Jump to bottom

109 comments
1 darthstar  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:11:43am

Not a good day to be president of Egypt. If that was my job, I'd be spending some serious time on Monster.com.

2 Douchecanoe and Ryan Too  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:22:28am

re: #1 darthstar

Not a good day to be president of Egypt. If that was my job, I'd be spending some serious time on Monster.com.

I think it's time to get on the phone to Fwance about that extended vacation package.

3 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:27:05am

It feels really bizarre to have gone to sleep 8 hours ago and basically come back and see the same protests going on. I wonder how they are organizing things such as bathrooms, water and food.

4 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:28:26am

re: #3 Alexzander

It feels really bizarre to have gone to sleep 8 hours ago and basically come back and see the same protests going on. I wonder how they are organizing things such as bathrooms, water and food.

Takes a lot of work, cooperation, and self-sacrifice. It's an indication of how serious these people are about getting changes made in how and who is governing their country.

5 Summer Seale  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:32:17am

Mubarak has got to be the most incredibly tone deaf politician currently around. Even if he manages to crush this thing completely, or stifle it, or even just waits them out until people end up going home, how can he not understand that he has completely lost all credibility inside and outside of his country and the world at large...?

Power hasn't only corrupted him - it's driven him absolutely fecking mad.

6 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:32:30am

I would bet Tahrir square is getting pretty ran by now. It's not like there is event staff bringing porta-potties or something.

7 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:32:39am

re: #6 Fozzie Bear

*rank

8 lawhawk  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:33:14am

re: #1 darthstar

I'm hearing that Saudi Arabia is offering relocation bonuses to recovering autocrats these days... /

9 lawhawk  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:38:31am

RT:

#
1821: Tunisia's new government - ushered in by last month's mass protests that inspired the Egyptian uprising - announces that its state of emergency will be lifted next week, according to Reuters.

So, there goes the argument that if Mubarak leaves, there'd be chaos.

10 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:39:16am

re: #5 Summer

Mubarak has got to be the most incredibly tone deaf politician currently around. Even if he manages to crush this thing completely, or stifle it, or even just waits them out until people end up going home, how can he not understand that he has completely lost all credibility inside and outside of his country and the world at large...?

Power hasn't only corrupted him - it's driven him absolutely fecking mad.

Honestly, its pretty normal for leaders to ignore protests. According to some estimates, 300,000 to 400,000 protesters marched in New York alone during the Feb 15, 2003 Anti-Iraq War protests (which took place around the globe and in 150 US cities). I dont think the US administration even acknowledged it.

11 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:40:15am

the antiMu people have staying power, that's for sure..a huge investment so far...it's almost inconceivable that Mu can withstand such determination, at least not without grave consequence

13 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:40:51am

I really have to admire the tanacity of these people. They aren't stopping. Of course given high unemployment and poverty they really don't have much to lose.

14 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:41:30am

re: #8 lawhawk

I'm hearing that Saudi Arabia is offering relocation bonuses to recovering autocrats these days... /

Is there a 12-step program for that?

15 Ericus58  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:41:31am

`You Will Be Lynched,' Says Egyptian Policeman: First Person

[Link: www.bloomberg.com...]

"Having a policeman say he wanted to kill me wasn’t my most frightening moment yesterday in Cairo. That came when police and civilians smashed our car windows -- with the five of us inside it -- jumped up and down on the roof, spat on us, pulled my hair, beat my friends and dragged us into a police van. "

cont.....

16 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:42:08am

re: #9 lawhawk

RT:

#
1821: Tunisia's new government - ushered in by last month's mass protests that inspired the Egyptian uprising - announces that its state of emergency will be lifted next week, according to Reuters.

So, there goes the argument that if Mubarak leaves, there'd be chaos.

Its just a guess, but I think that when Mubarak speaks about chaos if he leaves, hes not speaking about domestic problems, hes speaking about the potential for Egypt to abruptly change its geopolitical role for its allies, the US and Israel.

17 lawhawk  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:42:24am

re: #14 oaktree

For the right price, sure.

18 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:43:01am

re: #10 Alexzander

Honestly, its pretty normal for leaders to ignore protests. According to some estimates, 300,000 to 400,000 protesters marched in New York alone during the Feb 15, 2003 Anti-Iraq War protests (which took place around the globe and in 150 US cities). I dont think the US administration even acknowledged it.

as if Bush would suddenly slam on the brakes in Iraq?...a large demonstration for sure, but without any reasonable goal other than to express their anger

19 lawhawk  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:43:56am

re: #16 Alexzander

Actually, from the way he was framing it in his interview with Amanpour, he's talking about inside Egypt - that he wasn't doing it because he didn't want Egypt to descend into chaos.

