The Facebook Overlords are operating in overdrive. On Tuesday, August 16, I discovered that the FB Overlords had “fact-checked,” not one, not two, but three of the satirical memes I had posted over the past four days on my personal Facebook page. All of the memes satirized Biden’s proposed 87,000-member Schutzstaffel: the IRSS. This is a sure sign that Dems are quaking in their jackboots about how much the public hates their Inflation Reduction Act that spends buckets of hard-earned ducats on more bureaucrats, whose job will be to squeeze more money from Americans.

Enquiring minds wonder if Biden and his merry band of congressional pocket-pickers and Zuckerberg brown-nosers had a little confab with Zuck or his lackeys, begging them to do something—anything—to stop social media jokes. Luckily for Biden and congressional Democrats, it doesn’t take much to get the dour, humorless, and literal Overlords tasked with fact-checking satirical memes to start slapping scary “MISSING CONTEXT” stickers on posts willy-nilly.

Maybe the Overlords, overloaded with their censorship duties, farmed out their dirty work to Macedonian teens with time on their hands, or maybe the scary “MISSING CONTEXT” stickers—the next best thing to censorship—were slapped on by avatars in the Metaverse where real people go to die. Clearly, someone isn’t happy about viral jokes about the Democrats hiring an 87,000-member fiscal goon squad.

Here are the memes that got the Overloads all worked up:

Word to the Meta meme-slayers: All memes lack context. All cartoons lack context. All jokes lack context. Are the meme-slayers actually saying that Facebook kinda, sorta prohibits all memes, cartoons, and jokes?

Even satirical essays lack context. What would the meme-slayers do if someone posted Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal on Facebook?

And why do satirical memes about the IRSS generate such a fevered response from Facebook? Could it be that some Democrats and their collaborationist social media moguls fully understand the power of both social media and satire not only to reflect public sentiment but also to affect it?

Could it be that the Democratic Party and monopolistic leftwing social media seek to influence public opinion just as they influenced the 2020 election by burying news stories, spreading mis- and dis-information, and engaging in well-concealed algorithmic mischief?

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen tried to assuage the fears of the public, justifiably alarmed at the prospect of 87,000 new recruits into the IRSS army, while concomitantly fueling class division:

Specifically, I direct that any additional resources—including any new personnel or auditors that are hired—shall not be used to increase the share of small business or households below the $400,000 threshold that are audited relative to historical levels.

But the Heritage Foundation pokes a sharp stick into the sunshiny balloon Yellin tried to fly over the heads of deplorables:

But considering the sheer magnitude of 87,000 new IRS agents and an estimated $204 billion in new revenues from enforcement, is it possible for all those new audits and revenues to involve only taxpayers making over $400,000?

—Returning to 2010 audit rates for all individuals making over $400,000 would generate only 28%, or $9.9 billion, out of the estimated $35.3 billion in new IRS enforcement revenues in 2031.

—Even increasing recent audit rates 30-fold for taxpayers making over $400,000—including 100% audit rates on taxpayers with incomes over $10 million—still would fall more than 20% short of raising the estimated $35.3 billion in new revenues in 2031.

Sounds like Yellin, Biden, and congressional Democrats—including U.S. Senator Joe Manchin—have once again foisted on Americans a mess of fiscal pottage gussied up with some mis- and dis-information. And if some satirical social media jokes create problems for their political futures and their hopes for total control of American lives, those jokes must go.

This isn’t the first time FB Overlords have come unexpectedly to my tiny soapbox in the virtual public square. Like the Spanish Inquisition, they appeared and hauled me off to Meta-prison for 30 days because of this cartoon on the economy, claiming it violated their “standards” on (wait for it) “suicide”:

Silly me, I thought it was a cartoon about socialism and the economy. My apologies to all those people who contemplate suicide with a dinner fork.

Everyone who cares about the future of our declining republic seeks to influence public opinion. There’s nothing wrong with that. But there is something very wrong about the means the unholy alliance of the Democrat Party and social media use to achieve their ends—ends that include expanding the permanent, unelected, unaccountable government bureaucracy that has the power to destroy lives.

Last October the Illinois Family Institute brought attention to the “Free Speech Fairness Act.” Now faith leaders from around the country, including IFI’s executive director David E. Smith, are signing a letter addressed to U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy calling for the passage of the bill. This letter was delivered earlier this week.

