Gov. Sarah Palin charged the state for her children to travel with her, including to events where they were not invited, and later amended expense reports to specify that they were on official business.
The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race, and a trip to New York, where the governor attended a five-hour conference and stayed with 17-year-old Bristol for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel.
The 21-grand figure does not include the hotel expense, either. Poor, beleaguered can't cath-a-break Sarah may owe back taxes on her per diem expenses, Troopergate, wardrobe malfunctions and now this. Is is just me, or is there a pattern of widening gaps between the hockey mom and the privileged, dare I say elite, power-abusing, fibbing governor persona?
Nobody pays that much -
They may be in that tax bracket, but after all their deductions, they never pay that much - in fact, since they can afford to pay a good accountant, they usually pay less than the rest of us.
Also, with Obama's tax plan, even if you add the 3% he is talking about, that's what? Another 7500 - after you figure in your deductions, that ain't gonna be nothing.
And as far as their paying higher sales tax, that is a state tax - not a federal tax. And they choose to buy those more expensive items so that tax is their choice - they don't have to pay it.
MQ still pays more for ASR than other
companies. There was one company out there advertising 3 cpl for ASR. Their add said they need MTs who can "hit the ground running." It was on MTdaily a few days ago. There should be "ASR control" where they can't continue to lower our pay. Remember years ago when people voted for "rent control" and won? Time to sign those petitions for "ASR control."
That may be true about the rape kits, but I don't see any other mayor or former mayor saying that they are a maverick and running for VP.
The government pays for nothing....
...we have hired them to handle certain management tasks with OUR money.
We have grown too large to defend the country with just a militia. We have high-rise buildings and can no longer get by with volunteer fire departments. We need street crews because we have too much roadway, highways and freeways, and no longer can simply neaten up the road that runs past our property. We produce far too much trash to simply take it out back and burn it (if that were even still legal in some areas.) Some elements of modern life have grown just to large and complicated to handle on our own.
We have a system of compulsory schooling now that is doing SUCH a great job educating our children. Kids were far more literate and better educated when the bulk of their learning occurred in the home. Read anything written by John Taylor Gatto - Weapons of Mass Instruction is his most recent book - about the origins of public education.
I quote here what was in an earlier post: *If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until the government gives it to you for free.* What the government dispenses, the government rations. Do you really want a government bureaucrat in control of whether you get surgery or some diagnostic test your doctor says you need? Bad enough you have to fight about it with your insurance company now. You really want to turn this over to the government? Really?
They certainly must for so many MTs to be all atwitter over this plan. Fred Thompson said it perfectly last PM.
So those "moneybags" need to stop griping about MQ and how crappy it pays. You think you have less in your pockets now? You think this crap he's promising is free? How ignorant!
Even he see the unfairness here. Some conservatives are fond of saying that Democrats want to tax the wealthy unfairly, but what I would like to see is the wealthy taxed equally. "Mr. Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent." Here is the entire article. It's a great read. Trust me.
June 28, 2007
Buffett blasts system that lets him pay less tax than secretary
Warren Buffett, the third-richest man in the world, has criticised the US tax system for allowing him to pay a lower rate than his secretary and his cleaner.
Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat fundraiser in New York for Senator Hillary Clinton, Mr Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: “The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you’re in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”
Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent. Mr Buffett told his audience, which included John Mack, the chairman of Morgan Stanley, and Alan Patricof, the founder of the US branch of Apax Partners, that US government policy had accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation.
The comments are among the most signficant yet in a debate raging on both sides of the Atlantic about growing income inequality and how the super-wealthy are taxed.
They echo those made this month by Nicholas Ferguson, one of the leading figures in Britain’s private equity industry, when he criticised tax rates that left its multimillionaire venture capitalists “paying less tax than a cleaning lady”.
Last week senior members of the US Senate proposed to increase the rate of tax that private equity and hedge fund staff pay on their share of the profits, known as carried interest, from the 15 per cent capital gains rate to about 35 per cent.
Lloyd Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, acknowledged in an interview yesterday that there were justified concerns about the huge profits generated by private equity firms and that he worried that income inequality was “poisoning democracy”. He also said that he would be voting for the Democrat candidate at the next election. Mr Blankfein is the highest-paid executive on Wall Street, earning $54 million last year.