There are multiple reports that US and Egyptian officials have been in discussions about a transition.

20 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:44:42am

re: #19 lawhawk

Aww, thanks for the followup. I didn't watch the interview myself.

21 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:45:44am

re: #19 lawhawk

Actually, from the way he was framing it in his interview with Amanpour, he's talking about inside Egypt - that he wasn't doing it because he didn't want Egypt to descend into chaos.

There are multiple reports that US and Egyptian officials have been in discussions about a transition.


he has his phony nobility exactly backwards...I think his pride has taken a major beating

22 Summer Seale  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:45:55am

re: #10 Alexzander

Honestly, its pretty normal for leaders to ignore protests. According to some estimates, 300,000 to 400,000 protesters marched in New York alone during the Feb 15, 2003 Anti-Iraq War protests (which took place around the globe and in 150 US cities). I dont think the US administration even acknowledged it.

I absolutely do not equivocate this kind of protest in Egypt going on with the protests going on during the Iraq War. Sorry. =)

23 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:46:35am

re: #18 albusteve

as if Bush would suddenly slam on the brakes in Iraq?...a large demonstration for sure, but without any reasonable goal other than to express their anger

How is "Dont go to war with Iraq" any less legitimate a public opinion then "Mubarak must go" ? Quite similarly, the Egyptian movement doesn't have a lot of clear goals after the removal of Mubarak. At demonstrations this large, the message has to be simple.

24 dragonfire1981  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:47:56am

re: #22 Summer

Yeah anti-war protests are quite different from a popular uprising meant to topple a government regime.

25 Lidane  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:48:34am

re: #22 Summer

I absolutely do not equivocate this kind of protest in Egypt going on with the protests going on during the Iraq War. Sorry. =)

26 dragonfire1981  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:48:46am

Interesting story from Egypt: Did anyone see the photo that allegedly shows Christian Egyptians protecting their Muslim countrymen while the latter engage in daily prayer?

27 lawhawk  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:49:16am

An Egyptian journalist relates harrowing tale. Having a policeman say that she would be lynched wasn't the scariest part of her experience yesterday.

No, that came when crowds surrounded her car:

Having a policeman say he wanted to kill me wasn’t my most frightening moment yesterday in Cairo. That came when police and civilians smashed our car windows -- with the five of us inside it -- jumped up and down on the roof, spat on us, pulled my hair, beat my friends and dragged us into a police van.

The five of us were lucky: We emerged from our confrontation with President Hosni Mubarak’s police and operatives alive and relatively healthy. Violence over the past 11 days, much of it in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, has killed as many as 300 people in Egypt, according to the United Nations.

But it was a day I never dreamed could occur in my native city. It happened not because I was a reporter, a Sudan-based contract journalist for Bloomberg News returning to Cairo for vacation. The friends giving me a ride downtown were just trying to take food and first-aid supplies to those injured the previous night in clashes with pro-Mubarak protesters.

28 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:49:17am

re: #23 Alexzander

How is "Dont go to war with Iraq" any less legitimate a public opinion then "Mubarak must go" ? Quite similarly, the Egyptian movement doesn't have a lot of clear goals after the removal of Mubarak. At demonstrations this large, the message has to be simple.

I didn't say the NY protest wasn't legit did I?...as for this situation, the goal is removal of Mu....what happens after that is another matter

29 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:49:35am

re: #22 Summer

I absolutely do not equivocate this kind of protest in Egypt going on with the protests going on during the Iraq War. Sorry. =)

Why not? Not to say they are 'equal' but they are at the very least comparable. Huge popular uprisings against the actions of the government, that the government wasn't particular interested in acknowledging.

30 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:51:07am

Some Tunisian "anonymous" participant on AJ Live right now, speaking about trying to hack the Tunisian governments computer systems.

31 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:52:10am

re: #29 Alexzander

Why not? Not to say they are 'equal' but they are at the very least comparable. Huge popular uprisings against the actions of the government, that the government wasn't particular interested in acknowledging.

why are you saying that Mu is not interested in acknowledging the protesters?....are you doing some semantic acrobatics?

