The Wall Street Journal reports that Scott Brown opposes taxing the big banks. The Brown campaign said,
“Scott Brown is opposed to higher taxes, especially in the midst of a severe recession. Raising taxes will kill jobs. Martha Coakley’s tax-raising policies will make it harder to get our economy back on the right track.”Having wrecked our economy by gaming assets prices while carting off huge fees and bonuses, we are to believe that banks have the best interest of the economy in mind. Look at the great job that the banks and Wall Street have done in providing jobs. 10% unemployment!
The taxpayers have bailed out the financial sector to prevent a depression and President Obama wants to tax them ...
... to get our money back over time. I say that is fair and should be done. The New York Times article about the proposed tax is here.
Posts
94 comments:
Seven Reasons Not To Vote For Martha Coakley :
The Big Dig tunnel collapse (shameless corruption and cronyism of the very worst kind)
Coakley's shady deal with a notorious pedophile (John Geoghan)
The financial disclosure "mistake" in which Martha Coakley failed to list $200,000 to $250,000 in assets on her financial disclosure forms for the Senate race.
Her failure in the Henry Louis Gates arrest in Cambridge last July
The Louise Woodward case
The Menino ?emailgate? affair
Former state rep Mark Howland wind turbine fiasco leaving Bristol County residents out millions
Way to be objective Bill. I can't wait till Brown wins. Oh and nice tactic by the Dems threatening to stall the certification of the election so Brown cannot vote against healthcare.
Mass is worse than Chicago politics.
Democratic Governor Deval Patrick changed a state law to allow him to appoint an interim replacement for Senator Edward M. Kennedy as he announced that a special election for the seat will be held on Jan. 19. This whole thing is going to backfire !
Chaulk up another loss for the governor
When are people going to understand that business does not pay taxes .... you and I pay taxes. From the article cited ; “Mr. Geithner said such a tax would be passed through to customers.”. ...OF COURSE, even Mr. Geithner understands that.
It is populist to rant about huge, unfair, big bank and big oil profits, but where do think those profits end up ? Bank of America has 8.7 billion shares outstanding ; who do you think owns those shares and stands to gain when they appreciate ? ... or lose when they don’t ? When Exxon pays out its 42 cents per share [ 2.41% dividend - 4 times what the local bank will give you ] where do you think it goes ? The answer to all these is that it goes into the savings, pension and retirement funds that you and I own. I didn’t hear anyone complaining when our 401K’S were rising by leaps and bounds and I still hear few complaints when, after a brief drop in value, they have bounced back and are poised to go higher.
The pays earned by the wall street employees are outrageous, but we do not live in a bubble. Financial firms operate all over the globe and the best and the brightest are able to demand huge salaries .. or they work elsewhere, in other countries or in firms owned by other countries. These are the people that are producing the wealth that you and I depend on for retirement and savings. Are we suggesting that our nest-eggs would be better off if we hired lesser competent people because they worked for less money ? Seems to me we have that now – they are called Senators and Congressmen :)
Everyone is quick to rejoice at the prospect of cutting those huge pays but I wonder if anyone considered that fact that those pays are taxed at the State and local levels, taxes that flow into the state coffers at higher levels of taxation than corporate tax levels ? Wealth that is NOT going to the Federal coffers but is instead spent locally to support our States and local communities with jobs for local businesses – not sent overseas to foreign governments.
It is populist to decry that greedy banker for his wealth and view him with disdain when he drives by in his Jag but did it ever cross anyone’s mind that your neighbor, or maybe yourself, works in the sales or service department where that auto was bought and serviced ? Maybe you wait the tables where that person eats and where the auto salesman and service mechanic eat. Maybe you work or own the furniture store where that person shops or the boutique where she is coiffed or work in the many trades that built the large house on the hill. Maybe your son or daughter aspires to wealth someday and wants to see a clear path to attainment.
Politicians count on their populist rants to serve as anesthesia so the general public does not realize that their nose is being amputated just to spite their face.
Bottom Line : The only ones who pay taxes on the entire planet are you and I. We pay it in the form of increased prices, reduced wages, lost jobs and a poorer standard of living. Every single penny promised to be collected or spent in Washington comes from our pockets, you and I.
I have heard all that I want to hear about what ‘they’ are going to do FOR us. The only thing I want to hear is how much less ‘they’ are going to do TO us.
Greg Lynam
The Attorney General Martha Coakley failed to protect us ! That is a fact !
Greg,
2/3 of big corporations pay NOTHING in taxes, after they are done with deductions.
Brown wants to deregulate banks even more than they are NOW. Greg I understand you are an ideological conservative but even YOU have to understand that
Greg, you are very long winded. Although you have good points,,can cut down on the diatribe?...just alittle bit?
Thank you Greg Lynam.
Wow....you have provided understanding. Something that has disappeared from the political radar screen.
As you know, we have a very important senate election coming up on Tuesday, January 19th. I'm voting for the candidate who supports less taxation and less government. As a senior citizen ( where have all the years gone) I commend you for the most direct explanation as it relates to taxes, and who makes the payments.
