Republicans, sensing a slight opening, are pulling out all the stops about how the tragic defeat of Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman portends the end of civility, bipartisanship and Western Civilization As We Know It. Right.
One of the favorite talking points is that Joe was the last tough Democrat. Alas, the species is now extinct. Problem is, as Connecticut voters saw it, Lieberman wasn’t nearly tough enough. He was voted out because he acted like a sissy as a member of the loyal opposition — all loyalty, no opposition.
Equally fatuous are the claims that Ned Lamont’s primary win heralds a sharp, reckless and irreversible turn to the radical left for the Dems. If that’s so, why did far-left loose cannon Rep. Cynthia McKinney, D-Ga., get soundly thrashed out of office in this same election?
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on ACORN stole election?
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
- Phantom on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
- Phantom on ACORN stole election?
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
125 Comments
Because Cynthia McKinney is a joke and an embarassment to her community. People see through that eventually.
Lamont has yet to serve in Congress yet. He has yet to make a joke of himself. He will never be as effective as Lieberman.
But I guess the Democrat stance is that you have to be against the war in Iraq. If you’re not! You aren’t a true Democrat. So much for an open party.
Democrats need to really look at it’s own political failures in the past as a wake up call for what they are doing now.
Take a moment to read this article!http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/08/lamonts_win_is_a_shortlived_su.html
Joke Williams posts a link?
Clicked and read your link Joe. I’m liberal and open minded that way.
Joe’s link basically says if you aint pissing your drawers when you see and arab you oughta be.
I disagree with Randy. It is well past time that the neocons and their little dogs like Lieberman be silenced. Too hell with civility. When was the right ever civil? When they held Clinton hostage to their morality?
The right does not deal in civility. They understand a smack or a punch. It is time the left started hitting back.
By the mere fact that Republicans are pretending to be Lieberman’s friend is evidence that they must be running scared. And, to think, in 2000 the same Republicans that love Joe Lieberman now were the ones that stole the election from him.
Actually you can look at it in another perspective. Lieberman was the choice of Democrats not only for VP in 2000, but many Democrats supported him in 2004.
But a kiss is a kiss and he just kiss the wrong person.
But Lamont is a rich elitist, so he fits right in with the Democrat Party. And it was more about his money that won and not about himself and his one-issue stance.
Again! I’m for one am glad Lamont won. If you’re going to send a Democrat to Congress, send a weak ineffective one.
Am I to assume that Republicans are not rich elitists? That’s a good one…… I would like to see one poor one in the bunch of “powers to be”
You have a point! But the top 10 richest members of Congress, 6 are Democrats with a combine worth of $1.725 BILLION and the 4 Republicans combine worth is $702 Million.
A billion more dollars than Republicans. That’s quite the difference.
So the Republicans base everything on how much money one has?
Hey Joe Williams!
Your realclearpolitics column is contradictory and very bogus.
Krauthammer even quotes Lamont as saying we should “use carrots as well as sticks” — it is NOT “accommodationism” to say we should use very aggressive diplomacy as well as the military option.
Search on “Krauthammer” at http://www.dailyhowler.com/ for more examples of his inaccuracies and LACK of credibility.
I think both parties are out of touch with the real people in this country. We all need to hold each and every politician accountable.
Did a search on Krauthammer on the Daily Hower site. Seems like the only thing they accuse him of doing is shortening a transcript! News orgainization do it all the time.
Next!
No fedup! But do the Democrats base it on that?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5635128
Lieberbumb needs to be drummed out of the Democratic party and never allowed back…
Yeah – that’s why the Democrats are the only ones wanting to raise the minimum wage
Actually you’re wrong Fedup!
The Republicans intitated a raise to the minimum wage. Democrats voted it down.
The Minimum wage increase was only a rider on a very ugly bill. Try telling the whole story.
Why don’t you? Sacrfice the poor for the punishment of the rich.
Throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Joe Williams is disingenuous. Anyone that repeats Republican talking points is a tool
McKinney got thrown out because she was an embarrassment and an idiot. Had nothing to do with the Lieberman business.
He said….she said,BLA, BLA, BLA.The fat lady has finished the song.Let’s move on.
Go Tracy!
Joe the Dems voted against the minimum wage increase for a few reasons. One is that the restaurant lobby had the rupublikans put in an exemption for restaurants. In Washington and Oregon, and 5 other states, that would have amounted to a pay DECREASE. Another reason was that the repukes tacked on the repeal of the estate tax. While the Dems voted down the minimum wage increase they staved off further repuke attacks on the working class. It seems the repuke motto is “God bless America and freedom for all. (Certain restrictions apply, not available everywhere)”
Dude! Mr. K! Let me inform you!
The Estate Tax and Extension of Tax Relief Act of 2006, H.R. 5970, which passed the House on July 29, 2006 and is now in front of the U.S. Senate, proposes to raise the national minimum wage to $7.25 over a three year period.
The provision of the bill that would permit employers across the country to credit tips earned by employees against the minimum wage requirements is one of the many issues that are being debated currently. Below is an explanation of the tip credit and some possible ramifications for California employers and employees.
All But Seven States Permit Tip CreditsAll but seven states currently permit employers to count the amount tipped employees earn in tips towards their minimum wage. The seven states that do not allow tip credits are: Alaska, California, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. H.R. 5970 proposes to bring California and the other six states into conformity with the rest of the country by requiring all states to recognize a tip credit.
What Is a Tip Credit?Under federal law, employers are allowed to pay a lower hourly wage to employees who qualify as a tipped employee so long as the employee’s total wages (the lower minimum wage paid by the employer and the tips received) equal at least the standard federal minimum wage, currently $5.15 per hour. To qualify as a tipped employee, the employee must earn more than $30 per month in tips. Under current federal law, if the employee meets these requirements, then employers may pay them $2.13 per hour, instead of the $5.15 standard minimum wage per hour. Contrary to many politicized statements on this topic, a tipped employee is still guaranteed to make minimum wage.
