Over the past few days, I've told you all about unelected LV Tea Party leader Kim Schmidtner. But I've been unfair because I left out the man behind the woman, unelected LV Tea Party leader Joe Hilliard.Who the hell is Joe Hilliard? Let me tell you a little story. Not long ago, Charlie Dent sponsored the first ever Lehigh Valley Republican Convention at the Northampton Community Center, footing the bill and inviting ALL Republicans. Despite being invited as a registered Republican and committeeman, Joe just had to organize a protest rally against Charlie Dent at the event.
That's how Joe rolls. But enough from me. Let's hear about Joe from Joe himself, with his characteristic modesty:
"I have been blessed to network with thousands of people in a fairly effective coalition. I have had the privilege to help start about 20 limited government groups. It is always amazing when people I don't even know call or email me for advice. I am networked with many, many more groups across the state and even in other states. Senator Specter switched party because of the "censure movement" strategically initiated by a very small group. We have had an impact on the floor of the Pennsylvania legislature. We have implemented a number of initiatives and mechanisms that will have a big impact in politics. This includes legislative initiatives, legal strategies, media outlets, etc. More will be implemented this year. Some, surprisingly, have even been my suggestions and strategy ideas.
"More and more people acknowledge that raising money and handing out literature for candidates is not a solution to our problems.
"We are having impacts at the local government level which include defeating illegal bond issues and exposing fiscal 'smoke and mirrors'. In fact, such an effort led to a total collapse of one county government in our state - and exposed a huge nest of corruption which has led to many indictments including a few sitting judges. It is amazing what can be accomplished by following a few simple principles and pulling back the curtain to expose politicians and the games they play. I was there at the beginning of that effort. In fact, it all started with a meeting with myself and one county resident over a couple of slices of pizza. This turned into a two year battle with a coalition. And, because principled Republicans stepped forward who refused to play the game, there were even some electoral successes in this heavily Democrat county. There will be more such efforts coming in the future.
"I could continue, but my efforts do not need to be detailed as some sort of resume, because I seek no compensation nor recognition."
Then Joe continues anyway:
"We must continue doing what we have been, because we are having a big impact on politics. And, as I keep reminding people, we haven't even done that much yet! Our precinct organizing plan is the foundation for us to increase our effectiveness. Running for committee spots is one piece of that foundation. Our meeting will cover ALL of the aspects of what we hope to accomplish in the near future - which is changing the rules of the game because the political game has failed all of us."
Imagine that! In addition to being the Specter Slayer, he was able to topple a County government somewhere, armed with only a slice of pizza.
Unfortunately, LC Comm'rs Chair Dean Browning, a Republican, is in Joe's cross-hairs. You see, Dean proposed giving the Vice Chairmanship to that dirty, no-good Democrat, Dan McCarthy. It made no difference to Joe that Dan received a pretty good rating from the Tea Party. Unelected leader Joe delivered this ominous threat, ex cathedra, to Browning:
"I can only warn, as I have done consistently for the last several years, about this rapidly growing sentiment which, frankly, has shocked even me with the speed of its growth and strength. Those who get on board will be okay. Those who don’t…. well time will tell. And it won’t only be during an election cycle. Constant HUMILIATION over a four year term will take its toll on those who are a problem. We will use our rapidly growing email lists and hand out thousands of flyers about such “Republicans” for the sole purpose to inform the voters about those who truly represent taxpayers and those who sell out to the Democrats and Big Government groups who feed at the government trough at the expense of taxpayers. And no, we won’t be coming to meetings before a vote to wage this battle at the podium. This battle will be fought before hand to some extent, but ESPECIALLY after such votes are cast."
In Joe's world, none of this is political activity. The IRS has a slightly different view:
"Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. "
91 comments:
God is a teabagger. Obama is the anti-Christi
Rs just want a conservative alternative to the fairly liberal Dent. Cleanse from within. Vote Matt Benol.
what the hell is Hilliard talking about? even when the guy scores a victory (like on the city tax issue he vaguely cites), he gets run over in the next election. He is the classic 1 step forward, 2 steps back kind of political leader.
His narrative is an ego puffing ramble.
He sounds like Villa
"Never underestimate the stupidity of the American people" (Mark Twain) . This is a real quote.
He must be doing something right to generate this much attention and vitriol. Obama and Soros and ACORN farted in the general direction of campaign finance laws. It's been part of the change.
What an egomaniac! What County Government exactly did Hilliard bring down? The only one I know that indicted judges is in Wilkes-Barre. Is Hilliard taking credit for that, too?
I agree. He sounds nuts.
He kind of has an angelic squirrel face.
Hilliard is a blowhard who alienates anyone who does not agree 100% with what he believes. Ask anyone who has worked with him politically. He eventually forces you to distance yourself from him b/c he has tunnel vision and is a bully.
His threat to Dean Browning, standing by itself, demonstrates that. And note he is clearly threatening to use the political process and the people who never elected him, to get his way.
He certainly has the Dent camp's and their loyalists' panties in wad.
