IANAL, but my understanding is that a 501c . .

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #81,400 by Andrew Grygus 2/13/03 11:32:00 AM Reply	IANAL, but my understanding is that a 501c . . . . cannot engage in any form of political lobbying or attempt to influence legislators or legislation. That would be a difficult restriction for as opinionated a bunch of bastards as hang out here. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #81,406 by boxley 2/13/03 11:59:37 AM Reply	that is correct and we wouldnt get labelled partisan the restriction is against political ads that name candidates, issue ads and publishings are fair game. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]

what are the chances everyone would accede to a 501c corp? - (boxley) - (36) - Feb. 13, 2003, 12:26:37 AM EST

I am game... considering events lately... - (folkert) - Feb. 13, 2003, 11:04:41 AM EST

Re: Fox News attributing Ashton - (tjsinclair) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:08:23 AM EST

LRPD sayeth: Where's my tinfoil hat...? -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (1) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:45:26 AM EST

Same thing we do every night, Pinky... - (admin) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:54:49 AM EST

Interesting idea. I'll support it. -NT - (jbrabeck) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:53:38 AM EST

Ooo, I'd put THAT in my pipe 'n smoke it... - (inthane-chan) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:59:50 AM EST

I would help - (orion) - Feb. 13, 2003, 11:19:12 AM EST

Excellent idea - (Silverlock) - Feb. 13, 2003, 11:24:10 AM EST

IANAL, but my understanding is that a 501c . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (1) - Feb. 13, 2003, 11:32:00 AM EST

that is correct and we wouldnt get labelled partisan - (boxley) - Feb. 13, 2003, 11:59:37 AM EST

I work for a 501c3 and have founded a 501c3/509a1 - (tseliot) - (11) - Feb. 13, 2003, 11:41:30 AM EST

You convinced me - (Silverlock) - Feb. 13, 2003, 12:06:03 PM EST

here is how I see the outline - (boxley) - (9) - Feb. 13, 2003, 12:19:40 PM EST

Coupla points - (tseliot) - (5) - Feb. 13, 2003, 01:07:53 PM EST

For under $5000/year - (drewk) - (1) - Feb. 13, 2003, 01:35:18 PM EST

Note on hosting: - (admin) - Feb. 13, 2003, 02:04:54 PM EST

If anyone's interested in my sources - (tseliot) - (2) - Feb. 13, 2003, 01:43:24 PM EST

I'm in. And I have a question. - (mmoffitt) - (1) - Feb. 14, 2003, 01:11:23 AM EST

I would think so, but Google won't say. -NT - (tseliot) - Feb. 14, 2003, 12:43:41 PM EST

That raises an interesting point. - (static) - (2) - Feb. 13, 2003, 09:35:47 PM EST

Enron did it all the time -NT - (boxley) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:12:39 PM EST

Well, elect not to be on the board then :) -NT - (tseliot) - Feb. 14, 2003, 12:35:44 PM EST

Fox attributing Ashton?!? - (jb4) - Feb. 13, 2003, 01:42:43 PM EST

Now you've pissed off Al Sharpton too! - (Ashton) - (6) - Feb. 13, 2003, 09:15:42 PM EST

obLRPD: I'm sorry, I came here for an argument! -NT - (folkert) - (5) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:30:57 PM EST

Kinky LRPD sez___Drop to the deck and flop like a fish! -NT - (Ashton) - (4) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:43:08 PM EST

Uh, Ashton,,, from "Sponge Bob Square Pants" show on Nick -NT - (folkert) - (3) - Feb. 13, 2003, 10:53:46 PM EST

Which is, according to the LRPD: - (admin) - (2) - Feb. 13, 2003, 11:27:32 PM EST

Uh uh - just now, Powered by crabby patties! -NT - (Ashton) - (1) - Feb. 14, 2003, 04:39:39 AM EST

Home of the hash-slinging slasher! -NT - (admin) - Feb. 14, 2003, 10:52:15 AM EST

Count me in - (mhuber) - (1) - Feb. 14, 2003, 12:42:54 AM EST

ObAOL: Me too -NT - (drewk) - Feb. 14, 2003, 09:21:09 AM EST

Questions, comments - (kmself) - (3) - Feb. 15, 2003, 02:28:15 AM EST

The idea was not to change here, - (boxley) - (2) - Feb. 15, 2003, 09:34:45 AM EST

Small conceptual problem - (Ashton) - (1) - Feb. 15, 2003, 07:05:40 PM EST

yabbut, they get paid better, - (boxley) - Feb. 15, 2003, 07:24:56 PM EST

C:>_
315 ms