Here is the opening paragraph of the letter:

We, the undersigned, representing hundreds of thousands of Americans, want to thank you for your commitment to preserving the rights secured in the First Amendment of the Constitution, specifically the rights to freedom of religion and speech. Unfortunately, since its passage, the Johnson Amendment has effectively squelched both of those rights in the context of activities that could be construed by the IRS as on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate for public office. That is why we support the Free Speech Fairness Act of 2016 (H.R. 781, “Fairness Act”), introduced by Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) and Representative Jody Hice (R-Ga.) to protect the speech and religious freedom rights of 501(c)(3) organizations and their leaders. We encourage you to prioritize hearings and votes on this important bill.

A lot has been written about the existing and growing threats to religious liberty for the past couple of years, and the infamous “Johnson Amendment” even became an issue during the presidential campaign.

H.R. 781 would restrict enforcement of the Johnson Amendment against churches and other non-profit groups for whom the law was never intended. You can find more information about that legislation by clicking here, as well as a great deal more information on the Johnson Amendment here.

In addition, both the Family Research Council and the Alliance Defending Freedom have information posted outlining the details of the legislation and why it is needed. FRC has published a one-page outline that answers the following questions:

• What Does the Bill Do?
• Why is the Bill Needed?
• What’s The Background on the Johnson Amendment?
• Has the IRS Gone After Nonprofits For Speaking Out On Political Issues?
• Who Supports the Bill or the Policies Represented in the Bill?

At their website, the Alliance Defending Freedom lists “5 Things to Know about the New Johnson Amendment Fix“:

1. The bill fixes but does not repeal the Johnson Amendment.
2. The bill applies to all 501(c)(3) entities, not just churches.
3. The bill does not turn churches and charities into political action committees.
4. The bill is constitutionally sound.
5. The bill is the first step in getting Congress to fix what it created in 1954.

Both FRC and ADF have videos posted that also outline the facts — here is ADF’s 3-minute video:

So many moral issues in the political arena must be addressed by church leaders inside the church – and not just by Christians outside the church. We must reclaim our God-given First Amendment right of free speech. It doesn’t just belong to those on one side of the debate.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representative to ask him/her to support or even co-sponsor this legislation. Speak up for free speech by telling them you want the Johnson Amendment repealed. Tell them they can start the process by cosponsoring H.R. 781, the Free Speech Fairness Act.

As of this writing, H.R. 781 has 57 Republican co-sponsors, including Illinois’ U.S. Representatives Randy Hultgren (Campton Hills) and John Shimkus (Effingham).

Download the IFI App!

We now have an IFI mobile app that enables us to deliver great content based on the “Tracks” you choose, including timely legislative alerts, cultural commentaries, upcoming event notifications, links to our podcasts, video reports, and even daily Bible verses to encourage you. This great app is available for Android and iPhones.

Key Features:

• It’s FREE!
• Specific content for Christians
• Performs a spiritual assessment
• Sends you daily Scriptures to encourage and equip you
• You determine when and how much content you get

Written by Erik W. Stanely

Late last month, U.S. Representatives Steve Scalise (R-LA) and Jody Hice (R-GA) introduced a bill in the U.S. House called the Free Speech Fairness Act (H.R. 6195). The bill is aimed at fixing the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 addition to the tax code that gives the IRS the ability to censor the speech of pastors, churches, and other nonprofit entities on issues related to candidates and elections. Here are five things you need to know about the bill:

1.  The bill fixes but does not repeal the Johnson Amendment.

The bill does not repeal the Johnson Amendment. Instead, it amends the law to allow for speech that is made “in the ordinary course of the organization’s regular and customary activities.” This means that, as you carry out the mission of your church, you would have the right to speak freely on all matters of life, including candidates and elections, and would not have to fear IRS censorship or punishment for simply exercising your right to free speech and freedom of religion. Put simply, the bill inserts a “relief valve” for speech into the Johnson Amendment and gets the IRS out of the business of policing the speech of America’s pastors and churches.

2.  The bill applies to all 501(c)(3) entities, not just churches.

The bill is not just limited to churches but applies to all entities organized and operating under section 501(c)(3) of the Tax Code. It is not just churches and pastors who suffer under the draconian regulations and penalties associated with the Johnson Amendment—it applies to all 501(c)(3) organizations. Because this is true, the fix should also apply to all 501(c)(3) organizations. The IRS never should have been put in the position of policing the speech of nonprofit entities and this bill will remove that power from the IRS—a governmental agency that has been proven to abuse this type of power in the past and so should not be entrusted with it.

3.  The bill does not turn churches and charities into political action committees.

The bill is specifically crafted to maintain the prohibition against 501(c)(3) organizations contributing money to candidates or campaigns. The bill only allows for speech in the “ordinary course of the organization’s regular and customary activities” so long as the organization does not incur “more than de minimis incremental expenses” for the speech.  Put simply, this means that speech about candidates and election can be added to whatever your organization is already doing as long as it does not cost the organization more than a de minimis (“an insignificant”) additional cost. The bill does not allow for campaign contributions to candidates or parties.