32 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:55:06am

re: #31 albusteve

why are you saying that Mu is not interested in acknowledging the protesters?...are you doing some semantic acrobatics?

If the state in Egypt could have had its way, Mubarak would never have had to offer a speech in response to the protests, and foreigners would never have covered it. Egyptian State TV tried to present the initial protests as uneventful. However, the strength and size of the protests made unacknowledging them impossible.

33 Summer Seale  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:55:48am

re: #29 Alexzander

Why not? Not to say they are 'equal' but they are at the very least comparable. Huge popular uprisings against the actions of the government, that the government wasn't particular interested in acknowledging.

Because, and I hate to say this, the war was the will of the representatives of the people elected in a free and fair election - even though I voted for Al Gore, I recognized that Bush did in fact win. The fact is that it was voted on by our representatives, and the majority of the country agreed with it. There were also very good legal reasons for doing so and not simply the whims of a dictator, no matter how the left portrayed Bush as one.

34 engineer cat  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:56:32am

Ronald Reagan Approaches 100th Birthday As President

rumors that he has died or is no longer president denounced as "evil socialist muslim propoganda meme meme ayers acorn marx"

35 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:57:16am

"I actually blame certain friendly nations who have television channels, they're not friendly at all, who have intensified the youth against the nation and the state," Suleiman said in a TV address.

"They have filled in the minds of the youth with wrongdoings, with allegations and this is unacceptable. ... They should have never done that. They should have never sent this enemy spirit."

[Link: www.cnn.com...]

Su is a paranoid monger...quite possibly worried about saving his own head

36 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:57:41am

re: #32 Alexzander

If the state in Egypt could have had its way, Mubarak would never have had to offer a speech in response to the protests, and foreigners would never have covered it. Egyptian State TV tried to present the initial protests as uneventful. However, the strength and size of the protests made unacknowledging them impossible.

But everyone knows that the revolution will not be televised. However, the world has moved on and it is being tweeted.

37 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:57:56am

re: #32 Alexzander

If the state in Egypt could have had its way, Mubarak would never have had to offer a speech in response to the protests, and foreigners would never have covered it. Egyptian State TV tried to present the initial protests as uneventful. However, the strength and size of the protests made unacknowledging them impossible.

hypotheticals...whatever

38 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 10:59:22am

re: #28 albusteve

I didn't say the NY protest wasn't legit did I?...as for this situation, the goal is removal of Mu...what happens after that is another matter

By legit I meant this dismissive claim about the NY protests:

re: #18 albusteve

a large demonstration for sure, but without any reasonable goal other than to express their anger

And again, just as the Egyptian situation's goal is the removal of Mubarak, in the NY 2003 case the goal was the halting of plans to enter Iraq. In both cases, "what happens after that is another matter."

39 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:02:02am

re: #18 albusteve

as if Bush would suddenly slam on the brakes in Iraq?...a large demonstration for sure, but without any reasonable goal other than to express their anger

And to tell our grandchildren that we were innocent.

40 lostlakehiker  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:02:24am

re: #10 Alexzander

Honestly, its pretty normal for leaders to ignore protests. According to some estimates, 300,000 to 400,000 protesters marched in New York alone during the Feb 15, 2003 Anti-Iraq War protests (which took place around the globe and in 150 US cities). I dont think the US administration even acknowledged it.

Protests that reflect the wishes of just a
determined minority can be ignored with some impunity. They ought not be taken for the will of the people.

This is different. When Burnham Wood marches on you, it's time to go.

re: #29 Alexzander

Why not? Not to say they are 'equal' but they are at the very least comparable. Huge popular uprisings against the actions of the government, that the government wasn't particular interested in acknowledging.

They are in no way comparable. The demonstrators against the Iraq war were demonstrating against a policy that had got a majority vote in a Congress that was elected in more or less fair fashion. The nation, taken as a whole, favored the policy, and those that didn't like it would have their say at the next election.

Even the protesters were not aiming at the overthrow of the government. They just wanted a change in policy.

Here, the demonstrators want a change in government. No more Mubarak. No more regime. Fresh start. And they speak, not for everyone, but for a supermajority.

41 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:03:56am

re: #37 albusteve

hypotheticals...whatever

You think the Egyptian state was eager to acknowledge the protests that were happening in its country? Why all the lies and misinformation on Egyptian state tv? I mean, its pretty obvious that if an action is against the government, your best first bet (as the state) is to try to dismiss its legitimacy, often by not even acknowledging it.

