Just when you think politicians can't sink lower

[Big Don]

They do this

 

[Steve]

What is it, don? I'm not clicking on any link without a little more to go on. Can you sum up a little?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Big Don]

What is it, don? I'm not clicking on any link without a little more to go on. Can you sum up a little?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

A link to Snopes confirmation that yes, Obama really is asking people to ask for donations to his campaign for wedding gifts.

 

[jks9199]

A link to Snopes confirmation that yes, Obama really is asking people to ask for donations to his campaign for wedding gifts.

Or other special occasions like birthdays...

It's novel. It's creative. And it's in no way an obligation or demand. I bet it's a response or use of something that already had happened... If a couple getting married, or someone having a birthday, or whatever, is sufficiently politically active, it's their choice. Their guests aren't even obligated to donate, any more than any other gift registry obligates a person to a specific gift.

What's so bothersome about it, Don?

 

[Big Don]

Or other special occasions like birthdays...

It's novel. It's creative. And it's in no way an obligation or demand. I bet it's a response or use of something that already had happened... If a couple getting married, or someone having a birthday, or whatever, is sufficiently politically active, it's their choice. Their guests aren't even obligated to donate, any more than any other gift registry obligates a person to a specific gift.

What's so bothersome about it, Don?

Bothersome? Nothing, aside from this is the same guy who was going to "Return dignity to the Presidency" "Get others to respect the US President again" and other such pablum.

 

[Master Dan]

Or other special occasions like birthdays...

It's novel. It's creative. And it's in no way an obligation or demand. I bet it's a response or use of something that already had happened... If a couple getting married, or someone having a birthday, or whatever, is sufficiently politically active, it's their choice. Their guests aren't even obligated to donate, any more than any other gift registry obligates a person to a specific gift.

What's so bothersome about it, Don?

I am hearing constant rants about Obama not caring while he goes to $1,000 a plate fund raisers? Where is the rants about Romney having current dinners for $100,000 contributors and even a dinner hosted by the billionare in Texas that showed art work on the walls painted by Hitler and even a signed copy of MinKomf in the dinning room? Obama ran on a platform of small donations $1 at a time but now Super PACS are just overwhelming that and grass roots funding is truly in danger. He is now considering forming his own super PACS which demonstrates how situations change never say never? it can bite you in the Derrier?
The problem for any Democratic PAC is that the PACS are dedicated to lower tax rates for the rich hard sell or the Dems will have to do a wink wink when they accept the money even rich democrats entertainers are saying I am voting against my own self interest by allowing my taxes to go up by supporting this or that candidate but isn't that what America should be about doing the right thing sharing your abundance to support the good of all.

 

[billc]

The difference is this, obama attacks the private business and the wealthy and then goes to $40,000 dollar a plate fund raisers with the tippy top of the one percenters, the very people he condemns with every speech. He broke his promise in his first presidential bid to take matching funds because he knew he was going to out earn McCain in donations, and he also takes millions of dollars from every public sector union available. It is only now with superpacs that private industry can actually put up the same money that the unions have always been able to put up by extracting money from their membership. Obama is a hypocrite when it comes to fund raising, Romney is not.

Obama to Break Promise, Opt Out of Public Financing for General Election


Email776Smaller FontTextLarger Text|Print


In a web video to supporters — "the people who built this movement from the bottom up" — Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, announced this morning that he will not enter into the public financing system, despite a previous pledge to do so.

In November 2007, Obama answered "Yes" to Common Cause when asked "If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?"
Obama wrote: "In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election. My proposal followed announcements by some presidential candidates that they would forgo public financing so they could raise unlimited funds in the general election. The Federal Election Commission ruled the proposal legal, and Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has already pledged to accept this fundraising pledge. If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."
Not so "aggressively," according to the McCain campaign, which argues that Obama did not discuss this or try to negotiate at all with the McCain campaign, despite writing that he would "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."

And hollywood isn't voting against their own interests, they just won't pay the new taxes. They will shelter their money or move out of the country to protect what they have...

This is just one of the hollywood types who would be voting against their own interest...

http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/17/jon-stewart-mocks-rich-romney-while-outpacing-him-in-wealth/

Comedy Central host Jon Stewart regularly bashes American multimillionaires for their wealth while ignoring the awkward fact that he’s one of them.
Though Stewart distances himself from the “one-percenters” and bellows over their extravagance, his bank accounts bear all the marks of the “multi, multi, multi, multi millionaires” he mocks. The 49-year-old Stewart, born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz, makes more than 300 times the median American salary, owns three luxury homes and sometimes doesn’t pay his taxes.

I don't mind that Stewart is wealthy, I actually like the fact that people can get rich in America. What is annoying is this...

