Seven Counts of Guilty for Stevens; Palin Still Doesn’t Take a Position
As you may recall, I’ve been asking the McCain-Palin campaign since September 9 whether Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin were endorsing then-indicted Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska.
Today Stevens was convicted of all seven counts of making false statements about gifts he received from the oil services company VECO.
Palin’s statement: "It’s a sad day for Alaska, and a sad day for Senator Stevens and his family. The verdict shines a light though on the corrupting influence of the big oil service company up there in Alaska that was allowed to control too much of our state. And that control was part of the culture of corruption that I was elected to fight. And that fight must always move forward regardless of party affiliation or seniority or even past service. And as governor of the state of Alaska, I’ll carefully monitor now the situation and I’ll take any appropriate action as needed. In the meantime I do ask that the people of Alaska join me in respecting the workings of our judicial system, and I’m confident that Senator Stevens, from this point on, will do the right thing for the state of Alaska."
So…we still don’t have an answer. And as far as I can tell, Stevens is still running for re-election.
It may be that Palin is trying to be compassionate. But is that the right political move for a self-styled maverick who takes on the old boys network?
Meanwhile, the editors of the conservative website RedState.com have endorsed not only Stevens’ Democratic rival, but that of Rep. Don Young, D-Alaska. "Republicans need to clean our own house," they write. "Washington cannot too soon see the end of Stevens and Young."
- jpt
UPDATE: A Palin ally writes: "You seem to be under-reading her statement. She was clearly making the point that he needs to do the ‘right thing’ and given he was convicted on all 7 counts, it seems pretty obvious what the ‘right thing’ is."
Really? Stevens thinks the "right thing" is to keep fighting the charges and to continue running for re-election.
Email
Rick Santorum Sweeps 3 States
Pentagon to Open Additional Jobs to Women
No one gave her the talking points yet.. Fox news dont know how to cover it either yet!!
Posted by: Mike NC | October 27, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm
Palin’s reference to a ‘culture of corruption’ is telling. That’s the phrase that Democrats used to define the Republican Congress in 2006, and in large part they not only succeeded but were right on the merits. That Palin is now attempting to appropriate yet another slogan for her own benefit should hardly be surprising, but that she’s doing so in the face of her own conviction for unethical conduct is the icing on the cake.
Posted by: Jake's mom | October 27, 2008, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm
From TJ – posted elsewhere, but it sums it all up so well:
What is it about Alaskan politicians? Palin is given a $150,000 wardrobe, which she wears, but doesn’t own it. Stevens was given furniture, but he doesn’t own it, yet it still sits in his home. Stuff is given to them, but they don’t own it? Steven and Palin must attend the same seminars on electoral ethics, or is this just an Alaska thing?
Posted by: just curious | October 27, 2008, 6:26 pm 6:26 pm
GEEEEEEE I haer she had parts of her house built at the same time hummmmmmmmm????Wonder.
Posted by: NH voter | October 27, 2008, 6:28 pm 6:28 pm
Everybody in Alaska knows that Palin is going to in the same trouble as Stevens, for she simply made the same mistakes: illegally accepting all kinds og fifts from big companies, having parts of her house built for free by company she gave a lot of building rights in Alaska. And then there’s the pipeline… the main liability and future scandal.
She is as corrupt as Stevens, so what should she way.
Posted by: Alaskan Brett | October 27, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
This was the longest serving Republican senator in history. Can’t believe it took this long to bag him.
Posted by: Mike | October 27, 2008, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
Hmmm. I think Palin is playing dodgy on this one. She waited until the verdict came out and then acted above it, in control of it. She’s spinning it as a way to show she’s in charge, not as compassion, but for sympathy and for a chance to look “executive.” I think that’s why Palin and Co. resisted a for or against vote on Stevens. Against they might have hurt his case, for and they might be dragged down with him.
I think there’s a stronger Palin/Stevens connection there….