It's a bit more than that. I get concerned when one person thinks he speaks for 100+ people who never elected him. I get more concerned when he ses his unelected position to bully the Chairman of a group that is elected. I get even more concerned when he bullies that person to do something that is actually contrary to the wises of his group. The Tea Party actually gave Dan McCarthy a pretty good rating, but Hilliard was screaming about Browning's bipartisanship and threatening to use th political process to get his way.
So my concern is really demagoguery. There's enough statements by Joe to justify that concern.
bernie, like a propagandist, you keep repeating the same phrase, "unelected leaders". i assume church leaders like john hagee and joel ostein are also unelected leaders of their 501's. yesterday's sermon by hagee was quite political.
also, i would bet that when felton posed with the basketball team holding his signs, he didn't know that their 501 application had not yet been approved. the fact that they lose money is what you would otherwise call a non-sequitur.
as you know the tea party is a movement, not a registered political party, i.e. republicans and democrats. although you have cited IRS regulations about political prohibitions, which seem to be widely ignored by thousands of groups, is there a regulation requiring elections? has this particular tea party's 501 application been approved?
MM,
The reason I persistently refer to these leaders as unelected leaders is beacuse they are unelected leaders. They have held themselves out as speaking for the group, but have never been elected to do so. I asked Joe Hilliard several times whether he was elected, and he never answered me. Now I know why. An 1100+ member group so interested in restoring democracy and "We the People" should at least elect its own leaders. Joe Hilliard may discover he's not a leader at all. This is not propaganda; it is truth, an inconvenient truth for someone like you.
As far as incorporating goes, I do not know how they could incoporate without officers. I have made a request to see their filing.
You call the tea party a movement, they call themselves a tea party one minute, a movement the next, a nonprifit the next. Frankly, they do not know what they hell they are, and people like Joe are using them to fulfill a personal agenda like excluding a Comm'r who they themselves rated highly.
As far as what goes on elsewhere , i will conmdemn any political activity by any 501c3 nonprofit. The fact that other nonprofits may sometimes cross the line is no defense.
MM, the groups you cited elect their leaders. They have a board of directors (sometimes called a council, sometimes consitory, sometimes a board of elders), elected by a congregation of members. this board, incorporated in which ever state they chose, hires or elects a pastor. they have bylaws that they follow and in some cases, when these bylaws aren't followed, there are lawsuits. They can sue and be sued. They have legal obligations.
With the LVTP, who are the officers? where are their bylaws? to really boil this down, if somebody is going to file a lawsuit, who gets served with the papers?
To answer your question about whether the IRS requires elections, they do not. HOwever, the bylaws layout a process in which the officers and directors are chosen. Bernie is pointing out that no official process has been laid out to elect officers and directors of this organization. Why? B/c the moment they do, their movement will lose numbers as people have to proclaim membership or assume powers that others do not wish for them to assume.
anon 12:25, there have always been movements. from women's suffrage to the antiwar movement to this newest one, labeled the tea party. most of these movements did not have elected leaders, but as with all movements, there were leaders. since you claim the IRS does not require elections, even for 501's, bernie's prefix "unelected leader" is apparently just a tactic to demean schmidtner and hilliard. although bernie defends this tactic because of "democracy", apparently their followers don't see a problem, neither do I. I also support dent for congress, but to attack people for becoming involved and aware, even if they don't support "my" candidate, doesn't seem to be sincerely supporting democracy.
Comparing the womens' movement to the teabaggers is an insult to humanity...
"since you claim the IRS does not require elections, even for 501's,"
MM, please, don't ever start a non-profit. You clearly didn't read closely. The IRS doesn't require the elections but that is not the point. To be a tax-exempt organization, you have to be incorporated in a state. To be incorporated you have to have articles of incorporation and bylaws. The bylaws state how directors and officers are elected. Bernie is absolutely right in saying that this organization (they claimed that titled) hasn't elected their officers. To anybody's knowledge, no bylaws even exist.
Re: movements... go back and read some history books. movements were led by organizations that elected/appointed their officers. The civil rights movement had the NAACP and churches. They have bylaws that lay out director/officer election. Women's suffrage: National American Women Suffrage Association (elected officers, namely Susan B. Anthony). Anti-War movement: Student Peace Union (complete with a national organization of elected board members and campus chapters with elected leaders).
Movements have structure otherwise they fizzle out. Most of the structures endure as long as the mission of the organization is salient, but for every movement you find, I can find an organization with a prominent leader who was elected by a board or membership.
Additional note: the IRS did not establish the terms for 501c3 until after most of these organizations were founded. HOwever, all of these organizations were incorporated in their states long before.
Personally, I think the group is on the wrong side of the line when it comes to political activity prohibited by the IRS under 501c3. See for more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)
They most certainly seem to be establishing a system of bias favoring one set of candidates over another. MOre than likely, they are a 501c4 or a 527.
Somebody tell that a**hat Molovinsky that there are "movements" like the "Labor Movement" and there are organizations, like labor unions within it, that elect their leaders and file innumerable reports on how they spend money. The Tea Baggers should do the same -- in the name of transparency.