The current minimum wage in California is $6.75, but the new Federal minimum would be $7.25.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/programs/whd/state/tipped.htm
Other things the Democrats rejected in the bill:
Among other things, the bill resurrects deductions that expired last year for state sales taxes, tuition and teachers’ classroom supply purchases, along with a business research and development credit.
The bill had extra items to entice Democrats who were uneasy about voting for the estate tax reductions. The add-ons included a cut in timber capital gains taxes, rural development incentives and a program cleaning up abandoned coal mines.
All that didn’t matter! It’s punishing rich people.
Joe, if republicans are serious about minimum wage, why do they refuse to let it come to the floor as a stand-alone bill?
The bill was just another example of political grandstanding by republicans.
“But Lamont is a rich elitist, so he fits right in with the Democrat Party. And it was more about his money that won and not about himself and his one-issue stance.” Joe
Once again Joe you are flat wrong. Lamont won because he is in touch with the average person. At a car race a short time before the election both Joe and Ned showed up. Lieberho showed up with a horde of reporters and cameramen to take advantage of the publicity. Ned showed up with his wife and an assistant. While Joe was doing publicity photos and vomiting the repuke agenda, Ned was talking to the people and finding out what was on their minds, what they wanted. Personally Ned sounds like the type of person we need in congress SOMEONE WHO REPRESENTS THE PEOPLE!!!
Copy that X.
Joe Williams and Repukes (Republicans) are against anything that helps workers.
I wonder why that is.
Because they have never worked a day in their miserable lives JR?
k
Well….That’s the puzzling thing. Lotsa good hard working people VOTE Republican. They are just deluded happy folk like our friend Joe. Figure if they get their pic on the wall as employee of the month enough times they’ll be in clover.
But REAL Republicans? I’d say your assessment is pretty dead on.
“If you want to live like a Republican vote for a Democrat”Harry Truman
This Heathrow Hoax shows just how arrogant and desperate the PNAC bunch are to keep control of the congress.
They may go as far as to blow-up something here in the United States. When they lose control of congress, that means we can impeach Bush and have the FBI raid AIPAC for traitors in congress and shut-down the treasonous organisation. This up coming election is probably more important than the 2008 election, because by then the traitors will be exposed or on their way to jail.
Expect every dirty trick in Karl Rove’s bag of tricks, as this Heathrow Hoax is just for openers in frightening voters.
The Zionists invaded Lebanon ahead of our elections, as they will try to gain as much ground as they can before we take control of their military through congress.
When Rumsfeld hits the road, they lose the PNAC crusade.
And don’t forget Ed, you can expect the terror alert to change daily in the weeks leading up to the election in November. Just like in ‘04. Nothing causes fear in repuke cowards like some Faux News Channel hack screaming colors at them.
Cosmos–
I created a type key account.
But how do you log in under that account and get back to this WEBlog page?
Thanks.
Wally O.
Wally, I’m using TypePad, and just click on the “Sign In” link. It automatically comes back here.
Joe Williams,
“Seems like the only thing they accuse him of doing is shortening a transcript!”
Actually, the DailyHowler accuses the psychiatrist of many deceptions.
On the transcript issue, Krauthammer completely changed the context by omitting “(LAUGHTER)…MATTHEWS: No, seriously….(LAUGHTER)…”
‘PLAYING DOCTOR! Readers complained when a shrink doctored texts.’http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh122003.shtml
You seem to have reading comprehension problems. For example, you posted “33% of Democrats” when the article said “a third of the American public”.
If you can’t support you opinions with facts and credible analysis, you should change your opinions.
I’m not sure if Joe is for or against tip credits. As a Republican, he should oppose them. Why?
Because tips represent diners’ and travelers free-choice rewarding of people for jobs well done. This incentivizes the servers to focus on pleasing their customers. If you take away tips so that the workers get the same minimum wage, no matter how they perform, that’s bad news.
We see a lot of college students waiting on tables. They need the money for their educations. Do we want to encourage them to earn their degrees and move up, or not?
Last year, we went to Florida, and in one harborside restaurant, my son’s fries included a fried cockroach. In a KC-Plaza cafe, there was a dead fly in my salad. The servers were indifferent: in the latter case, the waiter said, “we didn’t do it, the lettuce came this way.” (Did you ever hear of WASHING your lettuce?) They weren’t even apologetic. If this happened at Yia-Yia’s, we’d get a sincere apology, a replacement dish, and it would be free. I didn’t give either the Florida or KC server a tip. They deserve minimum wage.
I recently had an African-American waiter who was new to the job. He made major faux pas in serving the wine, so I gave him some pointers. The thing is, he was very solicitous. He really wanted to learn to do his new job well. So I gave him a 25% tip.
I was a busboy and waiter long ago. Tipping essentially means that if you do a better than minimum job, you merit more than minimum wage. In my opinion.
Randy,
“Republicans, sensing a slight opening, are pulling out all the stops about how the tragic defeat of Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman portends the end of civility, bipartisanship and Western Civilization As We Know It. Right.”
Lets turn this around to exactly what you on the left have been doing:
Democrats, sensing a slight opening, are pulling out all the stops about how the defeat of Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman portends the end of the Republicans control of Congress and proves beyond reasonable doubt that people are fed up with Bush and anyone else who supports stabalizing Iraq before we cut and run like those on the far left of the party are demanding…
Cosmos: “You seem to have reading comprehension problems. For example, you posted “33% of Democrats” when the article said “a third of the American public”.”
Thanks- that’s what I thought when I posted to Joe about that incredible per centage he cited. That’s why we have the Joe Williams Bell, overused as it is!