Posted by: Jerome | October 27, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
It’s another huge blow to the GOP credentials, that’s for sure.
And to all the right wing losers who chatter about “corrupt Chicago”, do have a look at the history of corruption in Alaska, the record rape numbers, the massive meth addiction and trade… etc.
Stevens is dome now, Palin no doubt will be next.
Posted by: gregJ | October 27, 2008, 6:37 pm 6:37 pm
McCain will take your money and redistribute it to Iraq. Hundreds of millions of it.
It will go up in flames or be buried in American graves.
Posted by: trent | October 27, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
No corruption in Alaska with Big Oil paying every citizen thousands each year.
Posted by: Thinking | October 27, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm
Sarah palin – the worst VP nominee ever.
Posted by: whynot | October 27, 2008, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm
Let this verdict be a lesson and a wake up call to the Palins. I bet they will be busy working on how to cover up their past corrupt dealings…
Posted by: Sue | October 27, 2008, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm
Redstate link seems to be not working.
Guess they are busy scrubbing it off their site like their Ashley Todd story
Posted by: Ryan C (the actual real one) | October 27, 2008, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm
Former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell testified in Sen. Ted Stevens’ corruption trial Friday, saying the Republican from Alaska has a “sterling” character.
He was a trusted individual whose word you could rely on,” said Powell,
So much for Powell’s judgement.
Posted by: HH | October 27, 2008, 7:05 pm 7:05 pm
HH
Powell’s judgement about a friend to a court is completly different to Powell’s judgement in endorsing the leader of our nation!
Dont you think ?
Umm should that be: Do you think ?
Posted by: Mike NC | October 27, 2008, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm
Palin isn’t going to slap the hand that helped rub her back. She’s involved in the same ring of corruption I guarantee it.
Posted by: Julie | October 27, 2008, 7:19 pm 7:19 pm
No one gave her the talking points yet.. Fox news dont know how to cover it either yet!!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bawhahahahahahahaha!
SO true…..
Posted by: Brigette_J | October 27, 2008, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm
this election is turning me into a born-again american!
Posted by: earthisnotflat | October 27, 2008, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm
maverick my butt
Posted by: earthisnotflat | October 27, 2008, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
As of this time, Palin has indeed issued a statement about Stevens’ convictions. It wasn’t clear if she mentioned Stevens by name. However, it sounded as if Palin was once again touting her own self-reputed combating of the “big oil company” that once ran Alaskan politics. Sounds as if she is an opportunist at best, using current affairs to advance her own career at any cost.
Posted by: buzziea | October 27, 2008, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
Let me ask the democrats out there. You believe so strongly in distribute the wealth. Take your money every week, your extra money and turn and give it to someone poorer than you. Especially those making 250,000. Didn’t think so. You have McCain who gave 25% to charity. Can Obama match it, can any of you?
So ditribute the wealth is ok if it is someone else’s wealth. Hypocrites.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm
Sarah Palin is sure a class act.
Innocent until proven guilty. I believe that is still the way it is around here.
Posted by: Straight Talk Express | October 27, 2008, 7:28 pm 7:28 pm
Their isn’t a republican that believes there are corrupt republicans in congress. He was tried and convicted. His fault for his choices. Can you say there isn’t one democrat that isn’t just as guilty??
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 7:30 pm 7:30 pm
A correction is needed. Don Young is a Republican, not a Democrat! He is running against a Democrat, Ethan Berkowitz.
Posted by: nonnie9999 | October 27, 2008, 7:30 pm 7:30 pm
Don Young is an R-Alaska, not a D-Alaska.
Posted by: CJ | October 27, 2008, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm
Sounds as if she is an opportunist at best, using current affairs to advance her own career at any cost.
!!!!!
Like that never happens on the left.
Posted by: JD | October 27, 2008, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm
Wouldn’t it be funny if Alaska went blue!