Once again, I encourage you to run for selectman. Three years ago, along with school teachers, parent groups, and school administrator involvement, who succeeded to intimidate enough select board members to vote for a duel tax rate system. This added an unnecessary taxation on town owned business. As you may recall, the change in taxation was done to encourage a favorable outcome for a school referendum for additional town taxation, to fun an over funded school budget. Mr. Lynam , you are a well known, well informed educated finance committee member, who will accomplish more for Dartmouth, as a selectman.
I’ll try to keep the breeze to a minimum :)
Let us assume that 100% of companies pay $0 in taxes...... where do you think the money goes ?
Anybody with a dollar wants a return on their money, you do and so do I. We don’t just bury it in the back yard, although at today’s CD rates I might as well.
You and I place that money where it will earn the most, any company does the same thing and since they exist to sell a product, the money is placed where they can make and sell the most product. The profit earned by corporations goes into four basic areas :
It is paid out in the form of dividends to you and me and Union and municipal pension funds and pensioners.
It is re-invested in the company itself increasing employment for you and me while spurring greater local spending further increasing employment.
It is used to elevate the value of its stock, stock that is owned by you and me and Union and municipal pension funds and pensioners.
It is paid out in taxes to the State and Federal governments ... that is you and me too.
Whenever you change the tax structure you simply shift money from one place to another.
So the question becomes, “ Which one of these do you want to reduce in order to increase the flow of revenue into the Federal Government ?? “
Greg Lynam
Banks and other big businesses usually pay nothing in taxes. In addition, they receive incentives funded by the taxpayers to stay in the state. The track record of businesses leaving the state after those tax breaks expire is depressing. The reality is the average citizen is more on his/her own than ever. Just look at the shrinking middle class. Further deregulation of big business is stupid. Expecting big business to police itself is incredibly naive. One of the many massive failures of the Bush administration that Brown avidly supports is the disempowering of the SEC which led to so many abuses. Ponzi schemes, Enron, Worldcom, derivitives, sub-prime mortgages, etc. All while the SEC was strongly encouraged to keep it's nose out of these financial tradgedies that effect us all. Done by Bush and the boys. Bring back the right wing extremists? I think not.
Greg,
The tax breaks of the Reagan Admin. was supposed to trickle down to the little guy (Milton Freidman)....but it hasnt.
The effective tax rate on business is lower than the Republicans want to admit...dont you agree?
Remember John McCain quoting during the campaign that Ireland has an 11% corporate tax rate?
I dont see any TOYS being made there, I see them being made in China where the effective tax rate is on par with the USA.
So hwat are these companies evading? It is NOT taxes, it is LABOR.
Tax breaks belong to the middle class...not the upper class...WE, the working class create the DEMAND that businesses need to survive.
The reason for business start up is because they want to get in on the DEMAND for a product.
I have never seen someone start a company in a market where there isnt a DEMAND. Dont you agree?
Yes more organized labor is the answer. Hah. How has organized labor treated the auo industry? Over $2k on every single car going for pensions and retirement benefits. Ford created a program for layed offworkers to pay them for up to 2 years to do nothing! Yup that's what unionized labor has come to. Time for a change.
Where's Martha?
Why has'nt she agreed to any interviews? Where is she hiding?
She talks about a republican machine and yet who has come to her aid? Bill Clinton, the SEIU, MoveOn.org....
Refuses to grant interviews to most major media outlets. Asleep at the wheel when our stste leaders are indicted and removed from office. Somebody wake Martha up.
Oh it's too late....
yeah union labor...I hate a living wage...RACE TO THE BOTTOM....that's your motto.
Picture a pendulum. When our parents were starting out there was a great need for unions and they served an excellent purpose. As time has passed, they have gained too much power. Even the lowly truck driver now feels he should make as much as the guy who risks his life savings to start businesses that create jobs and make the economy work. It has become the land of entitlement instead of the land of opportunity. The pendulum needs to swing back a bit. The U.S. cannot compete in the world labor market anymore because too many people think they are entitled to excessive salaries with a mere 35hour work week that includes over a dozen paid holidays, generous vacation and sick leave, health insurance benefits, and defined benefit pensions. That is not to say that some other countries are not abusing their work force, they are. However, this country is in dire need of re-establishing a competitive work ethic. Those people who work 70 hour weeks to establish businesses and get ahead in life SHOULD be rewarded.
Germany has an extensive social safety net, larger than the USA. They compete globally, they have over 40% union membership, and STILL they are the BEST european economy and #3 economy in the WORLD.
Democrat Patrick Kennedy D Rhode Island is shutting off his crack pipe this weekend and going to back Martha Coakley
Mr. Lynman....
Still waiting for my question to be answered concerning a run for selectman.
The unions have served there purpose. They exist now only to feather their own nests and extort as much money as possible from the companies that employ their workers. One of the main reasons manufacturing has largely left this country for other places.
Thank you Scott Brown for running a wonderful campaign.
OH, wait Unions are the reason manufacturing left the COUNTRY!!!!! union membership only makes up 13% of the population....get your head out of the sand. its the overall wages that ran manufacturing out of this country.