Randy;I am glad you brought up Cynthia Mckinney.Where were Moveon.org and George Soros and all the looney (White) left? Why didn’t they HELP McKinney? Cynthia Mckinney believes that Bush knew 9-11 was going to happen, Cynthia sounds like many on the liberal Blogs.The radical left of the Democrat party is almost ALL WHITE these days.However, Rev. Sharpton and Rev. Jessie Jackson were in Ct, helping out Millionaire Lamont, not down in Georgia helping sister McKinney.(Don’t forget Jackson’s “Hymie Town” statement — better to defeat a Jew and stay in tight with Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakan than to help Mckinney.)—-Again Randy, why do you think “splits” in the Democrat party are a good thing? In fact, I have never heard or read anything about ANY “splits” in the Democratic party from you or the Eagle, Why is that?Is the Democrat Party completely unified?Will the Jewish vote go stronger or weaker towards Democrats this year? Do you even have the guts to discuss that issue?Will Rogers said “I don’t belong to an organized political party, I am a Democrat.”Is the Democrat Party more or less organized around central themes and coherent policies today?I would say LESS!However, you see Lieberman’s loss as a great victory for Democracy, and not the Anti-Jewish hard left radical political Jihad that it was!When Republicans disagree on abortion or immigration it makes the front page.Democrats disagree on the war and you act like the division in the Democrat party does not exist.By the way, the “VOTERS OF CT” did NOT toss out Lieberman.Michael Moore and George Soros and the radical left dominated one of the smallest Democrat primaries in the Country. This was a nasty coup, but it will not stand in November.—-I can remember more than one time, in Kansas, when a conservative Republican won a Republican Primary, and the Eagle Editorial Pages supported the write in campaign of the defeated Republican in the General Election. In those cases, The Eagle claimed that the primary election was not legitimate because it only represented a small segment of the voting population. The case of Mike Steiben and Ellen Samuelson in Harvey County comes to mind. Steiben defeated liberal Samuelson in the Republican Primary and then won her seat back in a write in campaign against Steiben in the General.I believe the Eagle supported Samuelson in BOTH elections.Am I wrong there?”Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds,” huh?That means inconsistency is the hallmark of liberalism!—–At least the liberal Slate magazine has a sense of history
http://www.slate.com/id/2147395/nav/tap1/
Joe – the reason the minimum wage bill got voted down is that the Republicans loaded it with the budget-busting estate tax elimination for billionaires.
You say Lamont is an “elitist” – WHY? Because he made his money instead of inheriting it?
Ben,
I thought the standard liberal opinion is that people didn’t make money they stole it from the poor people…
Nathan – I guess that is what Rush tells you what to think.
{ We’ve got to quite kissing the terrorist’s Zionists asses and to stop that, we need our congress back }
Haaretz:
“U.S. assures Israel it will not be forced to withdraw from Shaba. { Shebaa Farms which the G-d Lying-ass Zionist-Jews stole from Syria, that misspelling was deliberate }By Aluf Benn, Amos Harel, Yoav Stern and Eli Ashkenazi, and AgenciesA United Nations-brokered cease-fire would go into effect on Monday morning at 7 A.M., a senior Israeli government official said Saturday afternoon.
By then, Israel Defense Forces troops are expected to reach the Litani River, some 30 kilometers inside Lebanon, with the purpose of cutting off Hezbollah forces further south, toward the border with Israel. In the event that the fighting resumes, IDF forces will then be in a position to move more effectively against Hezbollah militants.”
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/749566.html
BenLamont is a millionaire from inherited wealth.I will grant that Lamont may have been wiser with his investments.(such as Walmart, which he owns, but does not show up at Walmart stockholders meetings to advocate policy changes, Lamont only criticizes Walmart at political rallies.)Even so, Lamont is not a self made man.Lamont was born wealthy.
Maybe paul, but he also started a cable television company and made it successful. He WORKED to make it successful. Mommy and daddy didn’t have to bail his ass out.
Run for the hills Repubs!!!
Your narrow minded mindset is slowly fading away in American society.
Don’t you love it when Republicans attack Dems for . . . wait for it . . . being WEALTHY!
Oh, sh*t, that’s rich!
Do we get to whine about the Republicans “class warfare” rhetoric now?
“If you want to live like a Republican, you have to vote Democratic.” Harry S Truman
Nathan: “I thought the standard liberal opinion is that people didn’t make money they stole it from the poor people…”
Just what is the “standard liberal opinion” , or I guess the deluxe model? And what would you know about such an evil thing, or are you trolling for a change? Hmmmmmmmm..
Most of the wealth owned by members of congress is owned by Democrats, even though Republicans are in the majority.I have absolutely NOTHING against wealth, I wish everyone were wealthy, I am just tired of the false claim that the Republican Party is the “Party of the Rich.”
Paul,”… Walmart, which [Lamont] owns, but does not show up at Walmart stockholders meetings to advocate policy changes”
Lamont does not directly own any Wal-Mart stock — it’s in two managed accounts.
The Dems aren’t giving tax breaks to the rich that cause the national debt to balloon to historic highs, Paul.
Reagan did, H. W. did, W. does and every time the national debt hit a historic high since WWII, both in nominal dollars and as a percentage of GDP.
Clinton-Gore raised taxes on the wealthy and actually reduced the national debt for a few years, until W. came along.
These are simple facts that you Repubs can’t spin.
You can try to spin it, but it won’t spin.
Whether or not Democrats or Republicans claim the party of the rich is meaningless. That the Republicans are the business party is a fact. The republicans have kowtowed to business to the point business now owns the Republican led congress and White House lock, stock ans barrel.