OK, let me say it clearly:
The term "teabagger" is EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE to the people involved in the TEA Party movement.
My teenage son had to tell me what it meant - I'd never heard that particular vulgarity before.
That members of the mainstream media use that term to describe hardworking American citizens simply because they have the temerity to criticize their elected officials makes THEM, not the patriots involved with the TEA party movement, vile and intolerant.
So just STOP IT, OK?
in the spirit of good intentions, I will agree with Donna, but will ask her to also consider the implications of the radical right calling the left "baby-killers, socialists, fags, terrorists" and the like. Words matter in politics. Whether "tea bagger" or "baby-killer", the intent is to marginalize your detractors.
so, for every "socialist" slam, keep that in mind.
"The term 'teabagger' is EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE to the people involved in the TEA Party movement."
Donna, At Friday night's meeting of LV Conservative Voice, John Hinkle used the term as part of his introduction of Kim Schmidtner. She never corrected him.
I will not use that word to describe tea party members and ask others to think about Donna's concern, which is very legitimate. Donna, I'll ask you to ignore the remark because I do not think the word is always used to be offensive. It appears that even some tea party followers like Hinkle are using it.
"MOre than likely, they are a 501c4 or a 527."
There are many 501c4 and 527 nonprofits that are permitted to engage in political activity. 527s are allowed to engage in political activity with issue advocacy. 501c4s are allowed to endorse, so long as it is not their primary purpose.
The LV Tea party was set up as a 501c3.
i think it is apparent that those who attack the tea party movement, do so because they feel that it is a threat to incumbent candidates. the attackers will have to have better ammunition than questioning if movement leaders are elected.
MM, I could care less about the tea party. What concerns me is that they want good gov't but don't seem to follow the rules when it comes to their organization. Forgive my cynicism, but if they won't follow the rules for their organization, why should we trust them with the keys to government?
This is a question of credibility. If they lack integrity in the organization, I seriously doubt their integrity with my tax dollars.
anon 3:20, they are not asking for the keys to government or your tax dollars. they are simply people getting together expressing frustration with the status quo.
MM,
Although you like to attack me, and do it all the time, I am not attacking the tea party movement. I actually hope it succeeds. It is grass roots democracy.
I have 2 chief criticisms. These are constructive, designed to make them better.
First, a group that promotes and advocates democracy and restoring "We the People" should elect its leaders, especially when this local group has 1100+ members. As it stands now, unelected leaders could easily hijack the group and use it for things they would not support, like threatening Dean Browning or making a statement to the effect that there are no principled Republicans.
Second, this group needs to educate itself on improper political activity, which extends to the tacit or express endorsement or denunciation of candidates.
The remark that Joe Hilliard made to Dean Browning was made after the LV Tea Party had gone non profit. He purported to wield the mighty power of the tea party, and threatened Browning with "constant HUMILIATION" over four years, and specifically mentioned the elections cycle.
That is political activity. It is wrong. It is demagoguery, and has to stop.
What's most amazing is that Browning was being brow-beaten for supporting a person (Dan McCarthy) who the Tea Party itself gave a fairly good rating, even though he is a Democrat.
This could be a good group. I am impressed that it can draw so many to a meeting. But as Anon 3:20 said better than I, a group that wants good government should itself follow the rules.
"they are not asking for the keys to government'
You are mistaken here. They are very much asking for the keys and everything else. Hilliard alone makes that clear.
"they are simply people getting together expressing frustration with the status quo."
ahahahahahahahahaha
*gasp*
ahahahahahahahahaha
You don't claim to have 1100+ people (which I doubt in light of their posts last week about inflating numbers to inflate power), run legislative score cards and hold candidate forums unless you want to run (or have your friends run) gov't.
MM, are you so naive?
"Big Government groups who feed at the government trough at the expense of taxpayers" Does that include the Republican wars that are going to cost us $8k a person, a total of $2.4 trillion?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2007-10-23-wacosts_N.htm
Donna: I'll stop using the term Teabagger when you loons stop all of the other hateful, threatening, intolerant and divisive language in common use on your side. Oh, and stop all the death threats, too. Deal?
bernie writes;
MM,
"Although you like to attack me, and do it all the time, I am not attacking the tea party movement. I actually hope it succeeds. It is grass roots democracy.
I have 2 chief criticisms. These are constructive, designed to make them better."
bernie, i do not like to attack you, but sometimes feel compelled to point out your inconsistencies. you have been mocking hilliard and schmidtner, look at your posts, photo's and titles. although it's kind of you to want to make them better, did they ask for your advise? I believe that if they were supporting dent and were less critical of browning, you would not be so concerned with their "unelected leadership". (btw, i mention dent and browning from things said on this site, i am neither a member or student of the 9/12 tea party positions) BUT I AM A STUDENT OF YOUR METHODS DEFENDING THOSE YOU SUPPORT AND ATTACKING THOSE WHO THREATEN THOSE YOU SUPPORT. i do not believe you "actually hope they (tea party) succeed"
as an outsider of the tea party, this will most likely be my last comment on the topic
MM's correct and Bernie's being disingenuous. Nobody asked Bernie to join and his offer of constructive criticism would be more credible if he weren't flakking for the Dent campaign like it's his job. Bernie's part of a tried and trusted Alinsky strategy of discrediting your (read: Charlie's) foe. He wants Tea Party activists to be nice to Charlie Dent or fail by whatever means necessary.
