying a flat tax with a maximum rate of, say, 12% (and MAYBE a temporary rate of up to 18% for dire national emergency, requiring 2/3 majority and annual renewal).

For once, passing a law might remedy the situation in the future. All applications for tax exempt status are provisionally approved upon receipt (registered mail recommended), investigation to follow. That way, the organizations actual activities will show if they truly qualify for tax exempt status under the law. SEVERE penalties (approaching, but not quite, on cruel and unusual) for fraudulent operations as tax exempt..

So you were around for the Grant administration, the last president with so many concurrent scandals?

The facts do not support your contention. If Romney had "pandered to the hard liner crowd", 4 million conservatives who had voted for McCain wouldn't have stayed home on Nov. 6th, 2012.

I could MAYBE go along with a reform plan if it contained 2 absolutely non-negotiable provisions: a) after naturalization, all former illegal immigrants may not vote until they have held their citizenship for the same length of time they were here w/o legal sanction; b) the border MUST be physically secured as completely as is humanly possible BEFORE any of the reform processes may begin.

The issue ads being run all over talk radio to convince us this is a good idea call the current system "de facto amnesty". I do wish they would explain how exchanging de facto amnesty for the real thing is an improvement... Sen. Rubio has claimed that after the "reform" measures, those here illegally would not be eligible for benefits for a period of quite some years, after they have paid a penalty and earned their way to citizenship. Given the deficit between taxes paid and benefits received listed above, how is that possible? Even granting his claims for the sake of argument, how long do you suppose those conditions would remain once the Lib-Progs start raising cries for more "fairness" and "compassion"?

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, WRONG!! Being levied at every stage of a products life where the value of said product is increased (possibly- or more likely, eventually- to include shipping and distribution), a Value Added Tax is a production tax, NOT a consumption tax. A basic rule of economics: If you want less of something, tax it. Even if ALL OTHER Federal taxes were repealed, the VAT is the ABSOLUTE WORSE way of funding government. You think the current tax code has grown into an unholy abomination...