You Heard it First Here

On May 14, in a post entitled "The IRS Scandal II," I made the following statement>

"So why wouldn't the IRS take a really close look at groups whose names implied political partisanship?

I guess the big question here is what was the criteria for extra scrutiny and was that criteria biased?"

Now we're finding out that they were just keying off of politically sounding terms like "Tea Party",  "Progressive" and "Occupy." In other words, they were treating both right wing and left wing groups about the same way. THEY WERE SIMPLY DOING THEIR JOB!

They couldn't help it if there were more groups with "Tea Party" in their name than "Progressive. If Congress hadn't written such an obscure, whezzle worded statute, we wouldn't have this problem.

So there's no scandal but that won't keep the ring wing fruitcakes from howling at the moon over imagined slights (I would have said ring wing fruitcakes and Republicans but that would have been redundant).

Just like Benghazi, it's much ado about nothing. This country is in serious trouble when a significant portion of the population can't tell fact from fantasy or simply doesn't care.