NAACP Has Yet to Acknowledge Scott, Love, and Hurd

[Asclepias]

More evidence of racism towards black republicans

Williams Say it loud Black GOP and proud TheHill

NAACP is mentioned one time in the article. Ooops! This is an opinion piece not fact.

 

[Asclepias]

When you get the power to revoke it. The NAACP has a mission statement. You should read it before claiming they arent doing anything.

Our Mission NAACP

Typical deflection. The OP didn't claim the NAACP isn't doing anything. On the contrary, the NAACP actively supports the Democratic Party (and ignores Black Republicans) in direct violation of its IRS 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Why weren't they scrutinized by Lois Lerner?

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

Yes I read that. Please quote the part where they broke the code.

To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.

So where did they break this? Be specific.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That's because the NAACP isn't in the business of "advancing colored people." They are in the business of advancing the Democratic Party, so the question begging to be asked here is when their tax exempt status is going to be revoked?

When you get the power to revoke it. The NAACP has a mission statement. You should read it before claiming they arent doing anything.

Our Mission NAACP

Typical deflection. The OP didn't claim the NAACP isn't doing anything. On the contrary, the NAACP actively supports the Democratic Party (and ignores Black Republicans) in direct violation of its IRS 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Why weren't they scrutinized by Lois Lerner?

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

You do however see must not be specifically about supporting one party.

 

[Asclepias]

For you Republicans.

Edward Brooke - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Edward William Brooke III (born October 26, 1919) is an American Republican politician. In 1966 he became the first African-American popularly elected to the United States Senate. No other senator of African heritage was elected until Democrat Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois in 1993.........In 1967, he was awarded the Spingarn Medal from the NAACP.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

When you get the power to revoke it. The NAACP has a mission statement. You should read it before claiming they arent doing anything.

Our Mission NAACP

Typical deflection. The OP didn't claim the NAACP isn't doing anything. On the contrary, the NAACP actively supports the Democratic Party (and ignores Black Republicans) in direct violation of its IRS 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Why weren't they scrutinized by Lois Lerner?

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

You do however see must not be specifically about supporting one party.

Nope, I don't see that either. Because that rule doesn't exist.

501c4s are forbidden from endorsing any candidates or parties.

That's all. There's no requirement to be "fair".

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not a democrat. I have no team. Its not a team sport and you should know this. I know you arent that bright but you dont seem to understand the difference between a party label and an ideology. Liberals can be Republican and conservatives an be Democrats. I feel sorry for you that you went through life not understanding that simple concept.

Can you name me some conservatives Democrats today, perhaps half a dozen, I'd like to check their voting record!

No....I wont fall for your deflection.

What deflection, you made a statement and I called for some information to prove your point... apparently you have nothing, or you would have posted it. Sorry to make you look like a fool...again!

This has nothing to do with conservative Democrats today. Its a deflection.

You claimed the KKK was conservative democrats so how is that not relevant?

The KKK was formed after the Civil War. Conservative Democrats nowadays have nothing to do with the KKK.

 

[jwoodie]

That's because the NAACP isn't in the business of "advancing colored people." They are in the business of advancing the Democratic Party, so the question begging to be asked here is when their tax exempt status is going to be revoked?

When you get the power to revoke it. The NAACP has a mission statement. You should read it before claiming they arent doing anything.

Our Mission NAACP

Typical deflection. The OP didn't claim the NAACP isn't doing anything. On the contrary, the NAACP actively supports the Democratic Party (and ignores Black Republicans) in direct violation of its IRS 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Why weren't they scrutinized by Lois Lerner?

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

Do you have a link to the NAACP endorsing any candidates or parties?

You don't see the inconsistency of those two statements? Good grief...

 

[Asclepias]

When you get the power to revoke it. The NAACP has a mission statement. You should read it before claiming they arent doing anything.