Mr Buffett, who runs the investment group Berkshire Hathaway and is widely regarded as the world’s most successful investor, said that he was a Democrat because Republicans are more likely to think: “I’m making $80 million a year – God must have intended me to have a lower tax rate.”
Mr Buffett said that a Republican proposal to eliminate elements of inheritance tax, which raises about $30 billion a year from the assets of about 12,000 rich families, would broaden the disparity between rich and poor. He added that the Republicans would seek to recover lost revenue by increasing taxes for the less prosperous.
He said: “You could take that $30 billion and give $1,000 to 30 million poor families. Or should you favour the 12,000 estates and make 30 million families pay an extra $1,000?”
I know I just took an inhouse job that pays me half what I make at home -
I am getting desperate to ensure that I have at least some income. My home-based job line counts are so low lately and I know it is because people are staying home. I am the only money maker in the family and I have to do something.
I am in college to get a degree to get out of this education, but have at least 3 quarters more before I am employable, and then who knows if I will be able to find a job then or not; with the way things are looking, more than likely NOT...
I wonder how it is going to help/hurt the economy and the illegal alien problem - I mean, will it make them go home or will they just draw more benefits off our government? If they go home, does that hurt or or help us?
WASHINGTON - The Republican Party says it still has a zero-tolerance policy for tampering with voters even as it pays the legal bills for a former Bush campaign official charged with conspiring to thwart Democrats from voting in New Hampshire.
James Tobin, the president's 2004 campaign chairman for New England, is charged in New Hampshire federal court with four felonies accusing him of conspiring with a state GOP official and a GOP consultant in Virginia to jam Democratic and labor union get-out-the-vote phone banks in November 2002.
The Republican National Committee already has spent more than $722,000 to provide Tobin, who has pleaded innocent, a team of lawyers from the high-powered Washington law firm of Williams & Connolly. The firm's other clients have included former President Clinton and Sen. Hillary Clinton and former Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros.
Republican Party officials said they don't ordinarily discuss specifics of their legal work, but confirmed to The Associated Press they had agreed to underwrite Tobin's defense because he was a longtime supporter and that he assured them he had committed no crimes.
"Jim is a longtime friend who has served as both an employee and an independent contractor for the RNC," a spokeswoman for the RNC, Tracey Schmitt, said Wednesday. "This support is based on his assurance and our belief that Jim has not engaged in any wrongdoing."
A telephone firm was paid to make repeated hang-up phone calls to overwhelm the phone banks in New Hampshire and prevent them from getting Democratic voters to the polls on Election Day 2002, prosecutors allege. Republican John Sununu won a close race that day to be New Hampshire's newest senator.
At the time, Tobin was the RNC's New England regional director, before moving to President Bush's 2004 re-election campaign.
A top New Hampshire Party official and a GOP consultant already have pleaded guilty and cooperated with prosecutors. Tobin's indictment accuses him of specifically calling the GOP consultant to get a telephone firm to help in the scheme.
"The object of the conspiracy was to deprive inhabitants of New Hampshire and more particularly qualified voters ... of their federally secured right to vote," states the latest indictment issued by a federal grand jury on May 18.
The Republican Party has repeatedly and pointedly disavowed any tactics aimed at keeping citizens from voting since allegations of voter suppression surfaced during the Florida recount in 2000 that tipped the presidential race to Bush.
Earlier this week, RNC chairman Ken Mehlman, the former White House political director, reiterated a "zero-tolerance policy" for any GOP official caught trying to block legitimate votes.
"The position of the Republican National Committee is simple: We will not tolerate fraud; we will not tolerate intimidation; we will not tolerate suppression. No employee, associate or any person representing the Republican Party who engages in these kinds of acts will remain in that position," Mehlman wrote Monday to a group that studied voter suppression tactics.
Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean on Thursday questioned Mehlman's commitment to the policy. "This is just another example of his say one thing, do another strategy. Ken Mehlman tells crowds his party is against voter fraud and intimidation, while in the backrooms he supports Republican officials who engage in these dirty tricks," Dean said.
