Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Forty years ago when I was a radical left winger, a chess playing partner of mine related his experiences twenty years earlier being investigated by the Feds for being a Communist.


Apparently he and most of his buddies were given the typical McCarthy kind of investigation, asking for names of Communists and so on. They all resisted that kind of investigation.


I asked him if any of those people had in fact been Communists. "Oh!" he said, "All of us!"



I always remembered that, and when I gave up my left wing ways to be a Republican in 1984, that was part of the reason. Communists were dangerous extremists and they DESERVED and NEEDED to have their subversive influence investigated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, I will take personal take on the world.. If you can make up your mind on a presidential candidate on his rhetoric, shows the sad state of the voters in this country.. Romney hasnt said much except Im not Obama..


For me, I dont like the multi-billionaires who have bought and paid for Romney .. I dont like his game of dodge as he tries to treat everyone as a horse with blinders on and the reins pulled tight..


Dont look at my time as governor (where he failed), Dont look at the Olympics (where the taxpayers paid $1.5 Billion to bail out Mitt.).. Dont ask for my tax Returns.. And yes I left Bane in 1999 (although when it was questioned running for Governor that I was no longer a resident of MA I stated my continuing business link to Bane, returning for board meetings and working over the phone..).. And dont look at the fact I started the ball rolling for the company to outsource before 1999.. Just look at jobs created before and after 1999, but dont look at jobs lost before and after 1999..


So if I need to choose between four more years of Obama even if he cant get Congress to work with him, and I fear policies changes if the President & Congress were all Democratic.. I fear more a sleazy greedy business man at the help, bought by 7 other sleazy rich guys, and I would definitely fear what they would do if the President & Congress all became Republican.



Obama - may not have gotten as much done in the last 4 years I would have hoped.. Some of his decisions I disliked.. But I know from 4 years he does have the best interests of the country at heart.


Romney - Shows self-interest (or the interest for his social class only), Lies and dodginess...


Now lets see what either of them have to say about how to get the country out of the mess it is in.. The mess the last Republican president put us in, the mess the Republican filibustering practices have had a heavy hand in as well as the President.

(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll admit I'm not a big fan of Mr. Romney but I have to disagree with this, "Dont look at my time as governor (where he failed)".



Romney was an effective chief executive. He significantly increased state revenues and balanced the budget while maintaining essential state services. He passed and signed into law Romneycare which led Massachusetts to having some 98% of our citizens covered by some type of healthcare insurance and those that aren' pay an additional tax to pay into they system. This has eliminated much of the medical free loading. By more than a 2:1 margin Massachusetts citizens support our current healthcare system modeled on the Republican approach to Health care. This was Romney's signature achievment as Govornor, that and raising state revenues to balance the budget without significantly cutting services.


The real question for Republicans is why is this guy on the ticket?





Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have mixed emotions about Obama-care, and Romney-care, so that crowning achievement was a wash.. I guess I was talking about MA being above the national curve on unemployment and far below the national curve on unemployment when he left.. But, i do have to admit some of my dislike for Romney is his being a MA governor, and I lived in MA during the Dukakis rule, and cringed when he ran for President. It was said that many in MA supported him too. (He too was scary).


packsaddle - LOL.. OK this is how I really feel..


In truth, I always liked a little Republican and a little Democrat mix, so one could balance out the other. The Democrat free to create whatever social program they want scares me.. I lived in MA, I hated being taxed for all their social programs, I moved to NH to get away from a lot of it.


I voted for both Bush Senior & Junior. With Bush Sr., I voted against Dukakis as he was Governor of MA while I lived there and I could stand the man's social programs.. I also loved Reagan. But I have voted Democrat also, and I always used to like an offset in Congress.. It slowed both sides down, but until this congress it did not grind things to a halt.



But the new Republican party will work with no one, and it's desire to hold the country hostage with filibusters is insane.. And my vote for George W. Bush was proved to be a mistake.. They have become so right-wing, so conservative they now are scary..


Then add the republicans choice for President, his dodginess, his lies, how he is raising his campaign funds and from whom.. The Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson who is up on Federal charges for bribing politicians in China to pull his casino out of financial ruin. The final one I heard about was brief, and may be a false rumor.. That was about someone else who made his millions in coal who contributed and was promised a seat on the environmental board if Romney wins. With or without disclosure, these billionaires like to sing.. But voting down disclosure stinks to high heaven also.


The Republican states (including NH) putting in new voter ID laws, with one Governor stating its sole purpose is to reduce the ability of democrats who are Latino, black or poor from voting, not to stop voter fraud (which no one has proved is anything but minuscule)


I guess I just see this whole country as vunerable, and I look at how Bane bought and sucked dry the vulnerable companies in order to profit while not only firing the employees but stealing their pensions. With the Republicans I feel those corporate vultures buzzing around our head..


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have often wondered what the percentage breakdown politically the 1% really is. I'm thinking whatever the number is, it's going to surprise most people. If Morgan Freeman can give Obama a $1,000,000 campaign contribution, I wonder where a Dem gets his hands on that kind of dough?



Link to post
Share on other sites

From a recent article on those making > $250K.


Jon Bakija, an economist at Williams College in Massachusetts, has used tax-return data from 2005 to compile occupational breakdowns for the top 0.1 percent, the top 1 percent and the top 5 percent of taxpayers.


"As you go up higher in the income scale, you get a larger share of executives and finance people," he said.


Professional Concentration

Engineers, architects and information-technology workers make up 9.6 percent of the top 5 percent of taxpayers and 4.2 percent of the top 1 percent of taxpayers, Bakija said. The top 5 percent includes managers, financial professionals, lawyers and medical professionals, though all in lower concentrations than in the top 1 percent.