Posted by: Julie | October 27, 2008, 7:33 pm 7:33 pm
How many democrats here want to really distribute the wealth
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm
Funmny how my posts are changed or deleted. Republicans do know there are corrupt republicans in congress. Like stevens, his choice his consequence. DO you democrats actually believe there are no corrupt democrats in congress?????
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 7:38 pm 7:38 pm
How many democrats here want to really distribute the wealth
Posted by: A Veteran | Oct 27, 2008 7:35:32 PM
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
I’d like to “redistribute” you nutcase Republicans that can’t think for yourselves… we’ll “redistribute” some of you to Alaska, some across the sea, etc…
Posted by: Julie | October 27, 2008, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
Palin says she is “confident Sen. Stevens will do the “right thing.” Boy, heart of a lion-that one!
Posted by: R. Wood | October 27, 2008, 7:42 pm 7:42 pm
A Veteran – Please Answer
If “less taxes on the middle class/more taxes for the rich” qualifies as income redistribution, then how is “less taxes on the rich/more taxes for the middle class” any different?
Posted by: just curious | October 27, 2008, 7:44 pm 7:44 pm
The moral/legal standard for voting appears to be much higher than the standard for the United States Senate. WOW!
Posted by: william whitesitt | October 27, 2008, 7:55 pm 7:55 pm
Palin recruited her Lt governor to run against congressman Young.
Young is a 35 year institution in Alaska and Palin recruited her Lt governor to run against him in the primaries.
Young was involved in lobbying scandals and major pork barrel spender.
Palin showed the courage to take him on.
Just like Palin showed the courage to blow the whistle on the energy committee she was on. Palin blew the whistle on the AG of the republican governor.
Just like Palin took on her incumbent republican.
The media never talks about this. Never. It is always negative, negative, negative.
Posted by: Sam | October 27, 2008, 7:56 pm 7:56 pm
“Sarah Palin is sure a class act.
Innocent until proven guilty. I believe that is still the way it is around here.”
yeah, that’s the way it is most places and he’s been proven guilty, so what’s your point and what’s Palin now, sure doesn’t have anything to do with class.
Posted by: JR | October 27, 2008, 8:00 pm 8:00 pm
Palin is learning from the master. Is every republican in AK corrupt?
Or is it every republican nationwide?
Posted by: bubba | October 27, 2008, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm
just curious
If you would type into google WHo actually pays taxes it would tskr you to a site that shows. The top 25% of the earners of this country already account for 85% of the taxes collected. I believe it said there are 1 & of americans or 300000 americans making 1,000,000 or more a year. So where does 250,000 a year figure. MIddle class? I would love just one year at 250,000 and would gladly pay more. I would post the link, but that just gets this deleted. Check it out amd let me know.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 8:04 pm 8:04 pm
Really Jake…would anything she said be accepted by the media? Or the Obamabots?
Posted by: RBR | October 27, 2008, 8:05 pm 8:05 pm
I think no one told Palin who Stevens was or what was going on about his trail and so she was in the dark as usual.
I can’t wait till 2012 when this zero runs against Romney and Giuliani. That should be hoot an a half. Those guys will eat her alive, especially when Giuliani turns the ex-Bush/McCain attack men on her.
Posted by: JR | October 27, 2008, 8:06 pm 8:06 pm
just curious
with distribute the wealth you will get more welfare. I do not know what your state is, here in NY we have 2nd and 3rd generation welfare families carrying cell phones, wearing designer clothes, using their food stamps and having a good old time. We are a BLUE state democratic controlled. OUr state is in a huge mess.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 8:07 pm 8:07 pm
A Veteran, the top 25% pay the top 85% because they earn the top 95%.
Posted by: JR | October 27, 2008, 8:07 pm 8:07 pm
What do you think taxes are A Veteran, they are “spreading the wealth” and always have been.