RACE TO THE BOTTOM!!!!! GOP MANTRA
11:06 a.m.: "lowly truck driver"????
P.S. Sure you're not referring to Dartmouth, here? Sounds like the town, not too long ago.
Over the past thirty years, the tax burden has shifted from those who provide capital onto those who provide labor. The rationale behind the shift was that the capital providers would efficiently invest the money that they did not pay in tax and it would provide more for those who provide labor. Great idea, except that it didn't work. Corporations are just a mechanism for individual capital providers to aggregate their contributions of captial. The idea that those who provide capital deserve to pay less tax on their earnings than those who provide labor is not fair.
Bill, I can't wait until I can correct my horrible vote for you!! See you on your election day, hoping to send another socialist packing!!
I will be voting for Martha Coakley. She stands for a woman's right to choose, she is against the war,health care for all, and she certainly will not vote for tax breaks for the wealthy.
GO MARTHA!!!!!
Good point Bill!!!!
All of us with commonsense will stand up and fight along with you!!!
Bill,
I'm not saying entrepeneurs should not pay taxes. What is wrong with a flat tax? Or how about just sales taxes? The more you spend, the more you pay. This seems to be a good way of collecting more from those who find ways of avoiding income taxes.
I am a democrat who is apposed to the national health care program. I have voted for one republican in all me years of voting. That republican is Ronald Reagan. I voted for a republican because President Jimmy Carter had this country in a fiscal crises. Unemployment was above 10% and inflation was running at 13% annually. Interest rates were 21% and counting.
Massachusetts voted for Ronald Reagan and voted to re-elect him four years later. Jimmy Carter was kicked out by the voters. Why did Massachusetts vote for a republican presendant?
It was the only time that Massachusetts voted republican that I can remember. President Reagan made several tax cuts. Business began hiring the unemployed and began manufacturing products. The unemployment rate fell to an all time low. He stuck a stick up the nose of the Russians and agreed to reduce the mighty missiles that would some day destroy the world. He was a man who believed in America. I see that history is repeating itself. I voted for Obama but he is reneging on almost all his promises except national health care. Most Americans are apposed to a national health care. I'll be voting for a republican on Tuesday, January 19, 2010. Jimmy Carter has returned to the white house.
Yeah - the job Obama has created - just where are they?
Unemployment is still at 10% - much much higher if you count those that have given up looking or are waiting for the next government handout. Banks? Yeah they're the villains. Obama liked having them under the yoke of government oversight. Once the banks paid off their handouts and got out from under governments thunb what does Obama come up with? A giant tax on them. Yep thos bad bad banks. Can't have them make a profit.
Did I hear right? Obama is coming up to little old Massachusetts? This the day after his press sect'y said he had no plans to come? I guess things in the rest of the world have calmed down so Obama has a little down time to see how things are going in the Bay State.
Wonderful, welcome Mr President.
Obama stopped the SLIDE...we would be at 13-15% unemployment if it wasnt for Obama.
you expect things to happen to quickly...
Ray Medeiros' op-ed nailed it on the head the other Day...all beit the ONLY pro coakley op-ed but none the less
If Bush was the democratic president they would want everyone to forget him too.
Scott Brown holds the same foreign and domestic policies as Bush...
MASSACHUSETTS we dont need a BUSHITE in the SENATE
" DEMOCRAT FOR BROWN " is exactly right. Maybe some are too young to remember or were not in a position to notice but I remember well. The 'stagflation' policies of Jimmy Carter left this country with double digit interest rates, high unemployment and military machinery that sat on the tarmac being stripped of parts to keep the rest flying.
I was a young father and husband and had just bought a small business ; times were tough as high interest rates were forcing business closures and layoffs.
One of the first things Reagan did was to accelerate business capital write-offs. I bought new equipment. This spurred manufacturing as new equipment was now affordable. Employment rose to make that equipment, interest rates fell over time and the prosperity that everyone seems to have forgotten about grew steadily. I hired three salespeople.
The military was brought up to date and places like Electric Boat and Raytheon employed thousands even while Federal personal income taxes were cut 25%. This resulted in the long period of high economic growth responsible for the prosperity that put people into homes they irresponsible bought at prices they should not have paid.
The 'blame' for today's situation falls squarely on those of us in and out of government that spent money we did not have in the belief that prosperity only runs uphill ... it does not, and those of us that remember the tax and spend days of Jimmy Carter know that lesson all to well.
I, too, see history repeating itself.
Greg Lynam
Obama stopped the slide?! Who are you kidding. Obama stated his stimulus plan would keep unemployment below 8%. Itis now easily at 10% or more depending on who you count. I may be getting old but my memory is not that short.
Obama owns this mess, partly because he assured us he could solve things by spending billions of dollars that we do not have.
As far as wanting to forget Bush. Why? He kept us safe, we had a good economy, and we knew the definition of a terrorist. Did he make some big mistakes? Yes he did - but so did many other people.
What do we have now? A growing dependant class, impending inflation, staggering debt and yes some good speeches.
That and 2 bucks will get you a cup of coffee.
