Is Media Matters guilty of cheating on taxes?

Page 4 of 6 [ 91 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

02 Nov 2011, 10:00 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

I had to mark not guilty. CLEARLY, if its a liberal source doing such great and wonderful work it has to be big oil, Fox News, and 'Boss Hog' Rush trying to tare them down with calmunies. Heck, they shouldn't even have to pay taxes for the great work they're doing in exposing the evils of the capitalist propaghanda machine.

Oh the conservative "you guys do it too" moral defense. :lol:

Fox is partisan and is breaking no law by being so.
The "Fair and Balanced" tagline on the other hand break truth in advertising laws. :wink:

Well right but, Fox doesn't take government money....or should we just say f*** the law, the world runs on emotion and feelings anyway and thus it shouldn't matter?

Don't be a potty mouth, or you'll be in trouble.

The law is the law. The facts are the facts. The legal arguments are the legal arguments. Media Matters was acquitted with no emotional appeals.

Media Matters does not take government, either.

Fox News was not on trial here--Media Matters was.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,692
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

02 Nov 2011, 10:03 am

pandabear wrote:

Media Matters does not take government, either.

Ah, great. Thanks for clarifying.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

02 Nov 2011, 10:09 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

Oh the conservative "you guys do it too" moral defense. :lol:

Fox is partisan and is breaking no law by being so.
The "Fair and Balanced" tagline on the other hand break truth in advertising laws. :wink:

Well right but, Fox doesn't take government money....or should we just say f*** the law, the world runs on emotion and feelings anyway and thus it shouldn't matter?

NewsCorp does take government money?
Either does Media Matters unless you count not paying tax as taking money.
NewsCorp benefits from its own list of tax dodges shelters and loopholes
last year they paid 6% tax Disney a competitor paid 31%. http://www.economist.com/node/319862
so unless Media Matters is the recipient of direct grants there is not much to say.
and NewsCorp does not.
I am going to Fox has the right to spin and so does Media Matters.
And we all have the right to disapprove.

_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,692
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

02 Nov 2011, 10:22 am

JakobVirgil wrote:

Yeah, I'm not willing to look at tax-exempt status that way. Grants and direct handouts yes, tax exempt status no.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

02 Nov 2011, 10:27 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

JakobVirgil wrote:

Yeah, I'm not willing to look at tax-exempt status that way. Grants and direct handouts yes, tax exempt status no.

Agreed,

Free speech wins.

_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

03 Nov 2011, 12:47 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

pandabear wrote:

Media Matters does not take government, either.

Ah, great. Thanks for clarifying.

What pandabear is neglecting to mention is that mediamatters has tax-exempt status supposedly as an "educational organization."

Fox News does not have tax-exempt status.

pandabear, honestly knows as much about the law as she claims, which quite frankly she does not, she would know that mediamatters is violating the law for their engagement in extreme partisan activity.

NPR even more blatently violates the law with their partisan behavior (cause they receive taxpayer money).

Fox News does not receive tax-payer money either, that is how media matters and NPR are violating the law while Fox News is not, and MSNBC is not.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

03 Nov 2011, 9:06 am

Inuyasha wrote:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

pandabear wrote:

Media Matters does not take government, either.

Ah, great. Thanks for clarifying.

I always find it very difficult to explain things to you in terms that you can understand.

Let me try bolded, capital letters for a change.

ENGAGEMENT IN "EXTREME PARTISAN ACTIVITY" DOES NOT VIOLATE THE LAW. MEDIA MATTERS WOULD HAVE VIOLATED ITS TAX-EXEMPT STATUS IF IT HAD EITHER PARTICIPATED IN A POLITICAL CAMPAIGN OR ENGAGED IN EXCESSIVE LOBBYING. MEDIA MATTERS DID NEITHER!! !!

:roll:

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

03 Nov 2011, 2:02 pm

pandabear wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

pandabear wrote:

Media Matters does not take government, either.

Ah, great. Thanks for clarifying.

Which they have done both.

Oh did you know that mediamatters was trying to help Democrats get the fairness doctrine put back into place.

Anyways Fox Business has an article where they try to have both points of view on the subject, anyways it makes for an interesting read.

Oh, btw a lawyer has filed his own civil complaint against Media Matters.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011 ... pt-status/

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

03 Nov 2011, 8:48 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

Oh, btw a lawyer has filed his own civil complaint against Media Matters.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011 ... pt-status/

Did you even read the whole article?

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,692
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

03 Nov 2011, 10:02 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

pandabear wrote:

Media Matters does not take government, either.

Ah, great. Thanks for clarifying.

What pandabear is neglecting to mention is that mediamatters has tax-exempt status supposedly as an "educational organization."

'Educational organization' sounds like an incredibly vague title - educational institution I understand but organization sounds like any news source, publishing house, magazine (even Penthouse or Playboy) could fit that sort of verbiage if they really want to. I wonder if that would include new age snake oil and if someone like Deepak Chopra could get one of those on his behalf as well? Sounds brilliantly malleable.

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

03 Nov 2011, 11:00 pm

pandabear wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

Oh, btw a lawyer has filed his own civil complaint against Media Matters.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011 ... pt-status/

Did you even read the whole article?

Yup, I am well aware that Fox News, Fox Business often tries to present both sides of the debate.

Question is did you?