Posted by: JR | October 27, 2008, 8:09 pm 8:09 pm
JR
I don’t mind fair taxes for all as long as it is spent wisely and within their means. I mind continuing to raise taxes to enable the lazy to continue to prliferate. There should be some kind of limits to welfare. Most could work but don’t want to.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 8:12 pm 8:12 pm
A Veteran – I know who pays the most taxes. You still didn’t answer my question so I’ll help out:
A recent study by the Tax Policy Center shows that a hard working individual with a total income of $19,000 would see a $100 savings under McCain’s plan compared to a $900 savings under Obama’s plan. So what happens to that $800 under McCain’s plan? All of that money, plus some, instead goes to the family that makes $225,000, where McCain’s plan gives them $4,400 in tax breaks instead of the $2,800 in tax breaks that Obama’s plan does.
In other words, McCain takes $800 from someone making $19,000 a year and gives it to the family that makes $225,000.
Posted by: just curious | October 27, 2008, 8:16 pm 8:16 pm
JR
I don’t have a problem whith those who earn that income. They were willing to take the risk, create a business and give opportunities for jobs. It was explained to me years ago, something I had never thought of. We always feel our employers owe us more. We in fact owe them. They gave us an opportunity for a job. We hear the terms and accept the job. They ( most ) give us an opportunity to have health care and benefits. we accept. Without the rich and their drive to be that way, we wouldn’t have the jobs. Now you want to penalize them more, when they acccount for most of the taxes now. How is welfare in your state
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm
THAT was her statement? Really? It’s sounds like it was written by the writers of Saturday Night Live, for god’s sake.
Posted by: Doug | October 27, 2008, 8:21 pm 8:21 pm
Hey Senator Stevens, in case you didn’t hear this, you are now a convicted felon 7x’s. What part of this don’t you understand?
Not only are you an embarrassment to Alaska, to the United States, and to the Constitution of the United States of American that you swore to uphold but you’re an embarrassment to the human race.
You have no morales!
Posted by: democratic | October 27, 2008, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm
just curious
Not true. at 20,000 a year you are paying lets say 1000 a year in income tax. the 250,000 is paying 9,000 a year in taxes. The 500 to 800 difference isn’t as big as it sounds. Will 800 a year make that big a difference to you. Would a 100 make a big difference?? No. There is no WEALTH being distributed. WEALTH is his pploy to make you dream of $$$$ in your head. It isn’t a lottery. Most won’t see enough top make a difference, but it does sound good. Neither will be able to keep their promises and not raise taxes and pay for the plans they have in mind. Create jobs to Obama is to repair our infrastructre, government funded. It is the same as so many elections before. Politicans promising something they will not be able to do to get your vote. Of the two I believe that McCain would try the hardest to deliver on his promises. I believe his charitable contributions, his service to his country give him the character and honor I need to believe in for the next president.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 8:25 pm 8:25 pm
What delicious irony! The man who once described the internet as “a series of pipes” is now going down the tubes! Pity that Palin is unable to provide a clear answer as to how she stands on the conviction. Her doublespeak would make Orwell proud!
Posted by: chuck | October 27, 2008, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm
just curious
I realized I didn’t answer all of your question. I must have politician in me. The other 800 would go toward the plans he has to help us out of the crisis we are in. I will say we as americans are more responsible for the crisis than the government. We have all been told if it sounds to good to be true, it usually isn’t. Greed runs our nation. From some lower all the way to filthy rich people. The congress worked together real fast when the financial crisis hit. Wonder why??? They were protecting their money. Once their’s is protected they won’t care.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm
“A Palin ally writes: “You seem to be under-reading her statement.”
That same Palin ally seems to be writing all the blogs.
Politico had an identical statement.
Posted by: Ryan C (the actual real one) | October 27, 2008, 8:35 pm 8:35 pm
at 20,000 a year you are paying lets say 1000 a year in income tax. the 250,000 is paying 9,000 a year in taxes. The 500 to 800 difference isn’t as big as it sounds
_____________________________________
$19,000 pays 15% Income tax.