42 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:04:26am

re: #40 lostlakehiker

..snip
This is different. When Burnham Wood marches on you, it's time to go.

re: #29 Alexzander

....

At least he'll die with harness on his back...

43 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:05:35am

re: #41 Alexzander

You think the Egyptian state was eager to acknowledge the protests that were happening in its country? Why all the lies and misinformation on Egyptian state tv? I mean, its pretty obvious that if an action is against the government, your best first bet (as the state) is to try to dismiss its legitimacy, often by not even acknowledging it.

I dismiss you're position...I'm not into arguing over it

44 Eclectic Infidel  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:06:02am

I take it that women are not permitted outside?

45 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:07:12am

re: #44 eclectic infidel

I take it that women are not permitted outside?

cooking and cleaning still go on....
(snark)

46 Douchecanoe and Ryan Too  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:08:49am

re: #45 albusteve

cooking and cleaning still go on...
(snark)

My husband only allows me to say "Death to America."

47 Tumulus11  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:09:15am

. Al Jazeera is just now remarking on the large numbers of women in Tahrir Square today.

48 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:09:53am

re: #40 lostlakehiker

Thank you thats a very reasonable answer. Although we actually dont know the level of popular support for the protests (although I suspect that its quite likely a supermajority as you say). But Egypt has nearly 80 million people, so the protests alone dont say that.

Similarly the support for military invasion of Iraq wavered a lot:

Only 27% opposed military action, the smallest percentage since the polls began in April 2002. The percentage of Americans supporting an invasion without UN support jumped eight points to 37%.

In march of 2003, If the U.N. Security Council were to reject a resolution paving the way for military action, 54% of Americans favored a U.S. invasion. And if the Bush administration did not seek a final Security Council vote, support for a war dropped to 47%.

But I still see your point.

49 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:11:14am

[Link: religion.blogs.cnn.com...]

when a church decides to go the capitalistic route...gotta wonder wtf?

50 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:11:18am

re: #43 albusteve

I dismiss you're position...I'm not into arguing over it

QED.

51 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:11:58am

re: #50 Alexzander

QED.

what's that mean?

52 Douchecanoe and Ryan Too  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:12:14am

re: #51 albusteve

what's that mean?

Quod Erat Demonstratum. "And so it is demonstrated."

53 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:12:59am

re: #51 albusteve

what's that mean?

quod erat demonstrandum, or "what was to be demonstrated." Its put at the end of a proof in math or philosophy sometimes.

54 Douchecanoe and Ryan Too  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:13:40am

re: #53 Alexzander

quod erat demonstrandum, or "what was to be demonstrated." Its put at the end of a proof in math or philosophy sometimes.

Blah, close enough. My Latin was always a bit rusty.

55 Kragar  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:14:19am

re: #49 albusteve

[Link: religion.blogs.cnn.com...]

when a church decides to go the capitalistic route...gotta wonder wtf?

I wonder how much money would be raised by removing religions tax exempt status.

56 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:17:43am

re: #55 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I wonder how much money would be raised by removing religions tax exempt status.

I'm Henery the Eighth, I am,
Henery the Eighth I am, I am!
I got married to the widow next door,
She'd been married seven times before.
And every one was an Henery
She wouldn't have a Willie or a Sam
I'm her eighth old man named Henery
Henery the Eighth, I am!

57 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:19:03am

re: #53 Alexzander

quod erat demonstrandum, or "what was to be demonstrated." Its put at the end of a proof in math or philosophy sometimes.

ah thanks...I don't want to seem uninterested, you have a reasonable point of view...at the moment, I can just barely post and read, way off my debate game....nothing personal

58 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:21:44am

re: #55 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I wonder how much money would be raised by removing religions tax exempt status.

good question....there should be some sort of cut off point....I never saw a megachurch til I moved to ABQ...holy shit, some are humongous and obviously rolling in dough

59 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:23:02am

re: #57 albusteve

Its cool. Mixing together Iraq war era politics with the current situation was probably playing with fire in the first place since there are a lot of emotions involved in both. I think I need some coffee too.

60 Lidane  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:23:12am

Egyptian Government Figures Join Protesters

61 Lidane  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:24:24am

re: #55 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I wonder how much money would be raised by removing religions tax exempt status.

A lot. The property taxes alone would be huge. Income taxes? Even more so.