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

As pointed out in the article their declaration of war on Fox News, is part of how they are breaking the law. They are engaging in a partisan hit job on a news corporation because they don't like the way said news agency reports things. That would be perfectly okay if something like this was coming from MSNBC or CNN, which do not have tax-exempt status. However Media Matters has tax-exempt status, so if we're allowing them to pull stunts like this, we're basically having our government endorsing a left wing partisan agency, by the simple fact they don't have to pay taxes.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

04 Nov 2011, 8:10 am

If you guys don't like the laws, then contact your members of Congress to change the laws.

Take a look at our ninth and especially our tenth amendments.

Quote:

Ninth Amendment - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment – The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

People can do anything that no law explicity prohibits.

There is no law against a tax-exempt organization declaring "war" on Fox News (so long as the "war" is carried out within the limitations of the law--no murdering, kidnapping, etc.), and there is no law against a tax-exempt organization engaging in a partisan hit job on a news corporation.

Inuyasha wrote:

we're basically having our government endorsing a left wing partisan agency, by the simple fact they don't have to pay taxes.

Look again at our first amendment

Quote:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

By your logic, if an entity's tax-exempt status equals "government endorsement", then the government would be violating our first amendment by granting tax-exempt status to churches.

Again, I'm only a judge. I read and apply the laws, fairly and equitably.

StonedMoonie
Snowy Owl

Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 129
Location: Terra, Sol System

04 Nov 2011, 9:09 am

I voted not guilty on the principle that the jury tries the law, not just the case. Avoiding taxes = keeping what is already yours. No one else has any 'right' to it to begin with.

I don't have much regard for Media Matters as an organization, but that is not a reason to extort them even more viciously than already occurs.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

04 Nov 2011, 9:36 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

pandabear wrote:

Media Matters does not take government, either.

Ah, great. Thanks for clarifying.

What pandabear is neglecting to mention is that mediamatters has tax-exempt status supposedly as an "educational organization."

Deepak Chopra has one

http://deepakchopra.com/chopra-foundation/about-2/

As for pornographic enterprises--I don't see why not.

Here is a service that claims to have successfully helped 7,000 organizations attain 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status

http://www.charitynetusa.com/501c3.php? ... KgodwQpwag

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

04 Nov 2011, 10:12 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

sounds like any news source, publishing house, magazine (even Penthouse or Playboy) could fit that sort of verbiage if they really want to.

You've stimulated my curiosity.

Apparently, you can party in the Playboy Mansion to benefit charity

http://www.partyingforapurposemansionparty.com/charity/

It must confer some benefit to Mr. Hefner.

Also, the Black AIDS Institute hosted a charitable event that featured "legendary porn stars."

http://diversitynewspublications.com/ta ... haritable/

Morality in Media is a 501(c)(3) organization that opposes what it regards as pornography and indecency.

http://www.moralityinmedia.org/

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

04 Nov 2011, 3:17 pm

pandabear wrote:

If you guys don't like the laws, then contact your members of Congress to change the laws.

Take a look at our ninth and especially our tenth amendments.

Quote:

To throw that back in your face, look at the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution, the fact Media Matters has tax exempt status, is like saying they are being endorsed by the Federal Government to try to deprive a news agency of their 1st Amendment rights.

pandabear wrote:

People can do anything that no law explicity prohibits.

Except laws are being explicitly violated.

pandabear wrote:

There is no law against a tax-exempt organization declaring "war" on Fox News (so long as the "war" is carried out within the limitations of the law--no murdering, kidnapping, etc.), and there is no law against a tax-exempt organization engaging in a partisan hit job on a news corporation.

They also said they would resort to sabotage, which would be illegal.

The liberal group Media Matters has quietly transformed itself in preparation for what its founder, David Brock, described in an interview as an all-out campaign of “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” aimed at the Fox News Channel.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/03 ... z1clkhTaBn

— is working to chip away at Fox and its parent company, News Corp. They include its bread-and-butter distribution of embarrassing clips and attempts to rebut Fox points, as well as a series of under-the-radar tactics.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/03 ... z1clizpybg

The group will “focus on [News Corp. CEO Rupert] Murdoch and trying to disrupt his commercial interests — whether that be here or looking at what’s going on in London right now,” Brock said,

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/03 ... z1clim2sWF

So seriously, drop the partisan act where you are trying to protect Media Matters.

pandabear wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

we're basically having our government endorsing a left wing partisan agency, by the simple fact they don't have to pay taxes.

Look again at our first amendment

Heed your own advice, Fox News is not tax-exempt, MSNBC is not tax-exempt, CNN is not tax-exempt; Media Matters is tax exempt.

pandabear wrote:

Quote:

By your logic, if an entity's tax-exempt status equals "government endorsement", then the government would be violating our first amendment by granting tax-exempt status to churches.

Since they apply that to all churches, mosques, etc. you don't have a case.

That is not the case with Media Matters, because Media Research Center has not declared war on the mainstream media, nor have they planned to sabotage MSNBC or CNN.

pandabear wrote:

Again, I'm only a judge. I read and apply the laws, fairly and equitably.

You are not a judge, you aren't remotely objective on this, so drop the act. In fact you act more like a Defense Attorney than a Judge.

Page 4 of 6 [ 91 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

Is Media Matters guilty of cheating on taxes? Post Reply New Topic

Is Media Matters guilty of cheating on taxes?