Mr. Froelich made many assumptions in his column titled "Words of wisdom" published June 27, one being the "IRS Scandal" or witch hunt to find President Obama guilty of another alleged crime.
He states that "at different hours of the day I get my national news from ABC, CBS, the Fresno Bee and yes, ... Fox news. The blending of news sources gives me a better perspective, more information ... to form my opinions. Those who receive their news from one particular source will always exclude another, have only part of the picture. Their conclusions are lop-sided."
He did not mention if he watches NBC or MSNBC. If he had been doing so, he might have a different perspective himself of the IRS situation. MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell has been saying this for weeks: The IRS has tax-exempt status for charities called 501C4s. The original and still included definition of a 501C4 is that the charity is exclusively for Social Welfare. In 1959, the word 'primarily' was added.
The IRS was targeting words like Tea Party as having political ties that happen to be conservative. The IRS was also targeting words like progressive which one may assume are linked to Democratic political ties.
Given the initial intent of the 501C4s, neither of these groups probably should be given tax-exempt tax status by "our supposedly non-partisan tax collectors (who) used their power to target and suppress ideals contrary to those in the White House."
What evidence of this abuse by the IRS workers has been made beyond workers trying to figure out the meaning of the 1959 added word 'primarily' and it's applicability to the groups seeking this tax-exempt status. I understand that all the groups including conservatives, still received this status despite the fevor. The definition of the 501C4s needs to be corrected to reflect it's original purpose.
Mary Herrmann, Oakhurst