Our Mission NAACP

Typical deflection. The OP didn't claim the NAACP isn't doing anything. On the contrary, the NAACP actively supports the Democratic Party (and ignores Black Republicans) in direct violation of its IRS 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Why weren't they scrutinized by Lois Lerner?

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

Do you have a link to the NAACP endorsing any candidates or parties?

You don't see the inconsistency of those two statements? Good grief...

That must mean you dont have a link.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

When you get the power to revoke it. The NAACP has a mission statement. You should read it before claiming they arent doing anything.

Our Mission NAACP

Typical deflection. The OP didn't claim the NAACP isn't doing anything. On the contrary, the NAACP actively supports the Democratic Party (and ignores Black Republicans) in direct violation of its IRS 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Why weren't they scrutinized by Lois Lerner?

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

Do you have a link to the NAACP endorsing any candidates or parties?

You don't see the inconsistency of those two statements? Good grief...

There are no inconsistencies in my statements.

The rules for 501c3s are not complicated, they are simple.

They cannot explicitly endorse any candidates or parties.

They are not required to be "bipartisan" or fair.

 

[jwoodie]

Can you name me some conservatives Democrats today, perhaps half a dozen, I'd like to check their voting record!

No....I wont fall for your deflection.

What deflection, you made a statement and I called for some information to prove your point... apparently you have nothing, or you would have posted it. Sorry to make you look like a fool...again!

This has nothing to do with conservative Democrats today. Its a deflection.

You claimed the KKK was conservative democrats so how is that not relevant?

The KKK was formed after the Civil War. Conservative Democrats nowadays have nothing to do with the KKK.

Remind us how the KKK is relevant to the OP? Do you understand the term "deflection?"

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Can you name me some conservatives Democrats today, perhaps half a dozen, I'd like to check their voting record!

No....I wont fall for your deflection.

What deflection, you made a statement and I called for some information to prove your point... apparently you have nothing, or you would have posted it. Sorry to make you look like a fool...again!

This has nothing to do with conservative Democrats today. Its a deflection.

You claimed the KKK was conservative democrats so how is that not relevant?

The KKK was formed after the Civil War. Conservative Democrats nowadays have nothing to do with the KKK.

Nor do republicans keep up or provide actual evidence.... I can provide evidence that a prominent Democratic Senator was a former head of the KKK and since 1960. Can you do the same?

 

[Asclepias]

No....I wont fall for your deflection.

What deflection, you made a statement and I called for some information to prove your point... apparently you have nothing, or you would have posted it. Sorry to make you look like a fool...again!

This has nothing to do with conservative Democrats today. Its a deflection.

You claimed the KKK was conservative democrats so how is that not relevant?

The KKK was formed after the Civil War. Conservative Democrats nowadays have nothing to do with the KKK.

Remind us how the KKK is relevant to the OP? Do you understand the term "deflection?"

Ask Roshawn. He brought up the KKK. Do you have a link to the NAACP endorsing a candidate?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Typical deflection. The OP didn't claim the NAACP isn't doing anything. On the contrary, the NAACP actively supports the Democratic Party (and ignores Black Republicans) in direct violation of its IRS 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Why weren't they scrutinized by Lois Lerner?

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

Do you have a link to the NAACP endorsing any candidates or parties?

You don't see the inconsistency of those two statements? Good grief...

There are no inconsistencies in my statements.

The rules for 501c3s are not complicated, they are simple.

They cannot explicitly endorse any candidates or parties.

They are not required to be "bipartisan" or fair.

They also can not disparage one party over another. Because that in fact is picking a party to support.

 

[Vigilante]

No....I wont fall for your deflection.

What deflection, you made a statement and I called for some information to prove your point... apparently you have nothing, or you would have posted it. Sorry to make you look like a fool...again!

This has nothing to do with conservative Democrats today. Its a deflection.

You claimed the KKK was conservative democrats so how is that not relevant?

The KKK was formed after the Civil War. Conservative Democrats nowadays have nothing to do with the KKK.

