Random Politics & Religion #00

If I don't get out once a week I get cabin fever.

I've been out here more times than in the U.S.

Mostly bars and one club. It's a different atmosphere though.

Before some of my friends got married we did that a good bit. Parties at houses etc.

Those were the days.

Couples living together are super weird when it comes to parties.

whooping crane.

booo. I new I'd get screwed with a bad spirit animal.

You're a cuttlefish!

With the best brain-to-body ratio of all invertebrates AND the ability to camouflage your skin at will, you're the complete package!

Neither of the activities listed would be an appreciable source of carbon. You fail to understand any of this. You should have claimed sarcasm.

I thought it would be like a phase or something, but nope.

Went to work abroad for two years, came back and it was even worse.

At least before when they didn't want to hang out, they would say so. Afterwards it was like pulling teeth. Never a straightforward answer, always bailing out at the last minute. Funk that.

The worst is once my friends got married it is all about we. We do this we do that. Well I don't care !

Hillary Clinton's family's charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.

The foundation and its list of donors have been under intense scrutiny in recent weeks. Republican critics say the foundation makes Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, vulnerable to undue influence. Her campaign team calls these claims "absurd conspiracy theories."

The charities' errors generally take the form of under-reporting or over-reporting, by millions of dollars, donations from foreign governments, or in other instances omitting to break out government donations entirely when reporting revenue, the charities confirmed to Reuters.

The errors, which have not been previously reported, appear on the form 990s that all non-profit organizations must file annually with the Internal Revenue Service to maintain their tax-exempt status. A charity must show copies of the forms to anyone who wants to see them to understand how the charity raises and spends money.

The unsettled numbers on the tax returns are not evidence of wrongdoing but tend to undermine the 990s role as a form of public accountability, experts in charity law and transparency advocates interview told Reuters.

"If those numbers keep changing - well, actually, we spent this on this, not that on that - it really defeats the purpose," said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government transparency advocacy group.

For three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S. governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in foreign government contributions reported in preceding years.

Those entries were errors, according to the foundation: several foreign governments continued to give tens of millions of dollars toward the foundation's work on climate change and economic development through this three-year period. Those governments were identified on the foundation's annually updated donor list, along with broad indications of how much each had cumulatively given since they began donating.

FOUNDATION DEFENDS TRANSPARENCY

"We are prioritizing an external review to ensure the accuracy of the 990s from 2010, 2011 and 2012 and expect to refile when the review is completed," Craig Minassian, a foundation spokesman, said in an email.

The decision to review the returns was made last month following inquiries from Reuters, and the foundation has not ruled out extending the review to tax returns extending back 15 or so years.

Minassian declined to comment on why the foundation had not included the necessary break-down of government funding in its 990 forms. He said it was rare to find an organization as transparent as the foundation.

"No charity is required to disclose their donors," he said. "However, we voluntarily disclose our more than 300,000 donors and post our audited financial statements on our website along with the 990s for anyone to see."

Separately, the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), the foundation's flagship program, is refiling its form 990s for at least two years, 2012 and 2013, CHAI spokeswoman Maura Daley said, describing the incorrect government grant break-outs for those two years as typographical errors.

CHAI, which is best known for providing cheaper drugs for tens of thousands of people with HIV around the world, began filing separate tax returns in 2010, and has previously refiled at least once both its 2010 and 2011 form 990s. For both those years, CHAI said its initial filings had over-reported government grants by more than $100 million.

Some experts in charity law and taxes said it was not remarkable for a charity to refile an erroneous return once in a while, but for a large, global charity to refile three or four years in a row was highly unusual.

"I've never seen amendment activity like that," said Bruce Hopkins, a Kansas City lawyer who has specialized in charity law for more than four decades, referring to the CHAI filings.

Clinton stepped down from the foundation's board of directors this month but her husband, Bill Clinton, and their daughter, Chelsea Clinton, remain directors.

The foundation said last week after Hillary Clinton became a candidate that it would continue to accept funding from foreign governments, but only from six countries that are already supporting ongoing projects. CHAI will also continue to receive foreign government funding, again with additional restrictions.

Nick Merrill, Clinton's spokesman, has declined to answer inquiries about the foundation and CHAI.

I guess it's true, couples only like to hang out with other couples and be flaky with each other.

No really not even joking why would you want to get married. Cause I'm not seeing a lot of upside to it.

and don't say love !

I've been around married people to know that it is the death of a lot of good men !

Turning back now to Hillary news:

Exclusive: Clinton charities will refile tax returns, audit for other errors

The Clinton's have made their living selling their political influence.

Disgusting.

See...I guess I just don't get how normal people work.

If you're friends with someone, why wouldn't you also be friends with their wife? Why doesn't their wife like doing all the things he likes doing? Why would anyone ever marry someone who doesn't share their interests and hobbies?!

This makes them unique among -- or even in the minority of -- politicians how, exactly?

I'm not saying "everyone's doing it, so it's okay". I'm just saying don't turn a blind eye to everyone else just to fit one narrative. :p

e bribery allegations against California state Sen. Leland Yee expose the folly of the U.S. Supreme Court’s logic in its April 2 decision in McCutcheon v. FEC, which struck down restrictions on the amount of money individuals may donate to federal campaigns in an election cycle.

The only legitimate reason to set limits on funding politicians’ campaigns, according to the court’s majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, is explicit trades of campaign dollars for action — quid pro quo corruption. The court pointedly dismissed “the possibility that an individual who spends large sums may garner ‘influence over or access to’ elected officials” as a reason to limit campaign donations.

The way our broken political system works, though, is that the chief place to raise money for campaigns is from industries and interest groups that want something from government. Influence is purchased all the time, whether in explicit quid pro quo trades or not, and such influence peddling just as bad for democracy as bribery. The real scandal in Sacramento and Washington, D.C., is not the occasional lawbreaking; it’s what’s legal.

Campaign fundraising is bribery


But I guess we're getting back to that "corporations are people" and "money is speech" stuff that you so fervently think is right, therefore to you, this doesn't meet your definition.

When, in fact, damn near every single politician we have is bought and paid for by someone, and isn't representing their constituent citizens; they're representing the moneyholder than got them into office.

Ok, what part of "selling influence to the Russians" isn't triggering something?