$250,000 paying 9000 a year.?.? OMG, I would love that. Try – more like $70,000
It’s all “wealth or income distribution” no matter how you slice it. Why is a tax cut for the wealthy considered “reform” or “conservative” while a tax cut for the middle class is considered “welfare”?
What Obama is doing is not new – he is rolling back the Bush tax cuts, McCain originally opposed.
I’ve seen you on these Blogs before, if you are so opposed to tis type of “distribution”, why is it not socialism that I keep paying into Social Security to fund your Disability payments? I highly doubt Social Security will still be there when I reach retirement age.
Posted by: just curious | October 27, 2008, 8:50 pm 8:50 pm
just curious
Do you really believe 250,000 is middle income??? I believe it is closer to 50,000 a year. May families like mine at just under or over 50,000 a year have nice modest homes, no credit card debt, have money in the bank and live a decent comfortable life. WHat more is needed. Greed pushes you to have more. Giving more to the needy only creates more people on welfare. If the government we elect would spend with more responsibility, trim the unnecessary fat out of government, our taxes would be enough. I still believe in a flat tax myself. Everyone pays the same percentage. That way everyone pays more as their income increases. You don’t reward the lazy and penalize the risk takers and successful people that drive our economy by creating businesses, thus creating jobs which gives everyone the opportunity to earn a living.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm
I highly doubt Social Security will still be there when I reach retirement age.
It would be if since Kennedy up to the present President and congresses hadn’t kept taking it, put it in the general fund as a loan.( part of the national 10 trillion debt) President Roosevelt guaranteed that Social Security would be ther for everyone. Taht is from my mother an angry 82 year old who has hated how our government has taken our guaranteed pension. The government has no desire to repay the national debt. Hell they can’t even control the yearly defecit. You shouldn’t have had to have an IRA or 401k in jeporady if the had kept their hand off of social security. It would be there. If they keep taking it away as a loan, there must always be a surplus. Does that sound like a program in jeporady??? They put it in Jeporady.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
You don’t reward the lazy and penalize the risk takers and successful people that drive our economy by creating businesses, thus creating jobs which gives everyone the opportunity to earn a living.
_________________________________________________
I know more “working poor” who are struggling to make ends meet and trying their best. With all due respect, you have a very skewed vision of low-income people. Just because they are low-income does not make them lazy or less important members of our society.
I am in the highest tax bracket and will be voting Obama/Biden because:
a. Our National Debt
b. Harm done to our constitution
c. Our loss of leadership globally.
The “income redistribution” argument is a farce and I have voted Republican my entire life.
My friends making far more $$ than I pay LESS taxes thanks to loophole city than most middle-class Americans.
I believe a rising tide lifts ALL boats.
Posted by: just curious | October 27, 2008, 9:22 pm 9:22 pm
just curious
I understand the working poor, believe me, I do. I have been one most of my life. I saw the same ads as the wealthy. I wanted the ssame things for my family. I had extreme credit card debt that I had to struggle through for many years. I begasn to understand that what happened to me was more my fault than anybody else’s. I don’t believe in loopholes. With a flat tax there wouldn’t be any. You pay based on what you earn. The filthy rich or well off wouldn’t need to pay the lawyers to help them. Just pay their percentage. At the same time the rules for welfare and medicaid, etc need to be changed. I have no problem helping those in need due to circunstances beyond their control. I do have a problem giving my tax dollars to those who live on welfare, medicaid that live better than I do as a working man. I herniated a disc in 1995. Without surgery I was able to return to work with a pain level I could tolerate untill it gave out in 2007. Now the joiunt has totally collapsed and surgery isn’t an option. I would rather be working than receiving disability at 900 a month. I am sorry to the working people I can’t. I know the poor working man struggles as much as anyone. Most though have the pride not to accept your help. I love them for their effort and their grit. My problem is with the people who have been taking welfare benefits, food stamps etc. all of their lives without onbe thought of where it comes from. Give me an email at I would love to give you websites to check and more info for you to understand where I am coming from.