Dennis Black and Dane Butswinkas, two Williams & Connolly lawyers for Tobin, did not return calls seeking comment. Brian Tucker, a New Hampshire lawyer on the team, declined comment.
Tobin's lawyers have attacked the prosecution, suggesting evidence was improperly introduced to the grand jury, that their client originally had been promised he wouldn't be indicted and that he was improperly charged under one of the statutes.
Tobin stepped down from his Bush-Cheney post a couple of weeks before the November 2004 election after Democrats suggested he was involved in the phone bank scheme. He was charged a month after the election.
Paul Twomey, a volunteer lawyer for New Hampshire Democrats who are pursuing a separate lawsuit involving the phone scheme, said he was surprised the RNC was willing to pay Tobin's legal bills and that it suggested more people may be involved.
The new development "really raises the questions of who are they protecting, how high does this go and who was in on this," Twomey said.
Federal prosecutors have secured testimony from the two convicted conspirators in the scheme directly implicating Tobin.
Charles McGee, the New Hampshire GOP official who pleaded guilty, told prosecutors he informed Tobin of the plan and asked for Tobin's help in finding a vendor who could make the calls that would flood the phone banks.
Allen Raymond, a former colleague of Tobin who operated a Virginia-based telephone services firm, told prosecutors Tobin called him in October 2002, explained the telephone plan and asked Raymond's company to help McGee implement it.
Raymond's lawyer told the court that Tobin made the request for help in his official capacity as the top RNC official for New England and his client believed the RNC had sanctioned the activity.
His Kids
I know the "C" story is true. As far as the kids go, he has 7 from what I understand. Two boys in the military and 1 or 2 adopted kids. I stated an opinion about his daughters because any man that would disrespect women the way he has (letting "H" be called the "B" word, laughing and not speaking against it, and then calling his wife a "C" publically), has no respect for women (which include his daughters). Then he comes out with this fake persona that he respects women and he welcomes their vote. Please --- anything to win.
We really would not have know about the kids other than
Palin herself putting them before the public like she did, kept the smaller 1 out of school and people questioned as to why they were not in school. Oh, now it is ne're-do-well beau. I remember what a warm reception he got from John welcoming him into the circle. All white trash, both sides.
Now really, kids!!
I think a lot of it has to do with the attempt to incite violence. While Olberman, Maddow, and the MSNBC crew may be left of center, they don't incite violence. Nor do I think Hannity falls into that category, either. Rush, Rev. Phelps, and Michael Savage are names that immediately pop into my head on the conservative end that seem to like to stir up crap. On the other side, I really wish we could find a way to export Sharpton, but I doubt any other country wants him anymore than I do.
Of course, WE are the country that denied Cat Stevens entrance, too, so I guess we can't get too holier than thou about Britain's keeping out the rabble rousers.
Kids - this is funny.
When Vífill Atlason, a 16-year-old high school student from Iceland, decided to call the White House, he could not imagine the kind of publicity it would bring.
Introducing himself as Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson, the actual president of Iceland, Atlason found President George W. Bush's allegedly secret telephone number and phoned, requesting a private meeting with him.
"I just wanted to talk to him, have a chat, invite him to Iceland and see what he'd say," Vífill told ABC News.
A White House official, who asked not to be identified, denied the young man had accessed a private number but instead dialled 202-456-1414, the main switchboard for the West Wing.
Vífill's mother, Harpa Hreinsdottir, a teacher at the local high school, said her son did, in fact, get through to a private phone.
"This was not a switchboard number of any kind," she told ABC News, "it was a secret number at the highest security level."
Vífill claims he was passed on to several people, each of them quizzing him on President Grímsson's date of birth, where he grew up, who his parents were and the date he entered office.
"It was like passing through checkpoints," he said. "But I had Wikipedia and a few other sites open, so it was not so difficult really."
When he finally got through to President Bush's secretary, Vífill alleges he was told to expect a call back from Bush.
"She told me the president was not available at the time, but that she would mark it in his schedule to call me back on Monday evening," he said.
Instead, the police showed up at his home in Akranes, a fishing town about 48 kilometers from Reykjavik, and took him to the local police station, where they questioned the 16-year-old for several hours.