In January Stewart exploded on-air over Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s income level. “That’s almost — that’s almost $57,000 a day!” he gushed.
But Stewart’s own income level brings him and his wife Tracey approximately $41,000 a day. The celebrity income-handicapping website Celebrity Net Worth lists his annual salary as $15 million and estimates his net worth at $80 million.

And it gets better...

At his current earning rate, The Daily Show host’s net worth will be $320 million by the time he turns 65 — Romney’s current age. And that total doesn’t include increases in property value or other assets Stewart might accumulate.
And then there are the houses. When Arizona Sen. John McCain ran for president in 2008, he was criticized for not knowing how many houses he owned. (The answer: seven.) Stewart is well on his way to McCain country, with three opulent mansions whose combined value is $12.8 million.
He doesn’t technically own those homes: Using a trick mastered by countless one-percenters, the properties were purchased by private trusts. Stewart’s trusts are named after his pets.
The super-wealthy often make big-ticket purchases through trusts in order to protect their other assets from lawsuits, diminish estate tax liability, and avoid public scrutiny.
The satirist started his real estate empire in 2005 when The Stanley Monkey Trust — named after his cat Stanley and one of his pit bull terriers, Monkey — purchased a two-story Manhattan penthouse for $5.8 million.
That deluxe apartment in the sky spans 6,000-square-feet and has 40 windows, a 600-foot terrace, and a 1,200-foot private roof, the New York Observer reported in 2005.

For emphasis...

The super-wealthy often make big-ticket purchases through trusts in order to protect their other assets from lawsuits, diminish estate tax liability,

As did John Stewart

And better...

With serious wealth often come serious tax problems. In January the comedian blasted Romney for paying a 15-percent tax rate on his earnings, most of which come from capital gains on stocks and other securities.
President Barack Obama has made that 15-percent capital gains tax the centerpiece of his tax reform proposals, offering what he called the “Buffett Rule” as a way to force titans of industry to pay what he said would be a higher tax rate than their secretaries.
Stewart advocated a similar position on the air without noting that he has had his own tax problems.
The New York Department of State issued liens against him and his wife in 2007 and 2008 for not paying their taxes in full, according to documents obtained by The Daily Caller that refer to the Stewarts as “tax delinquents.”
The Empire State issued its first “state tax warrant” for the couple’s failure to pay $476.03, sending the notice to the address of the KLS Professional Advisors Group, the financial firm that manages Stewart’s money.
New York issued a second lien in September 2008, this time a $3,225.63 demand to Stewart’s wife Tracey — erroneously spelled “Tracy” but sent to the address of the Stewarts’ trusts.

For emphasis...

President Barack Obama has made that 15-percent capital gains tax the centerpiece of his tax reform proposals, offering what he called the “Buffett Rule” as a way to force titans of industry to pay what he said would be a higher tax rate than their secretaries.
Stewart advocated a similar position on the air without noting that he has had his own tax problems.
The New York Department of State issued liens against him and his wife in 2007 and 2008 for not paying their taxes in full, according to documents obtained by The Daily Caller that refer to the Stewarts as “tax delinquents.”

So, the hollywood types will not be voting against their own interests, they will just shelter their money, which is easier when you are rich, or not pay the taxes at all...

And again, I like that John Stewart is Rich, I like that the obama's will be rich when they leave the White House. I think it is hypocritical for both of them to advocate increasing taxes on the rich when they will avoid those same taxes...

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Next they'll be asking for donations to the Obama campaign in lieu of donations to burn victims. What? It's only a suggestion, nobody HAS to do it?

But seriously, I can't think of a better way to divide a family. If a family member asked for that, I would not be attending their wedding. Too bad, because I can put politics aside for family - but not when my nose is rubbed in it and I'm forced to make a choice in front of my family. They do that to me, we're no longer family. Period.

And yeah, it would also be true if they did it and asked me to donate to Romney or whomever. Screw that noise. Family is family - force me to take part in your politics to be part of your 'special day' and it'll be a cold day in Hell before you ever hear from me again.

 

[Carol]

Ugh.

http://www.barackobama.com/news/entry/the-obama-event-registry



Got a birthday, anniversary, or wedding coming up?
Let your friends know how important this election is to you—register with Obama 2012, and ask for a donation in lieu of a gift. It’s a great way to support the President on your big day. Plus, it’s a gift that we can all appreciate—and goes a lot further than a gravy bowl.


Emphasis mine.

I think it is VERY poor taste for Leader of the Free World to ask for such a thing -- and at the same time, imply that a gift someone may receive on such an occasion is virtually useless/meaningless. At least the way I was raised, telling people what you want for a gift is generally not a reflection of good manners.

 

[billc]

I think it is a great idea. They should also ask people to clean out their kid's college funds as well. Here is an idea, get rid of your guilt by cleaning out your 401k for obama. That money is just sitting around anyway and when you collect on it you'll just be another greedy 1%. Get rid of the guilt, and save the country in one fell swoop. Even better, is grandma or grandpa a little "out of it." Well, get in there and have them sign over their house to the obama campaign before they take their meds. I can think of any number of ways to get a little more money together to help "the one," win reelection and save the country from all the greedy 1%ers.