U.S. households in the top 5 percent are more likely to have two spouses working than those in the top 1 percent. Of that top 5 percent, 23 percent have spouses who don't work outside the home, compared with 31.6 percent of the highest 1 percent and 39.3 percent of the top 0.1 percent.


"What you have is a growth in two-earner couples at one end of the income scale," said Scott Hodge, president of the Tax Foundation in Washington, which favors a simpler tax code with fewer targeted breaks. "You have this huge cohort of people reaching their peak earnings potential."


Geographically, the taxpayers in the 2 percent group are concentrated in high-income states along the coasts. In Connecticut, 3.6 percent of households would pay higher taxes under Obama's plan, more than triple the 1.1 percent in Ohio and the 1 percent in Idaho, according to Citizens for Tax Justice, a Washington group that favors raising taxes for top earners.


Greatest Concentrations

After Connecticut, the greatest concentrations of households that would be subject to higher rates are in New Jersey , Massachusetts and New York, at 3.2 percent, 2.8 percent and 2.6 percent, respectively. The District of Columbia tops all of them at 4 percent. Mississippi and West Virginia occupy the bottom of the list, with fewer than 1 percent of households in their states facing the proposed tax increase. "







Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 1980's my Dad requested through the Freedom of Information Act his FBI file--if it existed. Sure enough Hoover's boys had a 4 page file on him. This was the salient points:


-In '54 he was a college student at an upstate tiny NY teachers college. The vice president of the young Democrats he put up a "Gov Dewey memorial highway" sign alongside the dirt road in front of the campus. As Gov Dewey was visiting the campus that day it got in the campus paper as a "practical joke".


-He worked on JFK's presidential campaign in Long Island as a volunteer on weekends going door to door in 1960. My dad said he did for one weekend to hang out with a cute girl.


-Showed up on a list of alternate delegates for Shirley Chisholm at the Miami Democratic Convention in 1972. He said that wasn't true--though he did vote for her in the primary.


-Wrote a letter to the Miami Herald complaining about how many tax dollars Nixon was spending in Vietnam.


As someone who led the exciting life of an accountant my Dad didn't actually expect there would be a file. It says a lot that anyone would spend the resources on such an ordinary american. I guess Hoover's FBI equated being a Democrat with being a Communist then too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stosh says:


If Morgan Freeman can give Obama a $1,000,000 campaign contribution, I wonder where a Dem gets his hands on that kind of dough?


I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you saying you don't know where Morgan Freeman would get $1 million from?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked up, he has an estimated net-worth of $90 million. I think he could swing it! I mean he earned it and everything in that free market system some claim to know and love. He has a hot commodity in the "Morgan Freeman" name these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is so sinister about Morgan Freeman besides he is a democrat and a great movie actor?.. What sort of payback do you think he is after?


How does his one-million dollar contribution compare to the Koch Brothers 10-million and pledge to go as high as 100-million dollar?


How does his one-million dollar contribution compare to the Sheldon Adelson 10-million and pledge of 100+-million (plus as in limitless) dollars.. (Federally charged with bribery of foreign politician in China to get out of Casino financial mess)


You wish to state Morgan Freeman 1 million as questionable?? It is peanuts and far less sinister, both in the reputation of who is contributing, as well as the amount contributed..


So Seattle, what were the very shady and questionable amounts donated to Obama in 2008?


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only candidate getting more donations from Wall Street institutions than Barack Obama is Mitt Romney.


Face it. Both major parties have been bought by special interests. The Citzen's United case has been a disaster for representative democracy. Wall Street owns both parties. Hence 4-5 years after the big bank bailouts that Bush II initiated there is no effective regulation or risk management in place to prevent them from doing the same risky investments they did to threaten the system in the first place.


Big Labor and Entertainment own the Democrats. Oil and Defense own the Republicans. Which is why candidates like Ron Paul or Jon Huntsman that gore all the special interests get no traction.


Until there is a break in the two party system, our best bet maybe a do nothing government rather than letting one extreme or the other actually get enough seats do implement their legislation. We need a multi-party system where no one party has enough clout to get anything done unless they are willing to form a coalition and compromise with at least one other party. The whole point of a contested legislative system is that negotiation and compromise more often produce better solutions than the extemes.



Link to post
Share on other sites

Really our Campaign Finance laws are badly broken and there is bad money flying to both Presidential candidates these days. The system stinks. Some big money is flowing to both sides--a lot of special interests hedge their bets; and Obama as the incumbent is gonna attract certain money because the incumbent always does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely.. No doubt.. It is broken.. How can you stay in the fight with someone spending a billion dollars on his campaign without capital itself.. Take all that money and put it to the deficite and our country would be starting to pull itself out..


Labor parties can not compete with the money being tossed around in the Romney campaign and must get permission to spend it.. I really don't fear the take over of the Entertainment industry..


Defense can get out of hand, we really don't need 100 bombs pointed at Iran, when one will take it out, but I have not gotten the notion our Defense wants to point their bombs at us (yet).. Big oil now that is a force that is dragging us under, not allowing us to find new solutions to get rid of our dependency on it is a killer.


Still I will take 1-million from Morgan Freeman, and 1 or 2 million from any other actor or director of Hollywood and the 10-thousand or 20-thousand from Labor Unions which need alot more of them accumulated together to pull in decent money..


I just can't take the 100 million plus from a handful of one percenters.. Who are not all Oil and Defense anymore.


My husband said the surplus of these donations should be required to be spent on paying down the deficit..


Me, I think there should be made a cap on what a campaign can raise, and how much one person can spend.. but, then I also think both parties should be destroyed and a whole lot of very radical other beliefs about politics in general.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...