"The police chief said they were under orders from U.S. officials to "find the leak" -- that I had to tell them where I had found the number," he said. "Otherwise, I would be banned from ever entering the United States."
Vífill claims he cannot remember where he got the number.
"I just know I have had it for a few years," he told ABC. "I must have gotten it from a friend when I was about 11 or 12."
Atlason's mother Harpa, who was not home at the time, said she was shocked to find her son had been taken away by the police but could not quite bring herself to be angry with her son.
"He's very resourceful you know," she said. "He has become a bit of a hero in Iceland. Bush is very unpopular here."
Vífill was eventually released into his parent's custody, and no charges have been brought against the high school student.
When ABC verified the number, it was the Secret Service Uniform Division, which handles security for the president.
"If the number were not top secret, why would the police have told me that I will be put on a no-fly list to America?" Vífill asked.
"I don't see how calling the White House is a crime," he added. "But obviously, they took it very seriously."
already and the 4th pregnancy could put her life in peril. Does she allow her other children to go motherless?
Maybe the kind who underwent extensive testing and was told that her child would be born limbless or so developmentally delayed that any kind of life would be miserable?
Maybe the kind who was raped and does not want to bear the child of a rapist, whether she would be able to put the child up for adoption or not.
A woman's body is her body. No one should have the right to tell her what to do with it. There are many reasons to have an abortion. I personally feel that in the above cases, an abortion is a reasonable option. I certainly wouldn't wish any of the scenarios above on anyone. Outlawing abortion in general is wrong. If you want to prevent it from being used as a form of birth control, then by all means put limitations on it, but don't outlaw it completely. Sometimes it is the only choice.
Not pro-abortion but definitely pro-choice. There is a difference.
THis is not about taking anything away from kids...they
still have access to birth control...health departments, planned parenthood, clinics, any number of places. It is common knowledge. You hear about it on television on a daily basis, and television, movies, and the internet are where most kids get their information. And frankly, listen to it much more closely than to their parents. Throwing more federal money into any kind of sex ed and/or abstinence programs to me is a waste of money. That was the original question, did I think federal funds should be used for sex ed and abstinence programs.
No, in this culture we live in today, to remove contraception would be idiotic. Sex has been reduced to "expression," having one partner for life has disappeared, multiple partners are fine, yada yada...in that kind of culture to remove birth control would be nuts. Think what the abortion rate would be if that was done...good grief.
By education and programs that doesn't mean dispensing actual birth control. At many schools kids can get condoms. Nearly every health department in the country will dispense birth control and any planned parenthood place will, and that is not going to change.
If you want to reach kids, put those programs on the internet or introduce that kind of information to the shows the kids watch all the time. If you want the information to get to them, that is where it should be covered.
almost 700 kids in 1 cemetary
On another note, I would rather have been raised by Rosie O'Donnell and her partner than my dysfunctional parents. They are much more "normal" than either of my parents.
The UN is not trying to tell anyone how to raise their kids.
in the idea of addressing global poverty. BTW, you need to do a little boning up yourself on the purpose of the United Nations, what it is, how it works and who benefits before expecting anybody anywhere to engage you in any serious debate on this subject. You have been spending way too much time hanging with the fringe. Trust me on this. There is life after fringe.
Why don't you let your kids decide for themselves
what they want to do. I'm glad I had responsible parents who taught me right from wrong, watched me grow, get married, but I also know that if I wanted to be gay they would love me still the same.
Unfortunately too many parents try to control every single aspect of their kids life, and the kids grow up as biggoted and unloving as their parents. Of course I'm not saying that is you, but you just see it too many times on TV.
Parents believe one thing, so they force their kids to believe the same thing, when all along the parents were pretty messed up.
You need to teach your kids on the different lifestyles people in America have and that's why it makes a great nation (or would you rather have the public floggings of gays like they do in the other countries because they don't share the same viewpoints as you). You need to teach your kids the different lifestyles and what it means as a lifestyle for them. Then let them make their own decisions as to what life they wish to choose for themselves.
You need to stop telling people to get a clue because you obviously don't have one.