Even better, Carol, instead of having them give directly to the obama campaign, they can simply register at the obama campaign store. The couple to be can pick out any number of items from the campaign store, bumper stickers, yard signs, coffee mugs, collectible collectibles, and have the wedding guests donate that way. This would probably be a "nicer" way to support obama anyway, without the heavy handedness of straight donations.:angel:

 

[oftheherd1]

Next they'll be asking for donations to the Obama campaign in lieu of donations to burn victims. What? It's only a suggestion, nobody HAS to do it?

But seriously, I can't think of a better way to divide a family. If a family member asked for that, I would not be attending their wedding. Too bad, because I can put politics aside for family - but not when my nose is rubbed in it and I'm forced to make a choice in front of my family. They do that to me, we're no longer family. Period.

And yeah, it would also be true if they did it and asked me to donate to Romney or whomever. Screw that noise. Family is family - force me to take part in your politics to be part of your 'special day' and it'll be a cold day in Hell before you ever hear from me again.

Familiy is family so I don't know if I would be that harsh as not to attend a wedding. For one thing, it depends on how close "family" it is. But if on talking to them, the choice I am given is to donate or not attend, I guess I would not be there. I can't imagine my kids doing that to me. Once you get past kids, especially at my age, there isn't much close family to talk about.

But I agree the idea of contributing to Obama, or any politician, in lieu of gifts is a little repugnant to me.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Familiy is family so I don't know if I would be that harsh as not to attend a wedding. For one thing, it depends on how close "family" it is. But if on talking to them, the choice I am given is to donate or not attend, I guess I would not be there. I can't imagine my kids doing that to me. Once you get past kids, especially at my age, there isn't much close family to talk about.

But I agree the idea of contributing to Obama, or any politician, in lieu of gifts is a little repugnant to me.

Let's look at it slightly differently. Let's say that my cousin was getting married, invited me, and said in the invitation that instead of formal wear, guests were being asked to wear "I love Obama" T-shirts. Now, I can attend and wear something that I find offensive. I can attend and NOT wear the shirt, thus informing everyone of my choices and basically coming off like an a-hole who won't support his dear cousin on her 'special day', or I can just not attend. So I will tend to choose the latter. And frankly, any relative of mine who would put me in that kind of position doesn't need to be contacting me in the future. Family is family, politics is politics. Leave them on their proper sides of the fence and we can all get along. Insist that I either drink the koolaid or declare myself in opposition, and I opt out.

 

[elder999]

Honestly, he gave the Queen of England an iPod with his speeches on it.....what do you expect from him? :lfao:

(Also scratches my "vaguely socialist" instinct as some sort of "great leader" worship.....)

 

[shesulsa]

Wow. That's beyond tacky, that's ... well, that's just plain offensive. Man, I think that's even worse than going to church and having the minister tell me how I should vote.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Well, you should support your king and queen.

 

[crushing]

If Obama can get about 20,400,000 of us to donate just $3 each, then we can match what he got from laywers and banking folks last go round, and maybe our collective voice can be just as strong as those special interests?

:lol:

 

[oftheherd1]

Let's look at it slightly differently. Let's say that my cousin was getting married, invited me, and said in the invitation that instead of formal wear, guests were being asked to wear "I love Obama" T-shirts. Now, I can attend and wear something that I find offensive. I can attend and NOT wear the shirt, thus informing everyone of my choices and basically coming off like an a-hole who won't support his dear cousin on her 'special day', or I can just not attend. So I will tend to choose the latter. And frankly, any relative of mine who would put me in that kind of position doesn't need to be contacting me in the future. Family is family, politics is politics. Leave them on their proper sides of the fence and we can all get along. Insist that I either drink the koolaid or declare myself in opposition, and I opt out.

I guess I should have been more explicit. To me, immediate family is my kids and their families. They are already married without any suggestions for political leanings at their weddings. I would be unlikely to get invitations from any of my cousins kids or grandkids. We aren't close any more, and live very far apart. So I can understand your position, and agree, and would likely take the same stance and actions.

Wow. That's beyond tacky, that's ... well, that's just plain offensive. Man, I think that's even worse than going to church and having the minister tell me how I should vote.

Interesting if that happened, since it might invalidate their tax-free status.