62 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:25:02am

I just tried to see if there were numbers for how much money in total is saved (by churches) through the tax exempt status but I gave up pretty quickly. I imagine it will sound pretty rediculous.

I think what is also true is that some churches really are existing with many millions in the bank, while others are perpetually on the verge of collapse. I know that is the case for a couple of churches in my community.

63 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:25:05am

[Link: www.cnn.com...]

for all the football fans, and even Cowboy haters...check out the Super Bowl venue...pretty cool

64 Political Atheist  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:30:27am

re: #58 albusteve

So then the separation of church and state becomes... except for taxes. No religious symbols in a government run park... But pay us or else.

65 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:31:49am

re: #64 Rightwingconspirator

So then the separation of church and state becomes... except for taxes. No religious symbols in a government run park... But pay us or else.

yes

66 Lidane  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:32:33am

re: #63 albusteve

[Link: www.cnn.com...]

for all the football fans, and even Cowboy haters...check out the Super Bowl venue...pretty cool

What's hilarious is that for all the money Jerry Jones spent on that stadium, there's apparently a shortage of hot water in the locker rooms:

[Link: espn.go.com...]

67 Political Atheist  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:33:17am

re: #65 albusteve

So when the government needs more taxes they can promote the religion(s). (Just for revenues sake)
///

That's just not gonna fly.

68 Obdicut  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:34:02am

re: #64 Rightwingconspirator

I don't think the tax-exempt status of churches is rooted in the first amendment. There's no real direct connection. I think it's rooted in the non-profit nature of the organizations.

However, some churches are obviously very much for profit, obscenely so.

69 Obdicut  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:36:23am

Though rather than stripping the tax-exempt status of all churches, I'd really rather we just crack down on the ones that are blatantly campaigning-- which is a violation-- and those which are obviously funneling their money to a few individuals, the pastors of the megachurches.

70 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:36:25am

re: #66 Lidane

What's hilarious is that for all the money Jerry Jones spent on that stadium, there's apparently a shortage of hot water in the locker rooms:

[Link: espn.go.com...]

weird...I can't imagine why the hell hot water is so scarce, never heard that one

71 Slap  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:37:38am

re: #36 oaktree

But everyone knows that the revolution will not be televised.

I've heard that before.....!

Youtube Video
72 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:39:11am

re: #69 Obdicut

Though rather than stripping the tax-exempt status of all churches, I'd really rather we just crack down on the ones that are blatantly campaigning-- which is a violation-- and those which are obviously funneling their money to a few individuals, the pastors of the megachurches.

Sadly it would probably inflate their persecution complex.

73 Political Atheist  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:39:35am

re: #68 Obdicut

I'll not deny the big money in churches, nor do I denythe even bigger money in corporate tax loopholes.

The first amendment separation is used to justify all kinds of things, like forbidding school vouchers, public (gov property) displays of symbols, ten commandment displays at courthouses..., etc. Taxing small local churches that already struggle financially would put a damper on them.

I think that can of worms is better left closed.

74 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:39:54am

oh, beat fallout 3 last night, pretty satisfying ending just too bad that you can't continue on past the end. Picked up Divinity II and going to start that soon.

75 albusteve  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:40:39am

re: #67 Rightwingconspirator

So when the government needs more taxes they can promote the religion(s). (Just for revenues sake)
///

That's just not gonna fly.

no...churches can pay their share of property tax...with exemptions of course for small, rural or worthless land...my hometown village was wrecked by an influx of rich churches, using the historic village for status...I'm jaded, but not altogether unreasonable...I think they are

76 Obdicut  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:42:51am

re: #73 Rightwingconspirator

Again, I really don't think the first amendment has a direct connection to this. We guarantee freedom of the press in the first amendment; we still tax newspapers.

I've got no interest in taxing churches, as I said above. Hell, I've got no interest in taxing any (domestic) corporation, either.

However, these days, many churches are blatantly violating the rules on political involvement, and many more are blatantly violating the rules on individuals profiting from them. I don't care how small and struggling the local church is, if they're saying "Go vote for Senator X", they're violating the law and should be slapped down for it.

It's a big problem, and getting bigger.

77 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:43:44am

re: #73 Rightwingconspirator

I'll not deny the big money in churches, nor do I denythe even bigger money in corporate tax loopholes.

The first amendment separation is used to justify all kinds of things, like forbidding school vouchers, public (gov property) displays of symbols, ten commandment displays at courthouses..., etc. Taxing small local churches that already struggle financially would put a damper on them.