To paraphrase Bill Clinton's campaign: It's the Dent crush, stupid.
well, I could care less about Charlie Dent, Dean Browning, Don Cunningham or John Stoffa. The bottom line is that this group preaches gov't that is responsive and open but fails by any reasonable person's litmus test.
Anonymous 7:08 said...
"what the hell is Hilliard talking about? even when the guy scores a victory (like on the city tax issue he vaguely cites)"
As I recall there were a number of others involved in suing the city but I'm sure Joe will tell you he was the driving force behind their victory. And what a great win it was. The city was forced to refund the money it had collected and immedaitely repeal the tax.
No wait a minute . . . I never received a refund and the last time I looked the tax was still being taken out of my paycheck so exactly what did Joe accomplish other than make the city spend money on legal fees. Way to go Joe.
"i do not believe you 'actually hope they (tea party) succeed'"
Once again, you attack my integity.
I support any grass roots effort to make government better, and always have done so. Whether it has been the Patriot Party, the Green Party, Reform Party, Lehigh Valley Beyond Oil, LEPOCO, the A-town Speak Out Forum that you hosted or the tea party, I have always respected citizens who practice democracy, and I've attended meetings of all of those groups.
I even respect the people who are working hard to get Callahan elected.
They are ALL trying to make thngs better.
But I do not respect demagoguery, which is very easy in a new group that is experiencing growing pains.
Whether Schmidtner or Hilliard have asked for my advice is just as irrelevant as whether Pawlowski asks for my advice. They all set themselves up as leaders, and part of leadership is being questioned.
The idea that I am doing this just because of Dent or Browning is silly. It's true that I probably would not have paid as close attention to this if they were not part of the story, but the real underlying themes here have NOTHING to do with them.
The underlying themes are these:
(1) a group that wants to restore democracy, but that does not practice it; and (2) unelected leaders who obviously are engaged in improper political activity and a bit of demagoguery.
And I don't need your permission, as an American, to question those who instruct other Americans how they should be governed. I do not need your permission to challenge their demogagury, which is destructive to elected officials from both major parties, including Callahan.
Not only do you attack my integrity, as usual, but you betray a basic misundertanding of democracy and how it works. Democracy cannot exist without those of us who ask questions, whether we are simple bloggers or journalists. Grass roots leaders should be scrutinized just as carefully as those who are elected, if not more so.
You want them to get a pass because you yourself were an independent candidate for mayor, did horribly, and blame everyone but yourself. In 2009, you could not get past the 2005 election, and now you don't want any tough questions to the unelected leaders of a political group that appears to be in blatant violation of IRS rules regulating nonprofits.
Anonymous said...
He certainly has the Dent camp's and their loyalists' panties in wad
I'm sure they are quaking in their boots now that Joe is using his vast political skills to run Benol's campaign. Joe ran for State Committee 3 of 4 years ago and got his head handed to him. Guess he wasn't able to convince the Republican voters that he was really, really a "prinicipled conservative". No wonder he is on a crusade against the "establishment". How dare they not vote for him.
Joe was also the campaign manager for somebody who ran for Controller a few years ago. It didn't take Joe long to run the wheels off that campaign before bailing just before the election. First time Benol doesn't do things Joe's way he'll bail on that campaign as well. You already know what he is going to say, "I had it all worked out and if only Benol had listened to me we would have won, blah, blah".
Anon 5:20,
There were several people involved in what was a pyhrric victory over bonds refunding, including Dr. Bob Romancheck, Tony Phillips and Lou Hershman.
Here is a link to the DCED decision.
Hilliard, Dr. Romancheck and Michael Schware were 3 of 5 litigants who challenged A-town's EMS tax. Here is a lik to the decision rendered by Judge Reibman.
bernie, if there were no organizers, the group would have never started.
it is not a party, as was the green and reform party. it is a group, a large group. we who protested lanta, yourself included, never elected a leader. we who oppose the destruction of the park system in allentown have never elected a leader. how many members may you have before you must elect a leader?
as far as 2005/2009 election, it has nothing to do with my objection to your attack on the tea group and it's leaders. to my knowledge, they are equally critical or supportive of republicans, democrats and independents.
"we who protested lanta, yourself included, never elected a leader. we who oppose the destruction of the park system in allentown have never elected a leader. how many members may you have before you must elect a leader?"
I'll point out three things:
1) you failed to accomplish your goals in each endeavor (but that's besides the point)
2) you never claimed to a non-profit organization
3) you never claimed to represent the interests of a larger group of people (with the exception of people who gave you permission and to whom you gave great deference to)
The moment these people start claiming to be non-profit leaders and representing the interests of other people, they have moral and legal obligations. They are failing in both obligations. If they can't meet these obligations, they are unfit to lead government and manage taxpayer dollars.