 

[Master Dan]

The difference is this, obama attacks the private business and the wealthy and then goes to $40,000 dollar a plate fund raisers with the tippy top of the one percenters, the very people he condemns with every speech. please be specific on which top 1% ? He broke his promise in his first presidential bid to take matching funds He hasn't yet but I know he has said he intends to the only way to match the enormous contibution from the super pacs? Also money from Unions come from thousands of individual people and unions represent Labor When you say private sector it is from large individual contributors who have a specific agenda not good for the country or labor who do you know in Hollywood or non private sector that is pledging $100 million to defeat Obama and they and others like them expect consideration for thier contribution? because he knew he was going to out earn McCain in donations, and he also takes millions of dollars from every public sector union available. McCain lost not because of money the best the Republicans could provide was a senial angry man with a cute barbie doll for a VP and he stated Oh Snookey is to cute to go to jail and sings bomb bomb Iran? I am so pissed at Obama Uncle Tom to the Corps I could spit but give us something better to vote for as opposed to nut bags. You say privat industry? but it is not mom and pop business it is a huge machine that wants no regulation and every body back to work for $5 an hour. Hollywood is not out sourceing jobs and shutting down whole communities in America. It is only now with superpacs that private industry can actually put up the same money that the unions have always been able to put up by extracting money from their membership. Obama is a hypocrite when it comes to fund raising, Romney is not. That does not change who Romney is or his platform if you can even figure out what it is? All he can say with out change is I'm not Obama yeh he is white to so what. They do not come from the same background Obama's income as a senator and previous life was in no way the same as Romney and as a member of the church we would call him a text book mormon like marry popins perfect in every way having little emphathy for others not exactly like him. The thinking inside his head he does not tell you is that he believes in cutting all government programs and let entire private sector do as they please and all public programs and assitance will be up to the moral concience of corporations, churches and individuals if they choose. Basicly survival of the fitist.




And hollywood isn't voting against their own interests, they just won't pay the new taxes. They will shelter their money or move out of the country to protect what they have...

This is just one of the hollywood types who would be voting against their own interest...

http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/17/jon-stewart-mocks-rich-romney-while-outpacing-him-in-wealth/



I don't mind that Stewart is wealthy, I actually like the fact that people can get rich in America. What is annoying is this...



And it gets better...



For emphasis...



As did John Stewart

And better...



For emphasis...


So, the hollywood types will not be voting against their own interests, they will just shelter their money, which is easier when you are rich, or not pay the taxes at all...

And again, I like that John Stewart is Rich, I like that the obama's will be rich when they leave the White House. I think it is hypocritical for both of them to advocate increasing taxes on the rich when they will avoid those same taxes...

ok how is that in any way comparible to coroporations moving jobs and trillions of dollars out of the country and the facebook founder gives up his american citizenship to avoid taxes prior to the 200 billion stock offering which by the way is in trouble from insider trading? How is Obama gong to avoid taxes after leaving the whitehouse? and most presidents are worth more when they leave than before they entered office?

Many of Hollywoods rich feel a need to give back to society in gratitude for thier earnings the difference is that Hollywood is not making its riches from the physical labor on the backs of multitudes of people most fortune 500 do. I studied for grant writting 6 months in 2000 all giving trends of the entire fortune 500 companies and found out that most foundation grants while having many good mission statements and look like non profit non political giving was in fact in many cases 100% campain contribution because they would taylor thier giving to impact those areas base on demographics of the electoral votes and contituents of the most powerful senators and congressmen period. AT&T gave $350 million a year at that time and did alot of business in our state but did not give $1 dollar historically at all ever becuase we have only 4 electoral votes. In fact many foundations will not even give outside thier emediate area of political influence true it does not directly into the pocket of the senator but it has an effect on thier decisions just like lobbying and effects thier voter base.

bottom line bill all the tit for tat like this thread is not getting us anywhere we need real answers to fix out entire infrastructure, energy needs that does not involve poluting and killing workers or land owners or military intervention unpaid for by tax breaks, fair trade incentives to bring back jobs, health care single payer fire the insurance companies who produce nothing but mark up 30% real deficit reform with reform of tax codes so based on user fees not income.

There is no hope for this country if we cannot get out of class warfare and moral majority might is right who ever dies with the most toys wins mentality.

I have never met one person making over 7 figures that does not break the law they can becuase they have attorneys and CPA's to help them get away with it.

Any one know what drop ship in the construction industry is related to government or public works?

You say take a poll to see who is conservative or not on MA talk that serves little related to is that being representative to a national census?

What I would like is an honest answer of everyone who thinks they are a conservative like Don and similar threds like his is what comes in your mind first thing when think of yourself as a conservative?

If your honest its a vision of someone or some group stealing from you that is less deserving than you are people who should not be getting this or that because they are not you!!!!

 

[rickster]

Zealot Evangelists have been doing this for decades

 

[rickster]

"Thanking Obama for killing Bin Laden is like going into McDonalds and
thanking Ronald McDonald for the hamburger. It's the guy cooking the
burger who should get the credit, not the clown."

LOL

It is the clown who lures the people to come in, the guy cooking the burger really has no talent