I think that can of worms is better left closed.

A lot of locales (state, county, city, etc.) have tax laws on their books that cut non-profits some slack in terms of property tax liabilities. Usually with a size or value limit attached. Or if the property is being used for activities such as education or direct community service.

78 Gus  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:46:20am

Ugh. Some weirdo started talking about aliens and UFOs at the local store I go to. All because of the cellophane on the cigarette packaging expanding leading to a lot of mumbling about Roswell. Then the cashier started confiding his belief after I told him she was weird. Everytime these guys start talking about this stuff they always get all glassy eyed.

79 Lidane  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:47:20am

re: #74 Dreggas

oh, beat fallout 3 last night, pretty satisfying ending just too bad that you can't continue on past the end. Picked up Divinity II and going to start that soon.

I thought Fallout 3 had a bunch of extra DLC, including stuff that raised the level cap?

80 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:47:34am

re: #78 Gus 802

Ugh. Some weirdo started talking about aliens and UFOs at the local store I go to. All because of the cellophane on the cigarette packaging expanding leading to a lot of mumbling about Roswell. Then the cashier started confiding his belief after I told him she was weird. Everytime these guys start talking about this stuff they always get all glassy eyed.

Fukin' atmospheric pressure. How does it work?

81 Obdicut  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:48:20am

re: #79 Lidane

It has mods that do, anyway.

82 Gus  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:49:17am

re: #80 Decatur Deb

Fukin' atmospheric pressure. How does it work?

Seriously. I just stood there trying to hold back the laughter. Roswell!!11ty Sheesh. What is it about flight test areas surrounded by a bunch of alcoholics that they don't understand?

83 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:49:45am

re: #79 Lidane

I thought Fallout 3 had a bunch of extra DLC, including stuff that raised the level cap?

there's a mod to continue play after the ending, however there would be a story disconnect since I turned on the purifier and got nuked in the process. Considering I had enough rad-x on me to supply the wasteland I should have been able to leave without dying.

84 Political Atheist  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:50:10am

re: #76 Obdicut

Well this is a big topic, I also admit very mixed feelings. I'm stuck between another first amendment issue-free speech and the tax status. I get uncomfortable both ways-Mega churches endorsing candidates, and a pastor having his right to speak freely at the pulpit impaired.

I do not think school vouchers should be a problem to give parents more power to get their kids better education. But the separation issue is used very often to thwart voucher efforts.

85 Gus  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:50:45am

Speaking of which. Cool...

[Link: www.nasa.gov...]

Image: 514766main_4858564642_7a2be08acd_o_946-710.jpg

86 Kragar  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:52:29am

re: #74 Dreggas

oh, beat fallout 3 last night, pretty satisfying ending just too bad that you can't continue on past the end. Picked up Divinity II and going to start that soon.

You can continue past the ending if you get some of the DLC updates.

87 Obdicut  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:55:35am

re: #84 Rightwingconspirator

Well this is a big topic, I also admit very mixed feelings. I'm stuck between another first amendment issue-free speech and the tax status. I get uncomfortable both ways-Mega churches endorsing candidates, and a pastor having his right to speak freely at the pulpit impaired.

Again, I think you're conflating two different things. The tax status of churches is based on them being a charitable organization, a non-profit, which is not allowed to endorse candidates. The same rule applies to any charitable organization. Churches aren't being singled out.


I do not think school vouchers should be a problem to give parents more power to get their kids better education. But the separation issue is used very often to thwart voucher efforts.

I think vouchers are just a terrible idea on their own, without the need to resort to the separation of church and state. However, it also seems obvious to me that if the government gives parents money to send their kid to a madrassa, they're paying for that kid to get indoctrinated into a religion. That seems a rather clear violation to me.

88 Kragar  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:55:44am

Went back to FO3 after playing FONV and the single most annoying thing is not being able to repair weapons back up to 100%

89 lawhawk  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:58:46am

re: #77 oaktree

Taxation of churches is a result of a public policy determination that it is in the public interest to give churches a tax-exemption or other tax breaks due to their charitable works and social betterment.

Property tax breaks often require the churches to show that they're engaged in charitable works or other nonprofit activities.

The income tax break derives from whether an entity registers under Sec. 501 of the tax code.

Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.

Churches can qualify under 501(c)(3) but if they violate the part in bold, they should lose their exemption.