Curious to know where, when, and in what capacity that (Hilliard's speech) was said. A little more specific than "ex cathedra" please.
Maybe I'm missing it but I don't see that info given.
Thanks Bernie.
anon 6:59, let me confess that my knowledge of the tea party is limited to what i read on this site and their blog, so i cannot address all your concerns. but i do know when bernie attacks somebody, as he did ms. schmidtner. his questions concerning her residency, voting record and tax lien were all cheap shot smears. likewise, although more sophisticated, this "unelected leader" is meant as a shot. as an outsider, questioning bernie's motives, i'm accused of attacking his integrity (how about ms. schmidtner's integrity?) and having leftover unresolved issues from 2005. but to the point, who is bernie convincing? is he discouraging potential tea party members? i would imagine just the opposite. good evening.
Bernie,
If John used the term “tea-bagger” it was a verbal gaff and not intentional. It is a slur to call people in the Tea Party movement, or anyone, a “tea baggers”. It was disappointing to me to see Anderson Cooper start it all off with what he thought was a clever joke on his news program. Typical of the Left to think such license is acceptable.
Scott Armstrong
In his defense Joe Hilliard like a few others fought the good fight in Allentown against the Democrat Machine that is destroying the city. With no support Joe won small victories in the courts but lacked the resources (and support) to continue the fight.
Joe is an ideologue. This makes him an extremely difficult person to work with. For him the truth is always clear and narrow and this certainty is often impractical when applied to political campaigns and popular movements. This trait becomes apparent to everyone who attempts to work with Joe on any project. This doesn’t make him a bad person. With this understanding of his personality I and many others have urged Joe to take his certainty and run for public office. There he could field test his vision directly on the voting public.
Scott Armstrong
"questioning bernie's motives, i'm accused of attacking his integrity (how about ms. schmidtner's integrity?)"
That's bc you did attack my integrity. You basically called me a liar. I never attacked Hilliard or Schmidtner's integrity. I accused them of engaging improper political activity and said they should be elected. Her tax lien was not used to attack her, either. I know many good people w/ tax liens. That was mentioned to explain her sudden interest in government.
I explained this before, but you posted a blog about it, one of many, whose sole purpose is to attack me.
The only person attacking another person's integrity is, as usual, you.
The funny thing is you don't give a shit about the tea party or Kim Schmidtner. And the real reason for all this venom from you is bc you are still vewy, vewy angwy that I did not let you get away with kicking Cunningham around. You are worse than an ex-wife.
Wayne, That statement is part of an email that your unelected leader sent to Hilliard. It was then posted on this blog.
Bernie O'Hare said...
Wayne, That statement is part of an email that your unelected leader sent to Hilliard. It was then posted on this blog.
----------------------------
Excuse me, I thought those were Hilliard words (you intro'd them thusly: "But enough from me. Let's hear about Joe from Joe himself, with his characteristic modesty:")
But now you say they were emailed TO Hilliard.
Not making any sense here...
My mistake.
Wayne, That statement is part of an email that your unelected leader sent to Browning. It was then posted on this blog.
OK, the whole thing or just last paragraph. Because the rest reads different.
From the first paragraphs (which doesn't read like the same letter) it appears that he has his fingers in quite a few groups. Why does this letter to Browning reflect on the LVTP in your opinion? Was it on LVTP letterhead or something?
OK Wayne, Given your remarks on the other site, it's pretty clear you're defending your unelected leaders at all costs. So let's drop the innocent "Was it on LVTP letterhead" question. It's very clear that Hilliard is engaging in political activity and his use of the Royal We suggests that his flunkies (possibly you?) will do his bidding, which you apparently are. Only a moron would reach any other conclusion.
His first, more lengthy, pronouncment comes right from the LVYP web page.
Hey Bernie! Hey Micheal! What's going on here? I love reading this blog to learn about things not found elsewhere and appreciate the genuine passion and informed opinion that both of you bring to some great discussions here.
But where did it get personal? I must have been AWOL for a bit to have missed where you two soured on each other. I wonder if I'm the only one who is wincing at the vitriol going on here between you two?
Mike, I think you're wrong about Bernie in some of what you're saying; likewise to you too Bernie.
Remember that great dinner we all had together at HOUSE of CHEN. (Of course, I would think it was great; I didn't have to pay! Mike picked up the tab for all of us! Good fellowship that evening. You were all in the thick of the LANTA thing. I was just tagging along.
Let's all get together again - at the same place - MY TREAT this time! I wanna see you both kiss & make up!
I'll bring the lipstick.
Why thank you...
Actually, except for the pic on my posts I don't think any of those unelected leaders (except maybe Bryan) would recognize me. Attended two meetings & one bus trip with LVTP... that's it.
Unfortunately, even though you may have a valid concern about what a 501c3 may or may not do, you come across all wrong.
Private individuals do have free speech. Period.
A pastor at a church can tell me exactly how feels about anything and belong to and contribute to whatever cause he wants. But when he's in the pulpit (as you say "ex cathedra") he better be circumspect. And there will be no political handouts in the church bulletin.