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 9:37 pm 9:37 pm
just curious
Do you believe that Lincoln was a great president??
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm
Jakey Boy -
What about Jefferson in Louisiana?
Has Obama commented yet?
Posted by: xaix | October 27, 2008, 10:05 pm 10:05 pm
just curious, you clearly do not understand economics or how mccain’s tax plan works.
mccain would not be taking $900 from the lower income family and giving $800 back to the higher income family. the reason the lower income family would be receiving less money back is because they make less money in the first place.
let me lay it out for you in laymen’s terms:
10 guys go out for beer. the check comes back at $100. if they split the check up like we split our taxes, it would look like this:
the first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
the fifth would pay $1.
the sixth would pay $3.
the seventh would pay $7.
the eighth would pay $12.
the ninth would pay $18.
the tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
the bartender, however, tells them he’ll give them a $20 discount, making their bill $80. since the first 4 men are already paying nothing, they get no discount. they deduce that if they divide $20 by 6, it comes out to $3.33. but if you subtract that amount from the 5th and 6th man, they’d be paid to be drinking beer.
instead, the bartender works out how much they would get back if he reduced each bill by approximately the same amount.
the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
the sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
the seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
the eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
the ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
the tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
as you can see, because the richest man paid the most, he is therefore, percentage wise, receiving the most back ($10). the sixth man, however, is only saving a $1.
as you can see, the sixth man did not have $9 taken from him and given to the wealthy man; rather, he did not get as much as the rich man did because he did not pay much in the first place.
get it now?
Posted by: sabita | October 27, 2008, 10:14 pm 10:14 pm
sabita
No I don’t get it. If they all enjoyed the same beer, why shouldn’t they pay for the privelege. We have the services the rich pay for but hardly ever use. They pay more for not using at all. Have you given your extra income to someone poorer than you????
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm
sabita – you really need some new, plagiarized material. A gimmick – not policy.
Posted by: just curious | October 27, 2008, 10:28 pm 10:28 pm
Jake…
“Really? Stevens thinks the “right thing” is to keep fighting the charges and to continue running for re-election.”
Yeah, just like William Jefferson! I mean let’s not let $90,000 bucks in the fridge and a 16 count indictment get in the way of “fighting on!”
Hypocrite.
Posted by: Jack Moss | October 27, 2008, 10:32 pm 10:32 pm
Using a a bit of your logic:
McCain is such a socialist that he voted against the 2001 Bush tax cuts, complaining that they unfairly favored the rich “at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief.”
The McCain campaign and mis-informed Republicans bizarrely call Obama’s tax credits “welfare.” Obama’s refundable tax credit for mortgage payments only go to those who work.
McCain is pushing a little “welfare” of his own: The centerpiece of his health care plan is a $5,000 tax credit to families. This goes to people regardless of their employment status. Socialist!
McCain’s tax credit would potentially go to people who don’t pay income tax. Isn’t that socialism?
Conservatives are also calling Obama’s health-care plan “socialized medicine.” Yet Henry Aaron, a top health-policy expert at nonpartisan Brookings Institution, laughed at this characterization.
He calls Obama’s plan “exceedingly moderate,” noting that it builds incrementally on existing insurance programs. It won’t tell private insurers what benefits they must cover beyond a basic package.
btw- if I am out with 10 friends, we ALL take turns buying rounds of beer.
Posted by: just curious | October 27, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
just curious, it doesn’t matter if it already comes from another source. i didn’t preface it by saying, “look i wrote this all by myself!!!! i’m so special!!!” the source explained it far better than i could; just because i didn’t not write it personally does not take away from the message.
what matters is the point of the post, which you seem completely uninterested in responding to. can you please, in an intelligent manner, defend your stance as to how it is that mccain is giving $800 back to the rich families, when my post has clearly explained that is not the case? to me, it seems that you are evading the answer simply because you have no way to refute my point and would like to continue to espouse ignorant views.