Churches can also lose their status if they engage in actions that violate the charitable intent. See here.

90 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 11:59:14am

re: #87 Obdicut

Again, I think you're conflating two different things. The tax status of churches is based on them being a charitable organization, a non-profit, which is not allowed to endorse candidates. The same rule applies to any charitable organization. Churches aren't being singled out.

I think vouchers are just a terrible idea on their own, without the need to resort to the separation of church and state. However, it also seems obvious to me that if the government gives parents money to send their kid to a madrassa, they're paying for that kid to get indoctrinated into a religion. That seems a rather clear violation to me.

When integration was finally enforced in our town, a crop of religious and private academies flew up overnight. Some received suddenly-surplus public school property at firesale prices. Our public schools have never recovered.

91 Kragar  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:00:32pm

re: #89 lawhawk

Taxation of churches is a result of a public policy determination that it is in the public interest to give churches a tax-exemption or other tax breaks due to their charitable works and social betterment.

Property tax breaks often require the churches to show that they're engaged in charitable works or other nonprofit activities.

The income tax break derives from whether an entity registers under Sec. 501 of the tax code.


Churches can qualify under 501(c)(3) but if they violate the part in bold, they should lose their exemption.

Churches can also lose their status if they engage in actions that violate the charitable intent. See here.

I got your charitable intent right here!

Image: copyrightNinaBermanaMegachurch.jpg

92 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:01:03pm

re: #89 lawhawk

Taxation of churches is a result of a public policy determination that it is in the public interest to give churches a tax-exemption or other tax breaks due to their charitable works and social betterment.

Property tax breaks often require the churches to show that they're engaged in charitable works or other nonprofit activities.

The income tax break derives from whether an entity registers under Sec. 501 of the tax code.

Churches can qualify under 501(c)(3) but if they violate the part in bold, they should lose their exemption.

Churches can also lose their status if they engage in actions that violate the charitable intent. See here.

All to the good, if the rules are enforced. I'm not seeing a lot now, and I doubt President Huckabee's DoJ will be very enthusiastic.

93 KingKenrod  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:01:59pm

re: #84 Rightwingconspirator

Well this is a big topic, I also admit very mixed feelings. I'm stuck between another first amendment issue-free speech and the tax status. I get uncomfortable both ways-Mega churches endorsing candidates, and a pastor having his right to speak freely at the pulpit impaired.

I do not think school vouchers should be a problem to give parents more power to get their kids better education. But the separation issue is used very often to thwart voucher efforts.

It's a tough issue. Perhaps the IRS should separate individual speech (a preacher giving a sermon that endorses or attacks a candidate) from actual campaigning - for instance, allowing church property to be used for a rally or a campaign headquarters, or political donations.

Even charities are entitled to look after their own interests in a reasonable manner, and if a particular candidate threatens those interests, the threat of economic loss shouldn't be used to silence a charity.

94 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:02:08pm

re: #91 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

404'd

95 sizzleRI  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:02:38pm

re: #90 Decatur Deb

When integration was finally enforced in our town, a crop of religious and private academies flew up overnight. Some received suddenly-surplus public school property at firesale prices. Our public schools have never recovered.

Same thing happened to my mom's hometown in Tennessee. I think it contributed hugely to her hatred for the mixing of public money with private education, particularly religious private education, like vouchers.

The hatred was intensified when she lived in RI and saw how much taxpayer money went to private Catholic schools.

96 Obdicut  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:05:00pm

re: #93 KingKenrod

It's a tough issue. Perhaps the IRS should separate individual speech (a preacher giving a sermon that endorses or attacks a candidate) from actual campaigning - for instance, allowing church property to be used for a rally or a campaign headquarters, or political donations.

Why? And how is the former not actual campaigning?

Even charities are entitled to look after their own interests in a reasonable manner, and if a particular candidate threatens those interests, the threat of economic loss shouldn't be used to silence a charity.

So you disagree with the law in general that non-profits shouldn't be able to engage in political action?

I mean, it's kind of a moot point now that Citizens United has opened the floodgates to corporate spending, but it'd allow anyone who wanted to get around campaign spending laws by simply founding a non-profit and using it to do the campaigning.

97 Fozzie Bear  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:05:07pm

re: #84 Rightwingconspirator

Well this is a big topic, I also admit very mixed feelings. I'm stuck between another first amendment issue-free speech and the tax status. I get uncomfortable both ways-Mega churches endorsing candidates, and a pastor having his right to speak freely at the pulpit impaired.