But you want a tougher standard for these people. I was very serious... in what capacity were these words written or uttered?
Your response is that I'm a flunky and a moron. That doesn't bother me in the least, except for your sake. The words out of your mouth are a reflection on you, not me.
Theres's a little blurb above this comment box that says you love to argue but personal attacks will be deleted. That makes you a little conflicted, doesn't it?
bernie writes;
"Her tax lien was not used to attack her, either. I know many good people w/ tax liens. That was mentioned to explain her sudden interest in government."
bernie, my error, i didn't realize you were analyzing her motives, i mistook it as an insult. also thanks for the insight about my unresolved issues from 2005 and my lingering resentment about cunningham. we here in the blogosphere are truly lucky to receive your insight and honesty free of charge.
Why is Browning sending you emails presumably from Kim and Joe? Were these things sent to his personal email or is he using his office emails? these are very interesting questions....
Wayne, Only a moron could read the paragraph Hilliard wrote to Browning and conclude he was just speaking for himself. If the shoe fits ...
Your remarks on the other page indicate you're not here for the discussion, but for trouble.
Whethervain,
You must have been away. MM has posted only about 10 blogs specifically attacking me, and occasionally interrupts the conversations here to start petty, personal squabbles. Today, for example, instead of civil disagreement, I am basically called a liar.
Any additional comments he posts here will be deleted, and no, I'd rather have root canal than eat lunch with him.
"Why is Browning sending you emails presumably from Kim and Joe?"
The email in question was sent to ALL county comm'rs, including Browning, with ccs to the world, and is a matter of public record.
Jeez! You people are all freaking nuts!
Bernie O'Hare said...
Wayne, Only a moron could read the paragraph Hilliard wrote to Browning and conclude he was just speaking for himself. If the shoe fits ...
_____________________________
I did not say he was speaking just for himself. Again...
I mentioned that his fingers are into quite a few other groups, as your posting of his words shows.
But you want to focus only on the LVTP.
"Jeez! You people are all freaking nuts!"
Agreed. Me, too.
All the tea partiers came on the scene calling themselves tea baggers and introduced themselves to the world that way until the rest of the more clued into reality of the population let them in on the news that it was a sexual term .
When will you blog about the asswhippin Morganelli layed on Angle in Court on Tuesday.
Sing goodbye Charlie to Angle. Thank God Almighty.
MM, your thing with bernie is your thing with bernie. You failed miserably in trying to respond to bernie's points on this matter. you tried to present facts and historical matters that were simply in accurate and now you are trying to dilute the matter b/c you simply have an issue with bernie's blogging style.
either present some course of arguments that refutes Bernie's claims or stay out of this matter. you are looking foolish.
Anon said:
"The IRS doesn't require the elections but that is not the point. To be a tax-exempt organization, you have to be incorporated in a state. To be incorporated you have to have articles of incorporation and bylaws."
******************************
Wrong! Check out the first amendment of the Constitution which covers the right to assemble. The government has no right to force a group to incorporate, adopt bylaws or hold elections.
The 501(c)designation relates to the income tax code, and how an organization is taxed. There are also many types of organizations that fall under the 501(c) designation, and again, incorporation is not required.
There is a lengthy application and review process for groups applying for 501(c)(3) status, which would allow contributions to a group to be tax-deductible. Simply being a 501(c)(3) organization does not preclude the group from speaking out on political issues or making voters aware of the voting records of candidates for office(particularly if that is their stated purpose)
At this point, it doesn't seem like we know for certain if this group has applied (or, if it has, that the application has been approved) for 501(c)(3) status. Without a copy of the application, it is impossible (even for Bernie) to determine what, if any, violations have occurred.
In my conversation w/ Schmidtner, she indicated her group has attained 501c3 status in January. I was very specific in asking her about that, and she was equally clear in sresponding. In fact, I'm told there was some discussion among some people at the top about goingthe 527 or PAC route, and they decided against it in favor of 501c3.
I have searched the state corp bureau records three times to find the incorporation and have been unable to find it. I have searched the IRS list of 501c3s once and cannot locate it. I have asked people in the tea pary to send it to me but they have not.
Bernie O'Hare said:
"...or making a statement to the effect that there are no principled Republicans."
********************************
And there's the real reason for all these threads. The OPINION of Bernie O'Hare that a brief statement by Kim Schmidtner somehow is a slight on Bernie's chosen candidate, Charlie Dent.
The funny thing is, I am a Dent supporter. I read the quote and assumed that Schmidtner must have been talking about the Tea Party movement NATIONWIDE and why some people - IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY - won't support candidates of either party. It would never cross my mind that she would be referring to Dent as "unprincipled".
Bernie reads the same quote and assumes she is talking about Dent and endorsing Jake Towne. He then goes on the attack against a group whose support Dent could use in November. All of which draws attention to whether Dent is indeed "unprincipled" or whether Bernie is doing Dent's dirty work.
Either way, not good for Charlie.
Bernie said:
"It appears that even some tea party followers like Hinkle are using it."