Wait anon 8:46 - you forgot to mention that the world now loves us!
Oh wait a minute - they actually don't.
He kept us safe? except for 9/11, the maryland DC sniper..(YES HE WAS A MUSLIM and an EXTREMIST), shoe bomber...your right you are old and your memory is JUST selective.
I know 9/11 was Clinton's fault...lol....Bush was in office for 9 months until 9/11
9 months into Obama's presidency you were calling for him to take the blame for everything
you cant have it both ways...why in September of this year EVERYTHING was OBAMA's fault...but 9 months into Bush's Presidency everything including 9/11 was Clinton's....you republicans and/or conservatives HAVE VERY selctive memories
well you DID say Bush kept us SAFE...i was just pointing out your fallacies. The fact that NO HE DIDNT comes to mind...DC sniper killed many people before being caught...thank you DUBYA
Bush never blamed any problem of his Presidency on Clinton. Each and every occasion BO has a chance he blames Bush for the things he inherited.
Bush was a stand up man, BO is a man who begged for this job and now that he has it he is blaming the person he took it from.
BO cannot hold a candle to Bush.
1993, KSM's nephew tried to blow up the WTC....he was sent to PRISON FOR LIFE...after being tried in FEDERAL COURT...are trying to say our justice system wouldn't find these terrorists GUILTY?....or the fact that in a military tribunal that don't LAWYER UP?....get a grip buddy
Bush can't hold a candle to "BO"...the president's DOG
Blaming Clinton for Bush's problems? Check your facts before you lie. Clinton not only balanced the budget, there was a budget surplus! We actually reduced debt! That is the mess Bush inherited? The Bush stooges and their revisionist history are hilarious. Clinton kept us out of these endless wars. Regulations on big business were far more stringently enforced during Clinton's administration. Bush started spending money we had to borrow in the trillions on the military and defense long before 9/11 and what did we get? Personal moral issues aside, Bush was nothing less than a comparative moron. And still is. For example, how many times do you see someone go ask Bush for his opinion on anything? Do something intelligent in your life, vote Coakley.
To those who favor President Bush. How well did the military do during Bush's term?
Its a lot of fun reading these blogs.
Scott Brown 2010.
Bush is not running Clinton is not running Cheney is not running. And the president's press secretary made sure to state yesterday that Obama is not running in this race, just in case his star power can't save Martha he'll have laid the groundwork for an 'out'
If Barney frank were as smart as he seems to think he is he would be running. Away.
Give me ONE piece of "brown" legislation that would make me want to vote for HIM...or HIS plan if he gets elected...what will he DO
Doing the math.
Brown supports Bush policies on business deregulation and huge increases in national debt for defense spending. Brown would have you believe we can prevent terrorism by spending billions and trillions of money we will have to borrow. Oh ya, and cut taxes while he is at it. For the wealthy, of course.
Brown needs to go to Iraq or Afganistan for awhile. Has he ever gone? No, just a cowardly extreme right wing conservative wanting to spend your money and send your kids to war.
At the end of Clinton's presidency, the American people were fed up with his antics of infidelity, ashame of his sexual encounters in the oval offices with Monica. I'll admit that Clinton's last two years produced the largest accumulation of budget surplus. While all this was going on, terrorist were planning to confiscate American air planes and fly them into the twin towers, the white house, and the pentagon. No, I didn't forget the airliner that was taken down by several brave American passengers. All these commercial air planes carried THE AVERAGE TYPE OF MEN, WOMEN, AND Children. Clinton knew that the terrorist where planning something big but didn't know what or when. Because of U.S. Laws (congress) didn't allow information to be exchanged between these two agencies.
When George Bush became president, he decided to redistribute the U.S. budgetary surplus back to the people. This is the first time I ever received a check from the government!
During the Clinton years, the U.S. Senate authorized the U.S. President to remove Saddam Hessian from Iraqi power by any means possible. Don't ever think for a second that Clinton didn't inform George Bush that the terrorist, in Afghanistan and elsewhere where planning some type of attack on U.S. property, or U.S. foreign embassies. Our government, at the time of the attacks, didn't allow the C.I.A. to collaborate with the F.B.I. In other words, it was against the federal laws to exchange information between the C.I.A. and the F.B.I. Sure, you can bet your last dollar, if you still have one, that our president Clinton and Bush knew something was up but didn't have the needed exchange of information to know what or where or the time. This is the fault of congress. Both parties where the causes of the U.S. attacks in 2001. The Clinton director of C.I.A. operations, advised/informed president George Bush that Iraq leadership/dictator was holding weapons of mass destruction, including but not limited to missiles contain poison gas. George Bush, on poor advise from the C.I.A. decided to take out Saddam and liberated Iraq. Wrong, we where not considered liberators, but occupiers. This gave the Shiite's and Sunnite's the opportunity to start up their old feud, and began by killing one another and the occupiers. Until today, I don't know how the U.S. leadership didn't understand the repercussions for the liberation of Iraq. Three separate factions are at war inside Iraq, this has been a ongoing feud for thousands of years and will not end with the U.S. Leaving Iraq. Within a couple of years, and only after the U.S, military forces leave Iraq, a dictator will appear to control the county. A country with out law can only be controlled by one person who dictates power.