While there is a problem with both parties sharing in the wealth being passed around by business, it is the Republicans that are garnering way more of the share of goodies out there. That is an undeniable fact. Just look at the Jack Abramoff affair.
Also, check out the current Governor of Kyntucky. He has been charged with a multitude of crimes, including giving jobs to family members, accepting bribes and he cannot be tried . . . yet. Not while he is in office. And guess what? He is the first Republican governor of KY in three decades. I wonder if he’s a millionaire?
Whether or not Democrats or Republicans claim the party of the rich is meaningless. That the Republicans are the business party is a fact. The republicans have kowtowed to business to the point business now owns the Republican led congress and White House lock, stock ans barrel.
While there is a problem with both parties sharing in the wealth being passed around by business, it is the Republicans that are garnering way more of the share of goodies out there. That is an undeniable fact. Just look at the Jack Abramoff affair.
Also, check out the current Governor of Kyntucky. He has been charged with a multitude of crimes, including giving jobs to family members, accepting bribes and he cannot be tried . . . yet. Not while he is in office. And guess what? He is the first Republican governor of KY in three decades. I wonder if he’s a millionaire?
Opps!!!
JM…
I think you left out the most recent case:
Rep. William J. Jefferson
As usual, you try to make it look like it is just Republicans, when it is not.
CapnAmerica,
There are other factors involved. Reagan was fighting the Cold war and Reagan greatly increased Military pay and benifits too.
The Clinton administration cut the military troop strength and cut funding and didn’t really fight a war.
G. W. Bush is also fighting the war on terror. Most of the increased spending and cause of deficit spending is from the creation of new Homeland Security departments and the war on terror.
Non-military discretionary spending has been down compared to past increases.
Of course, there is even more involved than what I have listed, but for you to make such an inaccurate assessment is obvious.
Paul, so you’re tired of the Republican Party being labeled the “Party of the Rich”?
Then convince the R’s to raise the minimum wage, and stop pushing the budget-busting repeal of the estate tax.
Nathan–
Bush says he’s fighting the war on terror. In fact he’s invaded and occupied a country that poses no threat to us and never has.
As for spending, he’s increased it some 9 percent a year. He’s grown government faster than the previous big government president, Lyndon B. Johnson–who was also fighting a much costly war in Vietnam.
The rate at which Bush and the Republicans cut taxes and increase spending is not just unsustainable, it is nothing short of insane.
BTW, Nathan, your share of the national debt is about 25,000 dollars and it’s growing by 1 and a half billion dollars a week.
CapnAmerica,
You also seem to have no understanding of what the “debt” really is or how it works either.
Okay, Nathan, why don’t you explain it to me.
heh
Yeah Nathan-Let the cartoon start!!Whoops- let me get the popcorn situated and then begin.
Well,
With goading and what not, I really have no interest in debating it.
So, I concede this topic for now.
Once Nathan is out of the godforsaken California desert, he’s going to be placed in the godforsaken Arabian desert. Maybe there he will be censured over there. But once home, he can tell us about his experiences. We should listen up. And let’s pray for his safety, while he is there.
Nathan-As retired miitary, I echo Heartlander’s post above.I do think hta this is another one of retreats from the blog when confranted with questions yo can’t or don’t want to anwer. Opening you r mind, or even changing it is not a sigh of weakenss, but rathe one of growth! You are too young to be so closed-minded, and I mean that as someone that has met you, and likes you, and usualy thinks you’re full oc caca!
Damn . . . I was really looking forward to hearing how a debt is not really a debt and how I’m not responsible for money that the government racks up in my name.
At the rate the debt is compounding and the taxes have been cut, we should be looking at an Argentina scenario in just a couple of years.
We’re already seeing creeping inflation coupled with decreasing productivity.
Meanwhile the falling interest rates that allowed the spendthrift American homeowner to re-finance their mortgage and immediately spend the money they sucked out of their equity dried up.
So, consumer demand is down. Gas price is up, up and away. The big V-8 trucks that Kansans love are sitting on the dealer’s lot. A Nissan V-8 is selling for the same price as a V-6 Frontier.
Ouch . . .
Anybody remember “stagflation?”
Cosmos;This is, I believe, a lefty blog, and he is upset that Lamont owns Walmart stock DIRECTLY:
http://www.redstate.com/story/2006/8/4/93743/63040
Again, Lamont has done nothing as far as organizing stockholders against any Walmart policy.In fact, Lamont endorses Walmart policy by OWNING Walmart stock!
Sorry- my post was sent before I edited my magical typing- sorry– I can decode upon request!
Paul–
Yawwwn.
Owning Walmart stock. If the only dirt you’ve got on this guy is that his parents were wealthy and he owns shares of Walmart, you got nothing.
Yeah- I use my miiitary retirement to buy Exxon stock!.Do I have to kill mayself and the neighbors on both sides??
Who’ll feed the dogs?
CapnLamont says Walmart is evil, Lamont made Walmart an issue, which means Lamont made himself an issue since Lamont is an owner of Walmart.http://www.redstate.com/story/2006/8/4/93743/63040
Nathan,”While there is a problem with both parties sharing in the wealth being passed around by business,”
Please read prior to posting. Your comment, “As usual, you try to make it look like it is just Republicans, when it is not.”, appears to be off just a bit, don’t you think? You really should think before shooting, at least in this blog. Under other circumstances, I would suggest shooting first, then asking questions.
So, Lamant/Walmart bad: Tiahrt/term limits good. Quite a fine line you draw there, Paul.
PAUL!
“This is, I believe, a lefty blog, and he is upset that Lamont owns Walmart stock DIRECTLY:”(redstate.com link, site down for the weekend?)
WAKEUP! redstate.com is a right-wing-nut site. Don’t you even know that “red state” is term applied to Repub states?