4.  The bill is constitutionally sound.

The bill removes a very unconstitutional restriction on speech that has existed for over 60 years. By applying it to all 501(c)(3) organizations, U.S. Reps. Scalice and Hice have introduced a constitutionally sound bill that provides relief to exempt organizations and removes the IRS from the speech police business.

5.  The bill is the first step in getting Congress to fix what it created in 1954.

The introduction of the bill is the first step toward fixing the unconstitutional Johnson Amendment. There are many more steps to the legislative process before the bill can become law and provide the relief America’s pastors and churches are seeking.  Nevertheless, the introduction of this bill is an encouraging sign.

There’s been a lot of talk about the Johnson Amendment this election cycle, shining some light on what has been a veil of silence over churches and non-profits for over 60 years. The more people learn the facts about this unconstitutional law, the more they understand why a fix like the Free Speech Fairness Act is needed to protect the constitutional freedoms of everyone—including pastors and churches.

Get your FREE guide to understanding the Johnson Amendment and how to navigate “political” issues this year here.

This article was originally posted at the ADF blog.

Have you ever read a voter guide or perused a legislative scorecard? Maybe you are one of the many Americans that have helped with a voter registration drive because you believe every citizen should be involved in electing their lawmakers.

The question is does everyone have the right to perform these tasks?

Putting together a voter guide or organizing a voter registration drive seems fairly mundane. Few people or organizations bother with it because it’s a straightforward activity that leaves no room for subjective opinion. A voter guide shows how specific candidates rank based on their views of certain issues. For example, a pro-life organization might put together a voter guide that shows how candidates voted on bills relating to life issues. If candidates vote in favor of defending life as sacred, the pro-life organization will rank them higher and urge support for such candidates. If a candidate votes in favor of measures that support abortion they will receive a less favorable ranking.

Legislative scorecards work the same way and are generally done by no-profit groups seeking to inform voters on how their state lawmakers voted during the legislative session. (Click here to view a legislative scorecard from a group here in Illinois.)

Again, who should be allowed to compile and distribute information like voter guides and legislative scorecards?

The logical, common sense answer is that everyone should be allowed to distribute such information. As long as the information is verifiable and true, there should be no regulation stipulating who can and cannot distribute a voter guide or legislative scorecard. Furthermore, everyone should be allowed to state who they support as a candidate and urge others to educate themselves before voting.

And yet, the IRS is now proposing new rules that would limit such activities for non-profit organizations.

The American Family Association commented on these proposed rules:

“The IRS is proposing regulations that will give them the authority to restrict voter guides, legislative scorecards, get-out-the-vote campaigns and even the voter registration activities of non-profit groups by defining such civic engagement as “candidate-related political activity…American Family Association General Counsel Patrick Vaughn says, ‘The proposed regulations are consistent with the IRS’ scandalous suppression of Tea Party applications for tax exemption. The IRS seems to have decided that it may have to process Tea Party applications, but it can render the organizations impotent.’”

To be frank, this is a blatant attempt to silence critics of the liberal, big-government social agenda that is being forced on Americans. Those who dare speak up for traditional values are being attacked and this is just the latest of a series of incidents. The IRS knows that voter guides and legislative scorecards are a threat to the liberal establishment who wish to keep legislative activities within the politically elite circles.   Conservative groups who provide these voter guides are seeking transparency and seek to hold lawmakers accountable. This is unacceptable to the IRS, they are afraid of an informed electorate, for they may cease to blindly follow the establishment’s agenda.

Under these proposed IRS regulations , groups such as the American Family Association, the Family Research Council, and even the Illinois Family Institute would be prohibited from letting people know how their lawmakers voted. These same groups would also be prohibited from evaluating candidates based on their positions on issues such as life, marriage, and religious freedom.

If these restrictions are put into place, how would the citizens keep the government accountable?

If the IRS can by fiat silence those seeking to keep the government transparent and accountable, how long would it be before the government, through the IRS, attempts to do the same to churches? How long before the IRS decides that teaching about marriage is considered to be “political speech” and thus illegal for a church? It seems a stretch of the imagination to think of such events, but after all that we have seen over the last few years, is it really out of the question?