******************************
Bernie -
Instead of assuming that Hinkle's misstatement was endorsing the use of the term "Tea bagger", why not contact Hinkle, Schmidtner and others to see if that is an acceptable term to use to categorize the group?
That would seem the principled thing to do.
8:27 AM, we will disagree on our interpretation of a non-profit corporation, the legalities it must fulfill and the political activities it may an may not agree upon. I just hope you do not provide legal counsel to any organization that does hold a 501c3 b/c they would likely be defending themselves on various accounts before the IRS on multiple occassions.
This group still lacks the accountability to hold the public trust. Thank you bernie for pointing it out.
The comment was made by Hinkle during a public meeting featuring many tea party people, including Schmidtner and Hilliard, and NOBODY said a word.
To me, it's not that big a deal. Before that, I would be uncomfortable when a tea party dectractor used that word. I still won't use it, but I'm no longer going to slam those who do.
Anon 8:50,
Schmidtner was asked and was speaking specifically about Jake Towne's candidacy when she launced into her tirade, stating that there would be no need for a third party if there were "principled" Republicans. It is clear her remarks were intended as a direct jab at Dent.
Bernie -
I've been involved in non-profits and I can tell you it usually takes some time to attain 501(c)(3) status. There is a lengthy application and the IRS is not quick in granting it.
Assuming that the group just formed last year, I can't believe that they would have their approval yet even if they did submit the application. From your posts, it sounds like they only recently decided to go for 501(c)(3) status (emphasis on the '3').
Perhaps Schmidtner misunderstood when you were asking specifically about 501(c)(3) status.
Could it be that this is all a misunderstanding?
Does their website claim that any contributions to the group are tax deductible? I would think that would be one of the first things that any group would do upon achieving 501(c)(3) status.
Anon said:
"I just hope you do not provide legal counsel to any organization that does hold a 501c3 b/c they would likely be defending themselves on various accounts before the IRS on multiple occassions."
********************************
I would have to say the same about you. In your case it appears that a little Wikipedia is a dangerous thing.
As I mentioned previously to Bernie, if you believe there is a violation please contact the IRS. Please, put your name to it and let them sort it out.
They may not have their approval yet. I cannot find it and their web page does not state that all contributions are tax deductible.
But it is quite clear they have applied for 501c3. That has been the subject of several discussions, both with Schmidtner and other tea party members. I was even told they had decided against a 527, which seems more logical.
Anon 10:32,
I've had several discussions with different tea party leaders. They've definitely gone the 501c3 route, but I can find no approval.
Anon 10:37,
If you want to insult people, do it somewhere else. I've already indicated I will file a complaint if I have to do so. I won't be doing it to appease you but because I feel it is necessary.
I would prefer they do the right thing and am hoping that some see they've crossed the line. I'sd rather they do the right thing than penalize them for their growing pains, but will file if they continue to be political.
Bernie -
It was the previous poster (quoted in my post) who started the insults.
As I stated before, I think your (and the poster I responded to) interpretation of the law is wrong.
We can have a legitimate disagreement, but there is a process in place to resolve those disagreements. It's called filing a complaint with the IRS, and letting them have their say.
It's not trying to bully them into agreeing with your position.
I'm surprised that you continue to do so while many of those on your site (who agree with you) accuse Hilliard of the same thing.
Anon 11:36,
If I wanted to play the bully, I'd file a complaint first and then blog about it. Any person who has been involved to any degree in matters of legal interpretation will agree that before going to court or an administrative agency, you should make a good faith effort to resolve the issue at hand.
I have identified just some instances of what I believe is improper political activity by the LV Tea Pasrty. As it happens, at least one of the unelected leaders has contacted me back channel to express agreement with me.
Before running to the IRS, I will give them a reasonable opportunity to make some changes. If no changes are made, a complaint will be filed.
I feel I would be a bully if I were to file now. Writing about their transgressions is not bullying. It's being truthful.
"Writing about their transgressions is not bullying. It's being truthful."
It's also about holding people who want to change the political system to the same standards that they want to hold the political system.
Bernie O'Hare said:
"As it happens, at least one of the unelected leaders has contacted me back channel to express agreement with me."
********************************
Bernie -
Why would it matter what one of the "unelected leaders" thinks?
As you have pointed out, the fact that they are "unelected" means that they have no authority and cannot speak for the group.
The unelected leaders have been speaking and acting for the group for months. They have the de facto power, so it is significant that at least one of them is concerned.
8:27am I just hope you do not provide legal counsel to any organization that does hold a 501c3 b/c they would likely be defending themselves on various accounts before the IRS on multiple occassions.
-------
I should point out, in the interest of transparency of course, that it would unethical and illegal for Mr. O'Hare to provide legal counsel to anybody as he was disbared back in the 80's.
----
10:32am I've been involved in non-profits and I can tell you it usually takes some time to attain 501(c)(3) status. There is a lengthy application and the IRS is not quick in granting it.
Assuming that the group just formed last year, I can't believe that they would have their approval yet even if they did submit the application. From your posts, it sounds like they only recently decided to go for 501(c)(3) status (emphasis on the '3').
------
Bernie has been informed several times by several different people that the group hasn't even recieved it's incorporation kit from the state yet- although the application was accepted.
