"Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration"
So said the report from DHS in April of 2009, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," released just a week before the numerous April 15th Tax Day Tea Party protests.
That report so blatantly labeled those who demand adherence to the founding principles of this nation as hateful anti-government racists that it received immediate and overwhelming condemnation.
The leader of the group that put it together, Daryl Johnson, told the Southern Poverty Law Center he felt betrayed by Janet Napolitano who initially defended the report, but after Congress denounced it, said she would have it removed from the government's websites. The report still stands, though, and it is based almost exclusively, according to Johnson, as a reply to a question from the Capitol Police.
The report evolved in a complicated way. It began after a phone call from the U.S. Capitol police in January 2007. They wanted help with then-Sen. Barack Obama's announcement of his candidacy for president. We monitored the Internet for about a month or so looking for threats to Obama. We didn't see anything threat-related, but I started thinking, "What if the U.S. elects a black president? What impact will this have on extremism in this country?" It seemed pretty clear to me that it would lead to a radicalization and recruitment boom by white supremacists, militias and other right-wing extremists, because this is what they fear the most-a black president, the ultimate symbol of a minority population's integration into U.S. society.
So, basically, DHS put out an extremely flawed report based on a hunch from an extremely biased government worker. By the way, the SPLC has been sending letters to your government agencies asking them to continue to monitor you, based on the renowned crackpot thinking of Mark Potok and J. Richard Cohen.
If you are anti-abortion or against socialism, government workers are being directed to monitor your actions, based on the flawed thinking that it is because you are racist.
Because with pro-abort socialists in charge, you don't have the right to disagree; you are supposed to put trust in your government.
So, when tea party groups received letters from the IRS asking questions about their personal and political lives, their families, or whether or not they ever wrote down their opinions, legitimate questions were raised about these probing questions.
On March 22, 2012, IRS Commissioner Shulman denied that these questions were anything more than run-of-the-mill back-and-forth with your friendly government behemoth. The very next day, Landmark Legal Foundation sent a letter to the Inspector General, demanding an investigation into possible misconduct by the IRS and called attention to the politically-charged targeting.
Last Friday, Lois Lerner, a high level officer of the IRS admitted to the targeting, but suggested it was just a few lower-level people who were involved. By Saturday, we found out that she knew about it in June of 2011, and she "immediately" called for a change in flagging procedures.
Six months later, the flagging criteria changed from flagging any application that included "the words "tea party" or "patriot," to, "'political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform/movement,' according to the IG report."
Oh, okay, that's better.
But according to the IG's timeline, the IRS actually began targeting the groups in the spring of 2010.
Meanwhile, Obama spokesman Jay Carney insists on making sure everyone is aware that the IRS Commissioner at the time was a Bush appointee. This is inconsequential to the leagues of tea party patriot types that populate this great Nation.
It has been said, time and time again, that the tea party grew out of resentment toward the color of Obama's skin. That is untrue, just like what Shulman said is untrue, and what Cohen and Potok and Johnson and Napolitano, all untrue.
The tea party began over the outrage of TARP, but grew significantly when Obama made his intentions for the country plain. They are not Bush supporters, nor are they Obama supporters.
Often maligned as conspiracy theorists, many tea party supporters have been vindicated over the results of the attacks on them by DHS and now the IRS, but the President himself has peevishly argued with tea party supporters, resenting that they don't share his views, and suggesting they are against him because he is black.
The theme has been tested and proved to be wrong, but it does not matter to this administration.
It sounds like the flagging will continue, and if you have spent time educating the public on the founding and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, you should have already received your letter.
So tell me again why I should think it's a conspiracy theory to question the government?
Obama said recently at a graduation, ""You've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that's at the root of all our problems." "You should reject these voices. Because what these suggest is that somehow our brave, creative, unique experiment in self-rule is just a sham with which we can't be trusted."
The message from your ruler is clear: Just trust us, stop resisting, we know what is good for you. But, just in case you decide to try to disagree, we have a number of agencies which deal with taxation and law enforcement that can deal with this sort of nonconformity.