Now we have a new president. While Clinton and Bush are out raising money for Hattie. Our new man is sitting in the white house try to get this national health care program jammed down the throats of all Americans. After seven years of no known attacks on U.S. Soil, a terrorist tried to blow up a commercial air plane over the city of Detroit.
Within a couple of weeks, the state of Massachusetts will have a new senator. I'm not asking you to vote for any particular candidate, I'm asking everyone to consider the type of person you will be voting for. Do you want someone who will follow the democratic leadership in Washington or do you want someone who will appose national health care, as being presented.
I'm voting for the person I believe will protect our country from terrorist and provide the people of Massachusetts with jobs, less taxation, and sound leadership. One who will provide constitutional protection to all people and not allow certain states, big unions, to get special concessions for their support of a national health care program.
It's time to set a new example throughout the U.S. Why? Because this Tuesday, all eye's will be focused on Massachusetts and the national health care program.
Speaking of Martha Coakley how about the Fells Acre Day Care case!
Coakley is reaching for even more undeserved political glory despite the evidence that she cares nothing for the truth and cannot admit the mistakes made by the Middlesex County district attorney's office, of which she took charge, succeeding the original Amirault persecutors, Scott Harshbarger and Tom Reilly.
The Republican candidate in Tuesday's U.S. Senate race, Scott Brown, has my vote, though I disagree with him on several things, not least of which is his statement that "Martha Coakley is a nice person." No, Scott, she is not.
Clinton not only balanced the budget, there was a budget surplus! We actually reduced debt! That is the mess Bush inherited?
This never happened, there was a projected surplus that never arrived. Additionally his budget was as close to balanced as has happened in a long time but was still 18 billion short of balanced.
All of the following agencies by law, loan and extra monies paid into their coffers to the Fed Gov. and are issued Government bonds for the balance.
Social Security $152.3 billion
Civil Service Retirement Fund $30.9 billion
Federal supplementary medical insurance Trust fund $18.5 billion
Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund $15.0 billion
Unemployment Trust Fund $9.0 billion
Military Retirement Fund $8.2 billion
Transportation Trust Funds $3.8 billion
Employee life insurance & retirement $1.8 billion
Other $7.0 billion
TOTAL $246.5 billion
Clinton doesn't like to admit that his "surplus" was based on loans from within the government but they were. THis is in FACT not a surplus.
Once and for all can we please stop the LIE that Clinton balanced a budget and had a surplus?
Even the CBO says there was never a real surplus, just the paper on described above. We still spent more than we took in by billions.
Martha Coakley is a good and decent woman. If she doesn't win on Tuesday, it will have much to do with the President and the national healthcare debate and almost nothing to do with her or Scott Brown. Across the country, people are angry. I understand that. I'm still going to vote for Martha Coakley. On most issues, she reflects my views and those of the people of this state. Mr. Brown's voting record in the state senate demonstrates that his views differ markedly.
Flip - Flopper
Coakley, the state's attorney general, said she no longer supports the death penalty for any reason, a change from her first race for Middlesex district attorney.
In 1998, Coakley said she was "primarily anti-death penalty" but favored it for the first-degree murder of a police officer, as well for a repeat murder in prison by a convicted first-degree murderer.
"I believe I was mistaken," Coakley, now the state's chief law enforcement officer, told reporters.
Selective situations?? What's the difference? A death is a death.
You know what gets me....the fact that nobody seems to say why they are voting for Scott Brown on here instead the only things I see are the negative about Coakley.I could care less who you vote for but get serious about it..If you have no clue as to why you are voting for either candidate maybe you shouldn't vote. Don't base your vote on something someone else said or the news networks escpecially since we know every last one is pretty biased whether it be liberal or conservative.I could list failures for both candidates but that's not going to help any of us. What we need to be focusing on is what each candidate is going to be able to accomplish for us on both local and fedaral levels.PLEASE VOTE FOR THE RIGHT REASONS FOR WHOEVER YOU MAY VOTE FOR ON TUESDAY!!!!!!
Anybody else catch Bill Moyers on PBS discussing this election? Interesting observation about the conservative Republicans criticizing the way government is run, yet every time they get into office, they screw everything up by following their own doctrines. You can't make this stuff up!
The Democrats have failed to give us meaningful health care reform. I would have supported reform if it had included a public option. Without that, all they have managed to do is give the insurance and drug companies a bigger pool to draw revenue from by mandating coverage. Gee, isn't that where the Democrats get their campaign money from? Neither candidate is going to do anything to help working families.
People have already said why they are voting for Scott Brown - you choose not to hear them. I am voting for hime because he is a good and decent human being whose views on many things align with my own.. His view that those of religous convictions against abortions should have an opt out of providing abortions makes sense. Ms Coakley chooses to frame that stand as denying people abortions. She is lying. Scott Brown will not treat terrorist who have demonstrated the desire to kill many Americans as common criminals that get all the protections of our constitution. Martha Coakley? She can;t even find the criminals under her own nose in the State House. So those are a few reasons I am voting BROWN.
