Cruz Blasts Holder, So What?

People are praising Ted Cruz for his assertions during yet another investigative hearing. Breitbart has their version of the exchange here:

Personally I define charity as doing something to assist others without expectation of any compensation, recognition, or reward. Politics, AIN’T NO FREAKIN’ charity! The scandals are not new, and could have been and can still be prevented with a savings of money. Mr. Cruz is it partisanship, idiocy, stupidity, or just a denial of Free Speech since it comes from a Livingston Parish boy? Before answering why not confer with your colleague Chuck Grassley since party label equates to credibility for so many today. It was the year 2005, and to quote Senator Grassley at the time:

“It will take a two-pronged approach to fix the problems in the nonprofit sector,” said Grassley, who last year wrote a law that tightened rules on used-car donations. “One is better, targeted enforcement from the IRS. The other is legislative changes to reflect the new realities in charity. No one has updated these issues in detail since 1969. That’s a generation. Creative people have taken advantage of the lull to make money for themselves at charities’ expense.”

A year later, 2006, the Wall Street Journal reported how a nonprofit brought about an investigation of Greenpeace by the IRS.The nonprofit watchdog, Public Interest Watch, funded almost entirely by Exxon Mobil. (Since a direct link to the WSJ allows only a partial reading for non subscribers, the link is to a copy of the article).

Congress has been the enabler Mr. Cruz and if you and others who get kicks out of continuously beating a dead horse would take just a short step off the partisan pedestal it’s in clear view that for too long both sides have been employing the IRS attack/defense on its opponents. I might only be a boy from Livingston Parish with public school book learning, but I can read transcripts from the past.

I have many detailed accounts on the current IRS scandal written here which address multiple aspects.  I would not expect many people to engage such dry reading which is necessary to at least try and understand substance and not emotional rants.

Whether read or not, the pertinent question which I and many have:

Why won’t Congress take on the task of reviewing the entire tax code which would actually help discover the economic troubles facing the individual citizens instead of this ad nauseam proliferation of fertilizer being spread verbally?