Remind us how the KKK is relevant to the OP? Do you understand the term "deflection?"

It's relevant to what Asslapse wrote, but don't let little things like having him prove what he quotes bother your pea sized mind!

 

[Asclepias]

No....I wont fall for your deflection.

What deflection, you made a statement and I called for some information to prove your point... apparently you have nothing, or you would have posted it. Sorry to make you look like a fool...again!

This has nothing to do with conservative Democrats today. Its a deflection.

You claimed the KKK was conservative democrats so how is that not relevant?

The KKK was formed after the Civil War. Conservative Democrats nowadays have nothing to do with the KKK.

Nor do republicans keep up or provide actual evidence.... I can provide evidence that a prominent Democratic Senator was a former head of the KKK and since 1960. Can you do the same?

I never claimed the republicans did. Where do you see that?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What deflection, you made a statement and I called for some information to prove your point... apparently you have nothing, or you would have posted it. Sorry to make you look like a fool...again!

This has nothing to do with conservative Democrats today. Its a deflection.

You claimed the KKK was conservative democrats so how is that not relevant?

The KKK was formed after the Civil War. Conservative Democrats nowadays have nothing to do with the KKK.

Nor do republicans keep up or provide actual evidence.... I can provide evidence that a prominent Democratic Senator was a former head of the KKK and since 1960. Can you do the same?

i never claimed the republicans did. Where do you see that?

You did not claim that the right was republicans, you did not claim the Republicans are conservative, you did not claim that the KK is conservative?

 

[Asclepias]

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

Do you have a link to the NAACP endorsing any candidates or parties?

You don't see the inconsistency of those two statements? Good grief...

There are no inconsistencies in my statements.

The rules for 501c3s are not complicated, they are simple.

They cannot explicitly endorse any candidates or parties.

They are not required to be "bipartisan" or fair.

They also can not disparage one party over another. Because that in fact is picking a party to support.

Let me guess. You dont have a link to the NAACP officially disparaging one party over the other?

 

[jwoodie]

Typical deflection. The OP didn't claim the NAACP isn't doing anything. On the contrary, the NAACP actively supports the Democratic Party (and ignores Black Republicans) in direct violation of its IRS 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Why weren't they scrutinized by Lois Lerner?

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

Do you have a link to the NAACP endorsing any candidates or parties?

You don't see the inconsistency of those two statements? Good grief...

That must mean you dont have a link.

That must mean you don't understand logic. "Must support Republican candidates too" acknowledges support of non-Republican candidates.

 

[Asclepias]

This has nothing to do with conservative Democrats today. Its a deflection.

You claimed the KKK was conservative democrats so how is that not relevant?

The KKK was formed after the Civil War. Conservative Democrats nowadays have nothing to do with the KKK.

Nor do republicans keep up or provide actual evidence.... I can provide evidence that a prominent Democratic Senator was a former head of the KKK and since 1960. Can you do the same?

i never claimed the republicans did. Where do you see that?

You did not claim that the right was republicans, you did not claim the Republicans are conservative, you did not claim that the KK is conservative?

No. I claimed the KKK was conservative.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The abiltity to establish context would help you out. The claim was that the NAACP was not in the business of advancing Black people. If this was true the NAACP would not fight for civil rights. Your deflection has nothing to do with that point. Where do you see the NAACP breaking this tax code?

Exemption Requirements - 501 c 3 Organizations

I don't see "must support Republican candidates too" in those rules.

Do you have a link to the NAACP endorsing any candidates or parties?

You don't see the inconsistency of those two statements? Good grief...

There are no inconsistencies in my statements.

The rules for 501c3s are not complicated, they are simple.

They cannot explicitly endorse any candidates or parties.

They are not required to be "bipartisan" or fair.

They also can not disparage one party over another. Because that in fact is picking a party to support.

Link to the NAACP "disparaging" the Republican Party?