If the majority of Massachusetts views align with Martha's this would not be a close race. The truth is most people do not like the direction we are going, thus the tight race in predominantly democratic Massachusetts. As for portraying candidates in a negative way, well Ms Coakley seems to have that covered pretty well.
I want socialized health care and the right to have guns. Since congress which is controlled by democrats can't get real health care reform done, I am voting for Brown.
Boy, am I going to miss all that telephone politicking. I've never felt so popular! They even call me by my first name.
What if they even had my email address? Can you imagine how many emails I would have to mark as "spam"?
To the person that calls Brown a coward - he is in the military. How does that make him any more or less a cward than Ms Coakley?
There will be wars, it's a shame but a fact of life.
As far as Bill Moyers and PBS - what a joke. PBS is about as far left as you can get and not fall over. Read the paper today? Seems the big O's mortgae bail out program is a failure.So it seems Republicans are t=not the only ones to screw up big time is it?
Yep give out more money to people who bought too much house or should not have been buying at all. Bought some time maybe but at what cost? It sure did'nt solve any problems.
To 6:52
How many wars have there been the last 20 years? How many times have some of these poor NG and Reservists had to go over there? Two, three and four times? How come Brown never went over? Zero times. Just a coincidence I guess. Coakley is not supporting wars or haven't you listened? So you want her to go over there instead of Brown? Who let the banks get deregulated so bad they gave out mortgages with smoke and mirrors as collateral? Hint: it happened within the last 10 years. Frankly, you should go crawl back under your rock. We will all be safer that way.
Are Nat and Joe running for reelection this year? Anyone know if anyone is interested in taking out papers to run?
I'm sure there HAS been a nastier, more negative, more dishonest campaign than Martha Coakley's, but I can't think what it was.
To the person who claims Clinton never balanced the budget because the government borrowed money? The government is always borrowing money. Ever heard of treasury bills for example? You know, the buyer buys now and gets paid back later. That's how borrowing works you know. How long has the federal government been borrowing money? Does about 1775 seem right? I guess that doessn't count when Democrats are in office.
Yikes.
I saw this on the DAILYKOS
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/senate-republicans/scott-brown-voted-against-giving-help-to-911-recovery-workers/YKOS
To the person who claims Clinton never balanced the budget because the government borrowed money? The government is always borrowing money. Ever heard of treasury bills for example?
Exactly, if you are borrowing money to pay the bills you do NOT have a balanced budget. IF you are robbing social security of a 150 billion dollar surplus to pay for domestic items you do NOT have a surplus.
YEAH fabulous!!!!!! republicans cut taxes and borrow from China to fund the government...Democrats tax the billionaires and balance the budget...I find it VERY disappointing how many people who are so called fiscal conservatives dont mind BORROWING to FUND the GOVERNMENT...oh and by the way Reagan started the soc sec swap...to subsidize the fed after the 1981 tax cuts...
'Coakley does not support wars' Did I hear that right? Whew, now I can rest easy. Elct Martha and everyone will love us again. Fabulous.
Thank God America has come to the realization that domestic and foreign policy failure are the cornerstones of the Republican party.
oh and by the way Reagan started the soc sec swap...to subsidize the fed after the 1981 tax cuts...
Wow, some people will stoop to new levels in an attempt to blame Reagan. The government adopted the unified budget during the Johnson administration, that is when social security funds began being raided to support the government.
Come on people!!
Why this independent is voting for Scott Brown.
1.I'm apposed to the national health care program, approved by the U.S. Senate.
2.The senate proposal has too many gimmicks, exception, and options.
3.A state senator from Nebraska, received state immunity from taxation, for his vote. No tax until 2018.
4.I'm not in favor of any government power (Senate) having total majority control. Dem's /Republicans.
5.Our president is hammering his national health care, with no public option, just to secure a political victory.
6.Any democrat in Massachusetts who needs to bring in so much outsider support is not worth voting for.
7.My vote for Brown is a statement to all the politicians who shall be watch Massachusetts on Tuesday, January 19th
8. Don't take the Massachusetts voters for a bunch of fools. The hard core democrats will vote for a democratic candidate but the independent voters will not have a political lease attached to their vote.
Don't forget independent voter that the proposed health care plan has just carved out another loophole. This one for the unions - bowing to heavy pressure from the unions they've agreed to not tax union's so-called 'Cadillac' health plans.
Great - the burden shifts again.
One post stated: "Regulations on big business were far more stringently enforced during Clinton's administration". It was Clinton that repealed the Glass-Steagall act in 1999 that many believe paved the way for the current great recession. It was perhaps the most insidious act of deregulation in the 20th century. And Obama will not take Paul Volcker's advice and fix this huge mistake. Obama's entire economic team (with the exception of Volcker) are wall-street insiders who helped to create the banking disaster to begin with. The reason it is so difficult to parse blame among politicians or political parties for any major event over the last 30 years is that there is ultimately very little difference among them. Oh, don't get me wrong, the rhetoric of Obama, for example, sounds completely different than that of his conservative enemies. But how most of our so-called leaders govern is basically the same, and it is largely conservative (over the past 30 years). The author Sam Tanenhaus calls Clinton one of the great conservative presidents of the 20th century. Obama will likely be the same. I am a liberal. Obama is a rhetorical liberal and a practicing conservative. To send Obama and the democrats a message, I will be voting for Brown. I can't believe it, but I am going to do it!