(emphasis added)http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1222948,00.html“… Lamont’s campaign manager, Tom Swan, said the candidate was not actively controlling the investment. “He does NOT own any stock DIRECTLY, it’s NOT a DIRECT holding,” he said. Part of the Wal-Mart stock is held in a Goldman Sachs “Tax Advantaged Core Strategies managed account,” according to a letter released Thursday by Swan. “
Good snag, Cosmos.
I’m in all kinds of mutual funds that are buying and selling stocks all the time.
I hate Walmart and everything it stands for, but it’s quite possible that I own now or have owned shares in it.
It’s too complicated to go digging through the prospectus every quarter trying to see what’s been bought and sold . . .
Are you asking to be forgiven? Are you saying that because you act like you have no heart, that you don’t care, that there’s still a good reason? Or have you come to know that you’re not worth the trouble it takes to dig the hole.
It was never supposed to be easy.
Why is it that Congress feels the need to piggyback bills? Shouldn’t each bill be voted on separately? Is the argument there just isn’t enough time to do it? If that’s true, why do they waste their time and our money with Anti-Gay Marriage and Flag Burning ammendments? If time is so short, let’s drop the b.s. and get down to the real business of running the country. And let’s start first with asking what the people want. After all, that’s their job.
Over a long period of time, Congress, under both parties, has left the people behind and created a giant game. Let’s tack on a little pork, better known as incentive and even better known as bribery, so “we” (members of Congress) can get what we want.
It’s ridiculous, and I’m sure the Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves at what their ideal has become. Shame on us.
As for the Lamont/McKinney thing, could it be that Dems are not like Repubs and don’t follow in lockstep? Does that necessarily mean a “split” in the party? The people have spoken. Too bad some don’t like what we have to say.
I hate it when they say Dems arent strong enough, and that they dont have a strong platform.
The Dem. party is a party of individual thinkers, not a group-think puke tank that the Repub. party is!!!
You guys are always bitching about the Dem. party. What have they ever done to ruin this country? What, helped people get back on their feet and obtain the milk and honey. And for crying out loud Repubs just come out and say it
“You hate black people and other minorities”
I hate to give you that stereo-type, but most outward conservatives I know tend to be the most racist people I know also.
You guys piss me off so much, because I know your more intelligent than what you appear to be on this blog.
Open your mind and THINK for once.
Late night Anger folks!!!
GaryC.,most “conservatives” are scared of change. We both know they don’t like new or changing situations. And you can’t really blame them. Change is difficult for some to deal with. The problem is, how, as a “conservative” to deal with the inevitable change, and not expose oneself as narrow minded, or even closed minded. In my opinion, a great many “conservatives” aren’t dealing with that problem very well. It would appear you don’t think they are, either……..and I agree, I think they are more intelligent than some of their postings…..but the same could be said of those with “liberal” leanings as well…….We should all open our minds and think.
GaryC.,most “conservatives” are scared of change. We both know they don’t like new or changing situations. And you can’t really blame them. Change is difficult for some to deal with. The problem is, how, as a “conservative” to deal with the inevitable change, and not expose oneself as narrow minded, or even closed minded. In my opinion, a great many “conservatives” aren’t dealing with that problem very well. It would appear you don’t think they are, either……..and I agree, I think they are more intelligent than some of their postings…..but the same could be said of those with “liberal” leanings as well…….We should all open our minds and think.
sorry, I didn’t intend to post that twice.
The dreaded double post! Happens to all of us as you must have seen jfran.
Twice well said!
Gary C,
Independent thinkers? Look what that “independent thinking” got anyone who didn’t tote the newly adopted cut and run mantra preached by those on the left…
The liberals are not a strong party.
Terrorists attack America:
What did we do to cause it they ask…
meanwhile the conservatives will hunt them down and kill them for you.
Terrorist are pulling out every stop to prevent the stabilization of Iraq:
Liberals demand we cut and run…
meanwhile the conservatives will continue to press forward till the job is done.
Liberals constantly loath our military strength and want reductions. Clinton made massive cuts in out military.
Conservatives support a strong military.
Terrorists are plotting to attack America:
Liberals are more concerned with the politics of attacking Bush for tracking them down and preventing them from plotting to kill more Americans…
meanwhile conservatives are the ones tracking their communications and actually fighting the war on terrorism.
Oh yeah, really strong reassuring party you have there.
Nathan,
If “conservatives” are so concerned about national security, why do they continue to allow are borders and ports to be unprotected? Is cheap labor and imports more important than security to those enron, country club repubs?
V.L.R.B!!
Why do conservatives send our resources overseas to start insurgencies when they could be put to better use actually fighting the terrorist or defending America? Why are there over 120,000 troops in Iraq when all the intelligence pointed to the fact that the terrorist where from Afghanistan, where we have less than 15,000 troops? Why was/is there no commitment from the conservatives to actually catch OBL?
Why do conservatives try to claim credit for capturing the terrorist in England? We know the terrorist work in cells and the cells don’t communicate with each other. Why would they talk to people in the US when they don’t have to? More BS to sway the mindless to give the pretzelnit unlimited power to commit treason and basically trample the Constitution.
Enjoy your freedom and security? Vote republikan! And it won’t last much longer!
CosmosMost economists agree that the minimum wage causes higher unemployment, particularly among minorities.The minimum wage is a bad idea.Where does the government ever have the right or the expertise to determine the value of anything?Why not set the minimum wage at $100 an hour?If it can do no harm, why not do even more “good” with it?The reason you can’t set a minimum wage without negative consequences is because Goverment can’t set minimum profit margins for employers.If employers can’t afford your wage, they won’t employ anyone.
What job pays minimum wage anyhow, beside being a waitor?
There might be a couple I can’t think of in Wichita, but please tell me what business pays just the minimum wage here?
