PDA

View Full Version : Is massachussetts backstabbing kennedys because...



Vagabond
01-18-2010, 05:18 PM
.....kennedys back stabbed Clintons during the last presidential elections ? just wondering looking at the senate race in massachussetts.

pooltchr
01-18-2010, 06:04 PM
I think the people of Massachusetts may be sending a message to Obama. They have had government healthcare in their state and it hasn't worked well, and been filled with massive cost over-runs.

The majority of Americans don't want the Obamacare plan. (57% against it, the last I heard) Maybe a state that has already had a taste of it is going to be even more firmly against it.

We'll find out in a few days.

Steve

sack316
01-18-2010, 06:22 PM
Coakley isn't helping herself much either with all of her gaffes. Misspelled the name of the state in one ad, put images of the twin towers in another... and the new england equivalent of a cardinal sin, thought Red Sox legend and World Series hero Curt Shilling was a Yankees fan! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Sack

Qtec
01-18-2010, 09:07 PM
Brown sounds like a stand up guy. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We already knew Scott Brown was looking out for his fact cat backers. Now, as we learn how he treats his own employees, we see that he’s really just out for himself.

Scott Brown’s campaign wants you to believe they don’t have employees. According to his campaign finance reports, Brown pays his staff as if they were independent contractors. He doesn’t just pay his media and other consultants that way, <u>he pays his lowest-level staff as if they weren’t really his employees.</u>

Campaigns often use the services of people who are accurately classified as independent contractors. But it’s impossible for any major campaign to reach the final weekend of the race and, as the Brown campaign wants people to believe, not have employees. It may be true that the Federal Elections Commission doesn’t designate how campaigns designate their staffers. But the Internal Revenue Service does have specific rules on who can and cannot be classified an independent contractor. If a worker takes direct instructions on tasks, has hours mandated by the employer, uses facilities and tools supplied by the employer, or is working exclusively for that employer, they’re not an independent contractor, they’re an employee. [Look here;(pdf) for the kinds of questions the IRS asks to determine employee status.] By any reasonable standard, at this late point in the campaign, when workers are working exclusively for the campaign, are taking direct orders from the candidate or other staff, and where they are working in campaign headquarters, spending campaign money, using campaign equipment, and representing themselves as Brown’s campaign staff, they’re undoubtedly employees.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>By paying his staff as contractors instead of employees, Scott Brown avoids any responsibility to be a good employer and provide them health insurance.</span> That alone should be enough to disqualify him in the minds of many voters. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>But by paying his staff as contractors, Brown has also managed to avoid his responsibility to pay their payroll taxes. Brown has pushed his tax obligation off on to his employees, which is not only selfish, it’s also probably a violation of federal law.

It’s no surprise that Brown evaded questions about paying his staff as contractors, directing people to speak to his attorneys. And it’s no surprise his attorneys wouldn’t comment on the issue, because Scott Brown is almost certainly in violation of federal tax laws.</span> </div></div>

link (http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/scott-brown-tax-cheat)

Q

sack316
01-18-2010, 10:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It’s no surprise that Brown evaded questions about paying his staff as contractors, directing people to speak to his attorneys. And it’s no surprise his attorneys wouldn’t comment on the issue, because </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Brown's campaign said most of his small staff are contractors who already had health insurance. Those who did not were paid more to allow them to purchase coverage under the Connector -- a system set up under Massachusetts' landmark health care reform. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><u>he pays his lowest-level staff as if they weren’t really his employees.</u>
</div></div>

Aren't those generally volunteers anyway? If he's paying the majority of staff involved anything at all, I'd imagine that's better than most running for office. JMHO

Sack

Vagabond
01-19-2010, 07:28 AM
I heard that Martha made some boboo with the campaign.

Gayle in MD
01-19-2010, 07:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Aren't those generally volunteers anyway? </div></div>

No, actually, they aren't. Volunteers are called volunteers, a politician's "Staff" employees are his paid employees.

G.

pooltchr
01-19-2010, 07:56 AM
Q,
It is a normal, and very legal, business decision to use contract employees for short term jobs. A campaign for someone running for public office is not an ongoing process. It has a defined beginning and a defined end.

Many employers hire contractors for a specific job, then offer them a more permanent job if it turns into a long term position.

Nothing unusual at all.

Steve

LWW
01-19-2010, 07:59 AM
Like paying SEIU employees to campaign?

LWW

pooltchr
01-19-2010, 08:08 AM
Or ACORN employees.....well, that might not be a good example since ACORN seems to have a long term steady stream of money coming in!

Steve

eg8r
01-19-2010, 09:42 AM
So you are quoting a guy that does not even know the tax law and accepting what he says as qualified. Good job q. I am not shooting the messenger just because he is a regular on the Daily Kos website but because you quoted (bolded and increased font) on the area where he proves he is not sure but just guessing.


eg8r

Gayle in MD
01-19-2010, 11:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Vagabond</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.....kennedys back stabbed Clintons during the last presidential elections ? just wondering looking at the senate race in massachussetts. </div></div>

Hi there friend, how's it going? No, I don't think Kennedy or the Clinton's have anything to do with what is happening in this Mass. election. I think as most seem to, that it's just another case of the Dem, ran a very poor campaign...and took too much for granted.

My answer, is that what we are seeing is typical for American voting trends. The party in power always loses some seats and takes a bit of a hit by their third or fourth election period.

The problem is the economy, job loses, and Americans who don't stay abreast of the facts, on healthcare, and regarding the accomplishments of our current president in alrady turning around our economic numbers enough to divert the Bush Global Depression.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/opinion/30wed2.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

Health care has a huge impact on our economy, as does our dependence on foreign oil.