10:57 A.M.
I just love it when you left wing liberals get mad. To prove your point, your voting for Brown and you can't believe your doing it. It's liberals like you that give the democratic party a bad name. Why don't you just turn over and become a republican. I'm not voting for Coakley. I'm voting for Joe Kennedy. I always wanted Joe Kennedy to run for Senator. Is he the son of Bob, or Ted Kennedy ??
Neither, no relation.
Who's gonna run the free oil from Venezuala program if Joe K wins?
6.Any democrat in Massachusetts who needs to bring in so much outsider support is not worth voting for
funny you would sat outside support...RUDY Gulianni is not a native...and neither are the TEABAGGERS FROM Texas
They are 'Tea Partyers - not Tea baggers' - but of course the idea that people would demonstrate their anger at an out of control government is something that the 'where's my piece of the pie' crowd would not understand.
The vulgar characterizaton of common citizns expressing their rights only serves to cement our convictions.
Scott Brown on Tuesday.
Who's next? Barney or John?
The banks are only part of the problem folks. But I know it's nice to have evil. prosperous villans.
Anyone that took a mortgage they knew they could not afford is to blame as much if not more than 'bankers'. Such stupidity is called greed and it was perpetrated by millions of people looking to score big. Personal responsibility - a worthy but forgotten concept.
This is just one example of how screwed up our elected congress/senators real are. I'm voting for Joe Kennedy and this is my reason.......
Like all independents I'm so tiered of having the same old political democrats/republicans lie about what they will do for us and when elected they do what is right for them and the lobbyist. Because we can't change the system with guns and bullets we can vote for change. While you democrats/republicans fight over Coakley or Brown I'll be voting for Joe Kennedy. In the mean time I'm heading to Florida for it's time to make money. Thanks to all the years of government involvement and controls this is the time and yes I can.
Turning a bad situation into a good investment is what I look for. It's called making money. I'm a property/home speculator. Within the next two weeks I shall land in Florida to invest approximately 500,000 thousand dollars and purchase land/homes that have been taken over by the mortgage holders/taxpayers. (The is you and Me) I shall pay 25,000 thousand dollars for each property that is being held at 250,000 thousand dollars in toxic loans/mortgages. For each 100,000 thousand dollars I invest I shall gained in value 1,000,000 million dollars of poor banking investment. Within the next 18 months to economy will take hold and I shall sell all my investments for 199,000 dollars per 25,000 dollar invested. This shall provide me with a 174,000 thousand dollar gain on my 25,000 thousand investment. Multiply this amount by each 20 X land/property purchased and it provides me with a 3.48 million dollar profit. I also have a clear return on my 500,000 dollar investment.
What a country.
Clinton sent missiles after Osama Bin Laden and he did it while under attack by the right wing nutjobs during the Clinton impeachment fiasco. Remember "wag The Dog?" While Clinton kept his eye on the ball and protected the US, the Repuglicans were clamoring to impeach him for next to nothing.
to anon 8:44 - I dont agree with your vote for Kennedy but I like everything else you wrote!
Thats the beauty of America, enterprising people seeing an opportunity and making the most of it. Beautiful.
Scott Brown 2010
I like bankers too. They got me my mortgages, helped me start a business and keep some of my money safe. That's what I expect of a bank and for 30 years they have delivered for me. Does that make them bad? Does that make me bad? Hardly.
Prosperous banks and prosperous people make this country what it has been for over 200 years. Being successfull is honorable or at least it was till this past January.
De-regulate big business? Back in the day, you qualified for a mortgage by having enough NET income (without counting your spouse's) to pay the mortgage. Banks were not allowed to have out of state charters. Because of that, they were forced to develop business primarily within their own state. Then came deregulation. Thanks primarily to the Republicans. Now Brown wants more de-regulation? Sounds like a major problem to me!
10:09...Banks dont keep your money SAFE...FDIC does...implemented BY DEMOCRATS
Folks....it's over.....the once impossible has been accomplished. Scott Brown will be elected as the next U.S. Senator from Massachusetts. Brown will win with 53% of the vote. This is a referendum on the presidents national health care program.
As for the national health care program, we have all witnessed how Nancy/Reid have worked behind the scenes (no c-span coverage as promised) to buy votes from democrats. With the election of Scott Brown, Massachusetts has saved the country from a national disaster.
I want to take this opportunity to thank all the republicans, democrats, and independent voters of Massachusetts. Well done. You make me proud to say I am a Massachusetts voter.
Just one problem to my announced victory of Senator Scott Brown. Somewhere in the democrats wood pile of dirty deals shall appear the certification of the candidates votes. It may be time to bring out the muskets and remember to keep the powder dry.