The posters are correct that the only reason Mr. O'Hare is picking them apart, is because they are questioning and using Charlie's voting record to educate people.
/sniffle sniffle cry moar plz
It's disbarred, not disabared. get it right.
The typical personal attack is about what I expect.
Bernie O'Hare said...
It's disbarred, not disabared. get it right.
The typical personal attack is about what I expect.
2:10 PM
----------
O, wait, it's OK that you dig into Kim's personal finances 'in the name of transparency' to show 'motive' but for someone to do it to you- it's a personal attack? double standard much?
sorry for the spelling error, i was trying to multi-task. it didn't work to well :D
Anonymous said...
Bernie has been informed several times by several different people that the group hasn't even recieved it's incorporation kit from the state yet- although the application was accepted.
____________________________
Is this true?
No, it's not. What I've been told is exactly the opposite, i.e. that the incorporation went thru in January.
Moreover, on the LVTP webpage, we have this statement on Feb 22. "THE LEHIGH VALLEY PROJECT 9-12/ TEA PARTY GROUP IS A NON-PROFIT CORPORATION AND AND AS SUCH CANNOT ENDORSE OR SUPPORT ANY CANDIDATE OR POLITICAL PARTY. THIS WEBSITE IS OWNED BY THE GROUP AND CANNOT BE USED AS A CAMPAIGNING TOOL FOR ANY CANDIDATE. ANY FURTHER ATTEMPTS TO CAMPAIGN ON THIS WEBSITE WILL BE REMOVED ENTIRELY.
THE ORIGINAL POST OF THIS DISCUSSION THREAD HAS BEEN EDITED TO REMOVE THE ITEMS THAT VIOLATE OUR NON-PROFIT STATUS."
On 2/22, they clearly knew the rules of the road.
Wayne said...
Anonymous said...
Bernie has been informed several times by several different people that the group hasn't even recieved it's incorporation kit from the state yet- although the application was accepted.
____________________________
Is this true?
5:43 PM
------
yes, it is true, he was told over the phone- several times by different leaders of the tea party. unfortunatly- now we come to a he said/she said situation. however, i do know that for a fact they have NOT recieved their incorporation kit from the state yet- and Bernie's arguments, once again are arrogate.
It doesn't make any sense that the LVTP would go through the trouble and expense of getting 501c3 status only to screw it up right after getting it. And I'd guess it's the leaders that will get the grief from the IRS if there is a problem. So one can only assume they know what they're doing.
It's the simplest and most logical answer...
"yes, it is true, he was told over the phone- several times by different leaders of the tea party. unfortunatly- now we come to a he said/she said situation."
This is certainly news to me, and I note that the person who is making this claim is doing so anonymously.
I had a series of back channel email exchanges with one unelected tea party leader, who I will not name, and one telephone call with Kim Schmistner. They both told me they are a 501c3 corp. Kim gave me the exact date in january that they supposedly incorporated, and I wrote it down, but can't locate my notes right now. The email exchange with the unelected tea party leader tells me they decided against a 527 or a PAC and went 501c3, and this person agrees it was a mistake for the reasons that are now all too clear.
But go aghead Wayne, trust your unelected leaders while pretending to be raging against the machine.
B-a-a-a-a.
Bernie blathered:
"But go aghead Wayne, trust your unelected leaders while pretending to be raging against the machine."
_________________________________
See, this is the attitude that's just there to provoke. They are my "leaders" no more than the officials of any other association I have joined. We're a group of individuals with some common ideas about government.
You're good at digging into people's pasts... you can see I have had no trouble voting without the aid of "leaders".
I simply pointed out that if the LVTP has troubles with its IRS standing, the grief is on them.
I'm not going to infatuate over it like certain blogging heads...
Wayne, after a number of posts, what you said is you assume your unelected leaders know what they're doing. Despite the evidence detailed here, you'll trust your unelected leaders. You insult me at the lvtp web page and come here to challenge every syllable I write, but you trust your unelected leaders.
B-a-a-a-a.
People from Nazareth are usually smarter than that.
Bernie O'Hare said...
Wayne, after a number of posts, what you said is you assume your unelected leaders know what they're doing. Despite the evidence detailed here, you'll trust your unelected leaders.
___________________________
You're just not getting it (I thought people that move to Nazareth were smarter than that!) Spelling it out for you...
Just what do I lose if the organizers fumble their tax status? What does my trust have to do with any of it? I've invested two dollars to help pay for the meeting place to be with like minded people. They organized a bus trip that was very reasonably priced to get me where I wanted to be. You're jumping up and down about following these "unelected leaders" but they are providing a service that I and many others greatly appreciate. I'd rather they didn't ever "fumble"... and in time I may participate more to help.
-----------------------------
Bernie O'Hare said...
You insult me at the lvtp web page and come here to challenge every syllable I write, but you trust your unelected leaders.
_____________________________
Hey, I said I was sorry... it was for the t-shirt. Just which part was so insulting?
As for challenging every syllable, I though I was actually being quite restrained!
Post a Comment