I personally disagree with cheating and it’s immoral, and shows their true character (I had a biz partner that cheated and that majorly turned me off)

While it’s immoral, it’s not illegal like tax evasion is. Morals are usually a higher standard than legal. So their is no question from a legal standpoint. Forget about morals though, we can’t even get the members of our government to do things legally.

Maybe the IRS can start in its own back yard.

However it does bother me more when one party preaches about tax fairness and everyone paying their fair share and then has so many people who are advocating for exactly that who are found to be cheating the system to get out of paying their fair share.

So I will pose this to you. Does it bother you worse when the Governor of SC preaches family values and fidelity and then flies to Argentina incognito to meet with his secret lover. Or what did he call her, his “soul mate”. Does that not bother you more than when someone who doesn’t preach those values cheats on his wife? I don’t advocate anyone cheating on their wife. But if you promote a certain choice as best for others while violating it yourself most people find that particularily upsetting. That’s why we have a special word for it, hypocrisy. Which is also rampant in Congress, I know.

Anyway, I think it’s relevant who did it in this case. I expect people who advocate for something to at least do it themselves. If you don’t want to do it then don’t advocate for it. I am fine with that.

Also concerning opponents. It’s common for each side to think the other side is unfairly attacking their guy. When clinton was in repubs said he was horrible and some believed he wouldn’t leave office when his term was done. When bush got in there was the constant refrain of the worst president ever and the same claims that he would not leave office when his term was done. Repubs felt there was a witch hunt on him, attempts to mock him and make him look stupid at every turn, etc. Now that Obama is in office the repubs again think he is horrible and the dems feel it is unjust attacking (references to every disagreement being racist or socialist fear mongering, etc.)

I think part of the problem is these President’s come into office talking about everyone getting along. Bush promised to “change the tone in Washington.” He did, it got more devisive. Obama promised to “Unite people” around a common purpose. Well he sort of did. He united repubs around the common purpose of being against him.

This is politics. There is no changing the tone or uniting people in Washington. There are two parties who have very different views, goals, and agendas. When people talk about changing tones and uniting people, they mean as long as you agree with them and they are hoping to convince you to agree to parts of their view.

So there is no unity in Washington. There is no nice tone in Washington. It’s a fight.

So I don’t think Obama’s opponents are any more driven or focused or ruthless than any other opponents in the modern era of politics. It’s hard to argue that Bush wasn’t hated and vilified by the left just as much as Obama is from the right. And as proof I will offer that I have not heard one person on the right refer to Obama as the worst president ever as Bush was regularily referred to from some of those on the left. I know it’s still early and they may eventually call Obama the worst ever, but as of yet, I haven’t heard it. The most left, or the most socialist President yes, I have heard that. But not the worst president ever.

My point is whoever works within our government should also be held to the same rules they create and enforce. It’s not like that now, nor was it like that when Bush was in office (I know everything is Bush’s fault).

Last time I checked tax evasion is not a minor issue (than being less “saintly”), but ah most people either get heavily fined and/or go to jail. Ask Wesley Snipes how’s that working out for him? By nothing happening to these members of government, while then stating they are expanding going after the “common man” is absurd!

Like health care, members of congress won’t be getting the same health care they propose we should get. So like taxes, I’m all for them going after tax cheats as long as it also applies to them! Otherwise it’s all hot air.

John DeFlumeri Jr

Should we have politicians who lead by example? That’d be great. But as far as I know, there isn’t a single member of Congress who ignores all lobbyist influence or even comes close to leading a saintly life. And I think they get paid way too much and have too many benefits to be considered truly representative. I often daydream of a truly democratic lawmaking process, but my design hinges on a foolproof identification system, which nobody has invented yet.

I also think that Obama’s opponents are more driven, focused and ruthless than, say, Bush’s opponents were.

At the same time, I don’t think that cheating on your taxes makes you incompetent at your job. Each case should be weighed on its own merits.

My tone was flippant, I’ll admit that, but I was trying to bring the point back to the intent of my original article, which had nothing to do with Obama, Democrats, or any other politician.

For what it’s worth, I’ll again give credit to the Bush administration for starting this program in the first place. I only wish it could have been enacted sooner.

I think your whole comment and tone in response to Junkie’s point just makes you look like you want to dismiss the comment like it’s rediculous. But it’s not rediculous. These are the people who want certain people to pay more in taxes and yet they don’t want to live by those same rules. That is hypocrisy and it really makes people angry. Just like the bankers getting bail out money and then paying big bonuses. Surely you can see that and not make such a silly comment as if to suggest the only way a federal employee can cheat is to make 10 million dollars and then hide it in phony offshore accounts.

As to the increased scrutiny efforts to ensure compliance with the law by the IRS, I am all for it. I do not agree with Junkie that stepping up enforcement means witch hunts on normal people to pay taxes. Sure it might mean extra audits but if you do your taxes properly and pay what you owe you should be fine. I am irritated by all the business people who play very fast and loose with the rules and cheat on their taxes all over the place.

I only wish there was enough discoverable cheating to impact the budget, alas, its just small peanuts around the margins. I still am absolutely in favor of them going after it, but the budget won’t be helped much by it. We have tough choices to make in the coming years to deal with the budget that can’t be solved by better enforcement.

The issue I have is legit businesses and individuals are starting to get hounded by our state and federal governments for taxes they don’t even owe! I got a NY state tax bill for $50, for something I don’t owe, and my accountant suggested to just pay it because of the time involved by his firm to just protest it. Sad, it’s becoming like mafia I say.. There will come a time where people say FU and either move out of state or out of country. There are places becoming much more friendly to entrepreneurs.

Sure, I think they’d be eligible for an audit.