I do not think school vouchers should be a problem to give parents more power to get their kids better education. But the separation issue is used very often to thwart voucher efforts.

See, if churches just paid taxes like every other institution, then there wouldn't be any issue of infringement of rights. Speak freely all you want. And pay taxes.

IMO, Churches should have to function as non-profits to avoid taxes. Not PACs, non-profits.

98 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:06:11pm

re: #89 lawhawk

Taxation of churches is a result of a public policy determination that it is in the public interest to give churches a tax-exemption or other tax breaks due to their charitable works and social betterment.

Property tax breaks often require the churches to show that they're engaged in charitable works or other nonprofit activities.

The income tax break derives from whether an entity registers under Sec. 501 of the tax code.


Churches can qualify under 501(c)(3) but if they violate the part in bold, they should lose their exemption.

Churches can also lose their status if they engage in actions that violate the charitable intent. See here.

I think the point being made is that enforcement seems to be fairly lax when it comes to churches. Now whether this is just a general laxity regarding 501-c organizations in general would be worthy of additional investigation. And I'm sure there are non-religious non-profits that abuse their status as well.

99 Kragar  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:07:55pm

re: #94 Decatur Deb

404'd

Better like this?

[Link: 2.bp.blogspot.com...]

100 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:08:12pm

re: #95 sizzleRI

Same thing happened to my mom's hometown in Tennessee. I think it contributed hugely to her hatred for the mixing of public money with private education, particularly religious private education, like vouchers.

The hatred was intensified when she lived in RI and saw how much taxpayer money went to private Catholic schools.

Our case was investigated by a cute young law graduate. Later, she married well.

Image: 2172239902_2afa6d892a_o.jpg

101 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:08:46pm

re: #99 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Liked 404 better.

102 sizzleRI  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:09:03pm

re: #100 Decatur Deb

Hahahaha, that is awesome!

103 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:13:48pm

re: #102 sizzleRI

Hahahaha, that is awesome!

If she soft-lands Mubareck without a bloodbath, there will be two Nobel winners in that snapshot.

104 Kragar  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:14:08pm

re: #101 Decatur Deb

Liked 404 better.

All I can think of is "AND ITS GOOD!"

105 Decatur Deb  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:17:56pm

re: #104 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

All I can think of is "AND ITS GOOD!"

Notre Dame version:

[Link: lostangelesblog.wordpress.com...]

106 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:18:15pm

re: #97 Fozzie Bear

See, if churches just paid taxes like every other institution, then there wouldn't be any issue of infringement of rights. Speak freely all you want. And pay taxes.

IMO, Churches should have to function as non-profits to avoid taxes. Not PACs, non-profits.

There are churches in this country that are completely indistinguishable from political organizations

107 Alexzander  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:22:44pm

Obama speaking now!!

108 lawhawk  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:27:36pm

re: #98 oaktree

Tax compliance and enforcement is a huge issue. There are periodic calls for improved enforcement, because it would likely result in increased revenues, but those calls peter out the moment that a favored group comes under greater scrutiny - such as 501(c)(3) entities, then they back off.

109 Feline Fearless Leader  Fri, Feb 4, 2011 12:40:17pm

re: #108 lawhawk

Tax compliance and enforcement is a huge issue. There are periodic calls for improved enforcement, because it would likely result in increased revenues, but those calls peter out the moment that a favored group comes under greater scrutiny - such as 501(c)(3) entities, then they back off.

True about a lot of things in general once an ox gets gored that belongs to an individual or group with deep pockets and any sort of political influence.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
US Military M17 & M18 Pistols Causing Unintentional Discharges Documents detail U.S. soldiers shot by their own Sig Sauer guns; military says no reason for concern Around lunchtime on Feb. 8, 2023, inside an administrative office at Fort Eustis in Virginia, a sergeant with the Army’s 221st Military ...
William Lewis
3 hours ago
Views: 36 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
The Good Liars at Miami Trump Rally [VIDEO] Jason and Davram talk with Trump supporters about art, Mike Lindell, who is really president and more! SUPPORT US: herohero.co SEE THE GOOD LIARS LIVE!LOS ANGELES, CA squadup.com SUBSCRIBE TO OUR AUDIO PODCAST:Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.comSpotify: open.spotify.comJoin this channel to ...
teleskiguy
2 weeks ago
Views: 712 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0