We were hemmoraging jobs in the neighborhood of 6 to 7 hundre thousand plus a month during Bush's last months. That has greatly improved.

The dollar seems to be recovering somewhat.

We were teetering on a global depression, which Bush predicted could last as long as a decade. Some are unrealistic regarding the time required to turn around such a devastating economy.

We are just beginning to reach a period of enough stability that Democratics, and the President are able to begin to hold these banks, the greedy ceo bonuses, etc, to account for what they have done to this country. Democratics will need to take a firm stance as regards initiating tighter fail safe measures to prevent the same threats from coming to fruition in the future, which means, bringing back the laws which regulatied the markets quite well for decades, before the Republicans removed oversight from our financila industry.

I believe as the President continues to improve the economy, as we all continue to see job loses drop, the dollar gaining, such as they have consistantly these last months, and more stability economically, leading to some job growth, we will see things improve for Democratic contenders.

The issue of health care has been so completely convoluted by Fox News, and Republican pundits, like Palin, Rush, Hannity, etc., most people don't even understand how important health care reform is to our economic recovery.

As usual, they turned on the propaganda full blast, and their followers, instead of studying the numbers, and predictions of the CBO and the AMA, the Unions, and many other organizations, which would not be supporting health care reform, if they were not convinced that it is essential to America's recovery, and future growth, have been all but left out of the discussion.

I think in the two cases last election when we had Democratic losses, they were situations with contenders, who failed to run the best campaigns. So naturally, here again, Republicans and RW pundits will blow this relativelty small victory, if it turns out that way, into some sort of major sea change, just as they tried to do in the last election, although Democratics actually won seats....

Same ol' same ol'. The election isn't even half over yet, in Mass. yet pundits have claimed a Republican victory for days now...

If there is an upset to their number counting, they'll swear it was all because of ACORN!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Politics as usual. Let's not forget, the lowest presidential approval ratings were broken by Bush, when he went down to 19%....But it didn't happen until the lies caught up to him.

Same thing will happen with these few lost seats....Republicans never do as they say they will, and this guy is so in bed with the corporate thieves, he will soon be exposed. Too bad that too much was taken for granted by the Dems, but then, after Bush, they have had nothing easy to handle.

Most folks in Mass., according to polls I have seen, still have good feelings about the President, and the likability factor, is very important.

He does have three more years, after all, and when things begin to recoup from Bush, I believe we will see a shift in favor of the president, and of the party. It is just taking a lot longer to undo all the damage left over from Bush...which most experts agree, was the worst legacy ever inherited by any president, many say ever in history, and most all say at the very least, since Roosevelt.

Rome wasn't built in a daym and this pesident surely has been handed a very deep recession, but...time will tell.

G.

pooltchr
01-19-2010, 11:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[
I believe as the President continues to improve the economy, as we all continue to see job loses drop,

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Obama has done nothing to improve the economy. In fact, his so called stimulus bill has proven to be a complete failure, as was predicted. (You can't stimulate the economy by taking money out of it in the form of taxes and then putting it back, nor can you stimulate it by borrowing money.)</span>

Let's not forget, the lowest presidential approval ratings were broken by Bush, when he went down to 19%....

<span style="color: #FF0000">That took almost 8 years to happen. Obama has managed to have the fastest decline in approval ratings in recent memory, all in just his first year in office. </span>


Most folks in Mass., according to polls I have seen, still have good feelings about the President, and the likability factor, is very important.
<span style="color: #FF0000"> Likability is worthless if there is no support for his policies. 57% of Americans do not want his healthcare bill to pass. What would make a president and congress believe they can mandate something that the MAJORITY of the population oppose?</span>


G.
</div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">NOte: There is no attack in this post...just facts that dispute your allegations.
Care to respond to the FACTS?

Steve </span>

Gayle in MD
01-19-2010, 12:01 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Vagabond</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.....kennedys back stabbed Clintons during the last presidential elections ? just wondering looking at the senate race in massachussetts. </div></div>

This is what I think it's really all about, Friend.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/opinion/30wed2.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

Fox News distortions and propaganda, along with those who watch Fox, are so out of touch with the facts regarding this health care issue, that they can keep the uneducated complacent, and keep them in the back pockets of the corporate fascist thieves, who are stealing from all of us....

The fact is, we didn't have Bush's Global Depression, thanks to Obama, and jobs losses are declining, the dollar is gaining value, people around the world have gained back a lot of the respect that was lost under Bush, and Republican Leadership, and too many lies have been spread around by the right.

In short, people are confused, afraid, and unarmed with facts...they appareantly don't realize how bad things could actually be right now, in their own lives, without the efforts our President has made to keep their own states going to get through this Bush mess!

Ignorance on parade. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

pooltchr
01-19-2010, 12:24 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Care to respond to the FACTS?

Steve </div></div>

I didn't think so....but I thought I would ask.

Steve

eg8r
01-19-2010, 01:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hi there friend, how's it going? No, I don't think Kennedy or the Clinton's have anything to do with what is happening in this Mass. election. I think as most seem to, that it's just another case of the Dem, ran a very poor campaign...and took too much for granted.</div></div>I have not been watching the tube today but I absolutely agree 100%. How in the world could this race be this close. My guess is that it really will not be in the end and the Dem lady will win.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The party in power always loses some seats and takes a bit of a hit by their third or fourth election period.
</div></div>Boy wasn't this true when W was in power. Now we are in a horrible situation where the Dems have too much power. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If there is an upset to their number counting, they'll swear it was all because of ACORN!</div></div>Someone has to pay. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r