Posted by: sabita | October 27, 2008, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm
A Veteran, of course, in normal cases, each person would pay the same amount for their own beer. but even with flat-tax, people would be paying different amounts based on their income and status (i.e. 15% taken from someone making $100 would not be the same as 15% taken from someone making $1000)
Posted by: sabita | October 27, 2008, 10:48 pm 10:48 pm
also, just curious, who are you responding to in terms of mccain being a socialist? i don’t see any comment but yours having made a remark about anyone’s socialist behavior or leanings.
Posted by: sabita | October 27, 2008, 10:55 pm 10:55 pm
sabita
Should it be different for the same item??? It isn’t now. You buy something you apy a sales tax. Everybody pays the same. Your income, They pay nore percentage now than you. They pay more. The top 25% of the nations earners account for 85% of payroll tax collected. As with the post about the Dolphins owner. He is already contemplating Obama’s victory and taking steps to protect himself.. The rich have always controlled the economy. They will always have the money to survive. Will you?????
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 11:18 pm 11:18 pm
btw- if I am out with 10 friends, we ALL take turns buying rounds of beer.
A much better way. You probaly won’t make it around so all pay for 10 beers. This time a couple make it through for free. Just rtemember who and remind them the next time it is their turn.
Enjoy the beers
Posted by: A Veteran | October 27, 2008, 11:21 pm 11:21 pm
A Veteran- Just checked back in. I agree with you on a flat tax. Oddly enough, (I haven’t double checked this) but wasn’t Jerry Brown, uber-liberal and MIke Hukabee BOTH for a flat tax?.? or was Huckabee’s a consumption tax?.
It doesn’t matter anyway. I get my info. on a lot of non-partisan WEB sites. The info. Re: taxes is available on The Tax Policy WEB site I mentioned way earlier in the night.
I have many great friends that live in the NE. Two in the city. Take care and Good Night.
Posted by: just curious | October 28, 2008, 12:52 am 12:52 am
I’m so sick of hearing Palin, Palin, Palin, is there another scapegoat to kick?
I hope Obama wins…..this is going to be
good.
Posted by: 93mike | October 28, 2008, 4:09 am 4:09 am
McCain has just released a statement asking Senator Stevens to step down. Will Sarah the wonder woman fom Wasilla do the same? Probably not. Why? She’s a maverick!
Posted by: obama supreme court | October 28, 2008, 10:27 am 10:27 am
Jeeze Jake. She’s being accused of being a “diva” by “unnamed staffers” in columns or stories by your colleagues in the media. She’s been accused of “upstaging” McCain. Did it ever occur to you that she might need to wait until the top of the ticket made a statement before saying anything stronger than what she said?
Come on…there are only 7 days left. Let’s at least try to have a wee bit of impartiality….k? :)
Posted by: Michelle | October 28, 2008, 10:42 am 10:42 am
Those Alaskans are the BEST socialists. They have more free government handouts than anyone else. You know that Palin is more generous than Castro, right? Alaska gives out more free money than any other Socialist regime in the Western Hemisphere.
Posted by: Fran Taylor | October 28, 2008, 11:04 am 11:04 am
Palin goes after corruption in Alaska?
Seems like she takes campaign funds from the very people who plead guilty to corruption.
When Sarah Palin ran for Lieutenant Governor of Alaska in 2002 she got $5,000 from VECO and including $500 directly from Bill Allen.
Was Palin bought by VECO at that time?
Why hasn’t Palin returned those contributions following the guilty plea of Bill Allen?
VECO has now been tied to corruption charges involving Senator Ted Stevens, Congressman Don Young, State Senator John Cowdery, State Senate President Ben Stevens, State Representative Vic Kohring, State Representative Bruce Weyhrauch, State Senator Don Olson, and State Representative Pete Kott.
Posted by: ohioindependent | October 28, 2008, 12:46 pm 12:46 pm