On Wednesday, U.S. Representative Charles W. Boustany Jr. (R-LA), Chairman of the House Ways and Means Oversight Subcommittee will hold a hearing with IRS Commissioner John Kroskin.  The hearing will focus on the ongoing investigation of IRS targeting, the newly proposed regulations concerning 501C3 and 501C4 groups, the backlog of applications for tax-exempt status, IRS responsibilities under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and improper payments of tax credits.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send an email or fax to your U.S. Representative to ask them to stop the IRS from implementing new rules to severely restrict the free speech rights of non-profit organizations like IFI.

More ACTION:  The government has no business telling anyone that they cannot distribute information freely. This attempt by the IRS to silence conservative groups is yet another example of government overreach. We must take action and let the IRS know they are out of bounds and interfering with the right to free speech. We encourage you to read the sample letter below and consider copying and pasting it to the IRS Comment Site where it will be logged. Let your voice be heard.

SAMPLE LETTER: 

I urge the IRS to reject proposed regulations found in REG-134417-13. It would restrict good citizenship by redefining all voter registration, non-partisan voter guides, legislative records, candidate debates or forums, get-out-the-vote reminders, even the mention of any issue that has been raised by a candidate as regulated political activity.  

In addition, the proposed regulation will stifle the ability of non-profit groups to inform citizens about the Administration’s judicial and political appointments by redefining those nominees as political candidates.  This provision of the proposal has nothing to do with accountability for election spending. It will however reduce the Administration’s accountability to the public.  Citizens have the right to hear more than the Administration’s line regarding what philosophies, policies, agendas political appointees represent.   

Most concerning, REG-134417-13 gives the appearance that the IRS is trying to adopt regulations to achieve the same goals that motivated it to hold-up granting the applications of conservative organizations and launch intrusive investigations of Tea Party applicants. 

Click HERE to support Illinois Family Institute (IFI). Contributions to IFI are tax-deductible and support our educational efforts.

Click HERE to support Illinois Family Action (IFA). Contributions to IFA are not tax-deductible but give us the most flexibility in engaging critical legislative and political issues.

The Thomas More Society is speaking out about blatant bias by the supposedly apolitical tax-collection agency. Cases handled by the Chicago-based public interest law firm support mounting accusations that demonstrate the agency’s abuse of pro-life organizations, in addition to those identified as ‘tea party’, ‘patriot’, or ‘government spending’ groups. Outrage spurred by recent revelations of IRS discrimination against these groups has also led the Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus to announce a full investigation into the matter.

In one case, the IRS withheld approval of an application for tax exempt status for Coalition for Life of Iowa. In a phone call to Coalition for Life of Iowa leaders on June 6, 2009, the IRS agent “Ms. Richards” told the group to send a letter to the IRS with the entire board’s signatures stating that, under perjury of the law, they do not picket/protest or organize groups to picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood. Once the IRS received this letter, their application would be approved. After a series of letters following a request for more invasive information, Thomas More Society special counsel Sally Wagenmaker sent a letter to the IRS demanding the tax exempt status be issued immediately.

Wagenmaker summarized her concerns about what she called “the IRS’s disturbing ability” to stall and suppress legitimate applicants. She explained how through lengthy questionnaires and wrong citations of applicable law (as in the case of Coalition for Life of Iowa), applicants with less fortitude or without access to legal advocates like the Thomas More Society will be effectively silenced from exercising their constitutional freedoms. Wagenmaker added, “The IRS’s role should only be to determine whether organizations fit the section 501(c)(3) test for ‘charitable, religious, or educational’ qualification, not to inquire about the content of prayers, protests, and petitions. It’s high time that the IRS be called to account for its workers’ potential to trample on our constitutional rights, through such ostensibly innocuous means…what the Ways and Means committee will discuss may only be the tip of the iceberg of IRS abuses.”

In another similar case, the IRS withheld approval of an application for charitable tax-exempt recognition of Christian Voices for Life, questioning the group’s involvement with “40 Days for Life” and “Life Chain” events. The Fort Bend County, Texas, organization was subjected to repeated and lengthy unconstitutional requests for information about the viewpoint and content of its educational communications, volunteer prayer vigils, and other protected activities.

“The application of Christian Voices for Life clearly indicated that the organization qualified as a charitable organization under section 501(c)(3),” stated Sally Wagenmaker. She added, “The IRS seemed to be intent on denying or delaying tax-exempt status based upon the organization’s pro-life message, rather than any legitimate exemption concern, through its exhaustive, cumbersome questioning. The implication that Christian Voices for Life somehow intended to engage in illegal activity was insulting.”

Sally Wagenmaker is available for interviews. Contact Tom Ciesielka at 312-422-1333 or tc@tcpr.net.

Details on the IRS abuse of “Christian Voices for Life” are available here.

Details on the IRS abuse of “Coalition for Life of Iowa” are available here.

Christian Newswire