Lieberman is ahead already!http://rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/August%202006/ConnecticutSenate.htm
And Cosmos, What I meant to say was that Red State was quoting a Liberal Blog on Lamonts Walmart holdings. Thank you for keeping the issue alive with your details!Sorry, I dont buy the argument that Lamont does not own any shares directly. For one thing,It would not be possible for anyone to calculate the dividends received from any mutual fund or third party “pass through” or passive investment. This can only be done if he held the stock outright.Even if the stock were held in trust (Lamont is a trust fund kid) Lamont still has authority to buy more stock or sell the stock held by that account. If not, there would be no reason to report the holdings, would there?Lamont owns Walmart, outright.Lamont is a hypocrite.—-RD,As far as “piggybacking” minimum wage onto the Estate Tax bill, this is the logic:The people hurt worst by any minimum wage hike (besides the unskilled minorities that will be fired from their jobs if they are under the arbitrary ‘minimum’ in productivity) are the small business owners.Small business owners are also the people most adversely affected by the Estate Tax.The Lamonts’ and Kennedys’ and Kerrys’ of this world do NOT pay Estate Taxes.”Old money” learned long ago how to legally hide their wealth so as to avoid the Estate Tax. The Estate tax is hardest on those whos wealth is held, primarily, in through ownership of their own business.Republicans realize that the minimum wage is stupid economics but politically popular, Republicans also tried to sugar coat this minimum wage measure by attaching minimum wage to the estate tax bill.Basically, the same groups pay minimum wage that pay the estate tax.It makes perfect sense.
Fast-foods.
Nathan,
There you go with your mindless BULLSHIT!!
If you really think that Dems want to cut and run, and coddle the terrorists than go see a psychiatrist!!!
NO sane-minded american wants that.
I suggest you put down the O’reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity diet that you may have.
Dems want a plan to get out of Iraq, not a political slogan.
Dems are pointing out that Bush is ruining the country.
Get a clue!!
And as many times as you post these lies Paul I will knock them down and have plenty of help doing it!
The repeal of the estate tax benefits approximately 8,000 of America’s wealthiest families. Cite for me ONE example of a “small buisiness” negatively affected by the estate tax.
Your arguement also presupposes that buisinesses employ more people than they need to to function! What a crock! If a business is allowed to determine the wage of it’s workers absent a legal floor it will probably result in more employent yes. HEll if you can pay 3 people what you used to pay one why not? I call that race to the bottom of what employers will pay a poor trade for higher employment!
It really is very simple readers. Folks like Paul F Rosell and the Republican party are for those who “have”…..having MORE! Those who “have not”? Well Republicans advise them to get that nose on the grindstone…..or up the nearest monied wazzoo! Yes if the table is full for the bloated, a slightly larger crumb might fall to be scrapped over by the “hungry”!
Sell it Paul!
Paul, Economists are split about 50-50 on minimum wage issue. And many businesses support an increase.http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/280956_minimum13.html
‘States raising the minimum wage on their own’http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/9830
“Why not set the minimum wage at $100 an hour?If it can do no harm, why not do even more “good” with it?”
Do you not understand the idea of a REASONABLE minimum living wage?
“Lamont still has authority to buy more stock or sell the stock held by that account.”
NO, the persons managing his accounts have that authority.
So, Paul, do you actually favor abolishing the mininum wage, or simply freezing it, as was done in the 80’s? The result of that approach was to keep low-wage jobs stagnating at the same rates.
I don’t buy the argument that a minmum wage per se causes unemployment. Perhaps if you set it to $15.00/hr or something it would, but people who make the current minimum wage are living well below the poverty line. To the extent that employers would hire more people for even lower wages, it would be lose-lose deal: the workers would be unable to meet their expenses, and harried, unmotivated workers make for bad business. Shrewd business people know that quality employees are worth the money.
Another thing Nathan,
The foiling of the plot last week is the perfect way to fight terrorism. You do it on a law enforcement, CIA investigative effort.
YOU DO NOT INVADE AND OCCUPY COUNTRIES, AND KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE!!!
Its not Black and White, good vs evil when your fighting terrorism!!. Its a little more complex than that, and that is what the Dem. Party has been trying to say.
The reason you see attacks on Bush is because he deserves it. He has brought so much dis-respect for the American public with his ignorant manipulative attitude.
JRHow many “net worth statements” have you looked at as part of your job?
I see several financial statements every month, Even though my business concentrates on the middle class, many of my clients are also business owners.
Often, business owners who are slightly over $2,000,000 in net worth simply buy a life insurance policy to pay any estate taxes. We usually have to set up an insurance trust, since, otherwise, any insurance benefit would be added to the taxable estate.This is a stupid, innefficient use of time, resources and money, but it keeps accountants, CPA’s and attorneys working, I guess!—-Wealth held within a small, mom and pop business is not “liquid” and the value of the business might well decline rapidly upon the death of an owner.I am affraid you see everything from your “employee” mindset.I wonder how you would ever handle it if you had to make your own, quarterly, estimated tax payments, do payroll tax withholding for your employees, matching their FICA, and try to figure out how to stay in business?The self employed take on tremendous risk, but they produce most of the job growth in this country every year.You asked me to show you a case where a small business was hurt by the estate tax.I am telling you that it happens all the time. Money spent on insurance to pay estate taxes could have been used to add an employee, don’t you think?(Take a look at the premium for a $500,000 whole life policy on a 65 year old, lol. For estate planning, only whole life will work, since the policy must be “guaranteed renewable” with a predictable premium. I admit I havent done many of these, but I know people who specialize in estate insurance and they set these large plans up all the time!!)—–Now, I have a home work assignment for YOU:Show me how much Estate Tax was EVER paid by a Kerry, Kennedy, Lamont or Rockefeller?(The answer is zero! The truly wealthy hold most of their wealth in financial assets, not their own personal business. It is easy to place financial assets in trust accounts and completely avoid estate taxes.)