To anon 3:08 - the banks that I do business with have never had to rely on the FDIC so yes they have kept my savings safe.
As for the FDIC being started by Democrats. That was then and there is a big difference between the Dems of yore and the Dems of now.
"not again please" thaNKS FOR NOT BEING A WIMP AND not USING A MONICKER. THAT DISTIGUISHES YOU FROM THE ANONY mICE. and you have my respect.
But let me disabuse you of the thought that Bush was not warned of the 911 attacks by Bin Laden. Condie Rice had a report from the Clinton administration stating "AlQaida plans to attack US" which senators made her squirm to say allowed on the chamber floor.
As for the miniscule rebate of 300 bucks Bush GAVE us. I gave mine to the Red Cross on Sept. 11 as most patriotic Americans did. The damage and response equaled 100 times the 300 dollar benefit.
Your president was a disgrace and deeply harmed US foriegn relations.
Poor delusional James.
Face it James - Obama has blown his opportunity. He promised way more than he will ever be able to deliver. Smooth talk and promises only go so far. Happy 1st anniversary Mr. President. It is kind of ironic on so many levels not the least of which is a 1st anniversary present of a Republican Senator taking the bluest of blue seats in the Senate!
Scott Brown promises change. Let's see how fast he can produce?
Good Luck in MA Scott. MA residents just shot themselves in the foot.
Watch and listen.....
Oh, the heartbreak in Hyannis today - - the hand-wringing, the teeth gnashing.
How could Massachusetts voters be so stupid - -not.
Let's see, I managed to get by for 50 years or so. Worked hard, raised a family, own a house, run a successfull business for twenty years - through a horrible recession to boot - manage to provide quality health insurance, support many local charities, and yet liberal Democrats seem to think I am ignorant and do not know what is good for me! Boy where have I gone wrong? I just can't imagine having gotten this far!
The arrogance of so many Democrats amazes me more every passing day.
The arrogance of the Kennedys. Ms. Coakley must have felt she was a shoo-in, that is until she realized that she had a real contender on her hands. Then she called in the "big guns" - - Obama and Clinton. A lot of good they did her. For all intensive purposes, maybe they even did her an injustice. Obama's popularity certainly has waned over the year he has been in office.
And, poor Vicki. My heart bleeds for her.
I would say the Kennedys certainly have epitomized the very essence of hubris. Now what can they crow about? What pie do they have their hands in now? The time has come to end the stranglehold they and the Democrats have had in this state.
"not again please" thaNKS FOR NOT BEING A WIMP AND not USING A MONICKER. THAT DISTIGUISHES YOU FROM THE ANONY mICE. and you have my respect.
But let me disabuse you of the thought that Bush was not warned of the 911 attacks by Bin Laden. Condie Rice had a report from the Clinton
Have a few less drinks, or lay off the MEDS before you type. Remember Clinton had the same information, and had Bin Ladin in the cross hairs of a predator drone, but refused to give the command to pull the trigger. Why because he wanted to to remain friends with everybody else in the world. History is a judge of the future, remember when Regan authorized the cruise missile strike on Momar Kadafi house, the LIBERALS wanted hid head, after the strike killed one of his wives, and his children he then quieted down. He flexed his wings again, but once Bush 41 notified him as a ACCESS OF EVIL candidate he again went like a rat under cover and he quieted down again. Power is a good thing remember negotiation and ass slapping ,and talk only go so far, sometimes force is necessary. That is why we have the best Military in the world, its a same to let it be a waste.
Wow, Anonymous guy who always writes a quote from another person than refutes it with the flimsyist of evidence or baseless assertions.
Here is what you wrote ACCESS OF EVIL
I bet you have fork marks in your face bc you are just stupid.
So we have proven you are stupid and using anonymouse constantly you are obviously a timid wimp.
you may remember if the alcohol and glue haven't destroyed your walnut sized brain, that Clinton was under impeachment proceedings and had a meeting with the joint chiefs and congressional leaders to send a cruise missile strike after Bin Laden, but jerks like you and Limbaugh and Hannity yelled "Wag the dog!" Also Condie Rice was brought before congress to testify after 9/11 and was asked to say the name of the report the administration got from intelligence community weeks before 9/11.
HMM Ha HMM ha Hmm Ha
Hmm Ha.
"Miss Secretary of State please just say the name of the report you recieved before 9/11" CONDI RICE SAID "AL QUIDA IS DETERMINED TO STRIKE INSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES"
You, my wimpy adversary, are more persistant than a pimple but less consequential.
Bush's major shift in foreign policy was Called the AXIS OF EVIL speech, get it dummy, like the AXIS powers of WWII. If you don't know about that it was Germany, Japan and Italy!
no wonder i get upset and call names, because it is so deserved.
Geez, James, you cite Limbaugh et al., and come out swinging just as bad as they, whom you denounce, are.
What happened to curtailing some of your venom like you said in a previous posting on another thread, I believe?
Of course, if you stopped being a rabid animal, you would just become another dull poster, I suppose.
And that just ain't fun, right?!
Just sign me Elmer.
ACCESS OF EVIL?
How wrong can one person be?
Post a Comment