Nathan says: “Liberals demand we cut and run…”
A Feb. 2006 poll,’U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006′http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
“Conservatives support a strong military.”
So do liberals.Americans are finally beginning to realize that that the Dem’s have better ideas for fighting terra than the Repubs.http://www.pollingreport.com/terror.htm
RageWhy dont you have the government set the price of gasoline, bread, coffee, milk, eggs, newspapers and everything else?Government does not set these prices, and none of THEM have gone down to zero.Neither will wages.Here is an idea:Why not let VALUE determine PRICE??
Well that would make you worthless then Paul woudn’t it?
I wonder if you got the point of that post Paul.
Just from my limited information and interaction with you, I arbitrarily assigned you a worth of zero.
That is the situation every single worker in this country would face on his job were there no minimum wage. You act as though employers are somehow charitable or actually could be trusted to pay workers fairly. Reality is vastly different. But hey keep selling it! More and more Americans are onto you. Let’s get ‘em all informed!
I wonder if you got the point of that post Paul.
Just from my limited information and interaction with you, I arbitrarily assigned you a worth of zero.
That is the situation every single worker in this country would face on his job were there no minimum wage. You act as though employers are somehow charitable or actually could be trusted to pay workers fairly. Reality is vastly different. But hey keep selling it! More and more Americans are onto you. Let’s get ‘em all informed!
Paul – give me the name and CPA license numbers of the accountants who have provided you with the financial information about Lamont, Kennedy, Rockefeller.
By the way, I don’t think Lamont inherited his wealth. He built it. Also, financial assets are subject to the same taxes as hard assets. And a business can be placed in a trust just as a financial asset can.
BenIf you place a business in a trust, you must give up “indices of ownership” meaning you will give up important control of that business.If you place financial assets in a revocable trust, and name members of your family as “beneficiaries” of that trust, you really dont care about avoiding “indicies of ownership.” You are then dealing with small, minority interests in mutual funds and the like, and “control” doesnt matter.True, you can put a business into a REVOCABLE trust, but revocable trusts do NOTHING to avoid death taxes, revocable trusts only avoid probate, an entirely different matter.Only an irrevocable trust, which requires the relinquishment of CONTROL, will move a small business out of an estate.(If you can still hire, fire, expand or change employee benefits, the IRS will say:”IT IS STILL YOURS, AND STILL TAXABLE TO YOUR ESTATE”
BenIf you place a business in a trust, you must give up “indices of ownership” meaning you will give up important control of that business.If you place financial assets in a revocable trust, and name members of your family as “beneficiaries” of that trust, you really dont care about avoiding “indicies of ownership.” You are then dealing with small, minority interests in mutual funds and the like, and “control” doesnt matter.True, you can put a business into a REVOCABLE trust, but revocable trusts do NOTHING to avoid death taxes, revocable trusts only avoid probate, an entirely different matter.Only an irrevocable trust, which requires the relinquishment of CONTROL, will move a small business out of an estate.(If you can still hire, fire, expand or change employee benefits, the IRS will say:”IT IS STILL YOURS, AND STILL TAXABLE TO YOUR ESTATE”)
BenIf you place a business in a trust, you must give up “indices of ownership” meaning you will give up important control of that business.If you place financial assets in a revocable trust, and name members of your family as “beneficiaries” of that trust, you really dont care about avoiding “indicies of ownership.” You are then dealing with small, minority interests in mutual funds and the like, and “control” doesnt matter.True, you can put a business into a REVOCABLE trust, but revocable trusts do NOTHING to avoid death taxes, revocable trusts only avoid probate, an entirely different matter.Only an irrevocable trust, which requires the relinquishment of CONTROL, will move a small business out of an estate.(If you can still hire, fire, expand or change employee benefits, the IRS will say:”IT IS STILL YOURS, AND STILL TAXABLE TO YOUR ESTATE”)
BenLamont is NOT a self made millionaire:http://www.democracy-project.com/archives/002716.html
BenProbate Court records are public.The “probate estate” and the “taxable estate” are two different things, of course, but filings in probate court can clearly be evidence of what might have happened in IRS filings.The Wealthy almost NEVER have much of anything filed in probate court.Again, show me something in probate court with a truly wealthy individuals name as the decedant. If you find such a person, I will then show you a personal attorney of that family who is guilty of gross incompetence!Probate records are public Ben.Have at it!
Paul – it is YOUR claim – the burden of proof is upon you.
touche BenSo I looked, cant find ANY probate records for the wealthy Kerry, Kennedy or Lamont families.This would indicate legal steps were taken to avoid probate court.This would indicate the use of trusts and estate planning.
Nothing in your link indicating that he actually inherited anything from his grandfather (or great uncle, which is it?). Your Lamont-hating ‘expert’ (sic) doesn’t even seem to know the lineage with any certainty.
I have, however, verified that he has inherited wealth:
His father, Ted (Edward M. Sr.), was an economist who worked with the Marshall Plan which helped reconstruct Europe after World War II.[11] He later served in the Nixon administration in Housing and Urban Development. Ted Lamont is now an unaffiliated voter, having last voted for a Republican in 1988. Since then he has voted Democratic. He told The Hartford Courant that “Eastern Moderates no longer have a place in the GOP.”[12]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Lamont
He is NOT the grandson of Corless Lamont as claimed by your Lamoont-hater. He is grandnephew to him. He actually descends from the JP Morgan business.
Ben, we began this exercise when you claimed that Lamont was somehow self made.I posted previously that Lamont was a JP Morgan heir, I made that point last week I believe, on a different thread.Lamont has wealthy roots.That was my point all along.I am not an expert on the Lamont family tree and I have not tried to present myself that way here.
The fact that you have not found them does not prove that they don’t exist.
Paul – I have not found probate records on any Republicans. Therefore, Republicans never pay estate tax. According to your logic.
Paul,
Thank’s for proving how Repugs spread false info — your link, the bogus ‘Pink Diaper Baby’, is spreading across the “red state” blogs.
R’s can’t win on the issues, so they resort to falsely smearing the candidates.
http://nedlamont.com/news/670/lieberman-rival-hopes-to-find-support-in-issues-beyond-iraq“A scion of bankers at J. P. Morgan & Co., Mr. Lamont said that he grew up with a trust fund — he would not disclose its size — but that his inheritance accounted for less than 10 percent of his current wealth.”
First they ridicule Dems for “class warfare against the rich;” then they attack Lamont for being rich.
I wonder if they develop a tolerance for hypocrisy the way a drunk develops tolerance for alcohol?
They build up to it over time until they can stand massive amounts without their heads exploding.
They particularly hate people like Lamont because they consider him to be a traitor to the wealthy. He thinks they should pay their taxes and not get additional breaks.
BenDo you know for sure that Lamont does not use estate planning tools for his heirs and has never used income tax shelters?That Lamont can parrot “soak the rich” bologna does not mean that he practices what he preaches!Increasing tax rates will REDUCE the percentage of taxes paid by the rich, because they will quit investing in productive activity.
Paul – it is YOU who is making all sorts of accusations. Therefore it is YOUR burden of proof. I have never heard Lamont say “soak” the rich – neither do I. Nor do Warren Buffet or Bill Gates. However, they do seem to advocate fair inheritance taxes. It is YOU who uses the term “soak the rich” just as you have misused the Laffer Curve in the past.
BenRaising tax rates will not increase tax revenue and will do grave damage to the economy.Raising tax rates will only change behavior, in a negative way.Of course you dont use the phrase “soak the rich” anymore, to be so open with Democrat class-envy politics is not helpful to you politically.There is a large portion of the Dem base that is very envy driven and wants to take out revenge on the perceived foes of the “working man” by using punitive tax rates.You keep the angry rable happy by speaking in broad generalities.You would do the country more benefit if you and the rest of the liberals would explain to your base that higher tax rates, at some point, cause more pain to the working man than they can ever solve.JFK and Lloyd Bentsen understood the destructive nature of high tax rates.I am eager to hear another Democrat that understands this issue.Quit pandering to your base if you are NOT a “soak the rich” radical.What level of taxation do YOU think is most effecient, producing the highest revenue with the least amount of economic pain?
CapnWe dont like Lamont because we know he doesnt believe what he is saying.He understands that the Wealthy dont pay estate taxes. Lamont also understands that higher tax rates will hurt the poor by reducing growth and jobs.Again, Republicans would love it if everyone was rich, Democrats need poverty as a voting block.Republicans support policies that encourage people to be financially independent.Democrats fought the 401(K) and Democrats fought the HSA (health savings account.)
HEH PAUL!
We already handed you your rear 2 weeks ago on points re John F. Kennedy (91% tax rate) — and misinterpreting the Laffer curve.
Your repetition of bogus points that were destroyed earlier is tiresome. Take notes if you lack a memory.
Again, you prove that today’s Repugs needs misinformation, Rush, Coulter, Faux, etc., and a DYSFUNCTIONAL media to survive.
Paul, Kennedy lowered the marginal tax rate to 70%, but Clinton raised (sic) it to 39.6%?
Rush, Laffer, Hannity, and Kennedy.http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh010603.shtml
Paul – I don’t use the phrase “soak” because I have no desire to soak. That is simply your lies – all too typical of you.
I’m sure Lamont will be thoroughly “Swift-boated” between now and election day.
I’m glad you “know” everything about Lamont – just like you “know” that Saddam flew the planes; that he had a mammoth WMD program; that our troops would be welcomed with flowers; that Ahmed Chalabi would take over with ease; …
I’m sure Rush, O’Reilly, Hannity, etc will tell you what to think tomorrow …
cosmos – it is rather funny how Paul keeps bringing up “cutting from 91%” as being tha same as total elimination. He seems to think nobody here has ever taken Econ.
so, let me try to understand this:
Lamont/WalMart stock = bad/hypocritical
Cheney/Hallibuton stock = good/no conflict of interest
Is that about the size of it?
Perhaps I’m missing something?
From your posts paul am I correct to assume you are an accountant or a financial advisor? If so you are one of the worst there are.
“Often, business owners who are slightly over $2,000,000 in net worth simply buy a life insurance policy to pay any estate taxes. We usually have to set up an insurance trust, since, otherwise, any insurance benefit would be added to the taxable estate.”
If you advise people to take out insurance policies to help pay the estate tax when their total net worth is slightly over 2M then you should be fired for incompetence. Because if you knew what the hell you were talking about you would know that they would only pay taxes on the amount over 2M.
But more than likely you are (once again) just full of shit.
jfran… you might be missing a few tiny details?
Such as, Lamont did not have direct control of the Wal-Mart stock, and was not controlling the investment.
I’m sure Paul F. Rosell will thoroughly explain the VP’s earlier actions as Secretary of Defense — plus being CEO, receiving deferred pay, and stock options.
Here’s an appetizer — Paul F. Rosell will provide the main course.http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Cheneys_stock_options_rose_3281_last_1011.html
thank you cosmos, you were right, I was missing a few “minor” details. I have a sneaky feeling that if this were a Democratic administration, and its VP was in a similar position as Cheney, what with all the stock options, and financial interests, the hell raised from the right would be deafening…..and rightly so…..so why no outrage from either side regarding Cheney? But, the nitpicking of Lamont continues??