Hey Kids! Run for President!
But if you screw up we will prosecute you and make sure you're labeled a criminal the rest of your life!!!
I hardly think that teaching kids...(sm)
how NOT to bash LGBTs is going to "force homosexuality upon your kids." Give me a break! They aren't teaching Peter how to kiss Paul. They're teaching Peter how not to beat up Paul. I think it's really sad that this actually has to be a lessen in school in the first place, and in grammar school at that --- not because of the LGBT issues being brought to light, but because of the parents who have obviously taught their kids that its okay to bash others who are different. How many times have you called an LGBT a bad name in front of your kids? Hmmm....
Lets take care of those kids already here
Some have such loud voices when trying to stop a woman from chosing what decisions to make about HER body but, yet, you hear nothing from these same people when it is shown there is so much child abuse, children living with drug and alcohol addicted parents, children living in poverty, not getting a good education, not getting the immunizations they need, not getting health care, on and on. Lets take care of those already on this earth..
I guess you can't think for yourself. I suppose the kids that just
got arrested for setting churches on fire were *indoctrinated* even though 2 of them are from a Methodist college? I guess it goes you show YOU fear *indoctriation* because you can't think for yourself.
It can end with affordable healthcare for kids.
I would like to see more affordable healthcare for all Americans, but really if kids got free or very affordable healthcare I would be happy. We spend outrageous amounts of money on the space program, the war, gourmet food for Congress, etc. I don't agree with the hoards of money going to those things, but I would think we could ALL AGREE on money being redirected to provide healthcare to all American children, because that is obviously a good and just cause.
Bush was lying about that, as the $83,000 income level limit was not a part of the bill that he vetoed. Also, Democrats already worked with Republicans and compromised quite a bit to come up with a bill that many in both parties agreed upon - too bad only one guy matters, huh? It's a sad day for many struggling middle-class families, but at least the issue has had a big spot light shined upon it - hopefully we can make some much-needed changes to make healthcare more affordable now. All kids deserve healthcare, regardless of how much money their parents make or don't make!!!
Here's a section of a New York Times Article that states that the $83,000 guideline was not a part of the bill that was just vetoed:
"This program expands coverage, federal coverage, up to families earning $83,000 a year. That doesn't sound poor to me," the president told the Lancaster audience. Dorn says that's not exactly right, either. "This bill would actually put new limits in place to keep states from going to very high-income levels. SCHIP money would no longer be available over 300 percent of the federal poverty level, which is about $60,000 for a family of four."
The president gets to make the $83,000 claim because New York had wanted to allow children in families with incomes up to four times the poverty level onto the program. That is, indeed, $82,600. The Department of Health and Human Services rejected New York's plan last month, and under the bill, that denial would stand. White House officials warn, however, that the bill would allow a future administration to grant New York's request.
link to the entire article: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14962685
Come on now...are you saying that if the Obamas had a down's child and he was elected that Michelle should just stay in the white house and raise him and not do what the first ladies normally do? They travel, they give speeches, yada yada.
Palin's husband will be of help. It's not like she is going to be in DC, just she and Trig with no help whatsoever.
Yes, he is a down's baby, but he is perfectly healthy in every other way.
And where are your kids while you're online?
No mother can devote 24/7 to their child, Down or not. I know people with Down children and they work, also. There are wonderful programs to enroll children in, too, and believe me, those mothers NEED a break sometimes. I'm sorry, but I do not believe for one second that someone with children is not capable of a political career. Maybe her husband plans to be home with the children, ever think of that? There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, either. A father is JUST as important in a child's life and development.
What about parents who don't discuss with their kids?
And so you know right off, I'm not a Barack fan nor McCain fan. However, my own personal beliefs aside, I believe "it takes a village to raise a child" and there are FAR too many parents NOT doing their jobs these days, which forces schools, governments, etc. to jump in to help. I see far too many parents who'd just as soon go to the bar than raise their child. There are parents who are apathetic, and there are parents who are embarrassed or ill-informed themselves to teach their kids sex ed. I don't think sex ed is a problem at all in school, so long as it's in the context of health education and not presented to students in a biased manner of some sort. It IS how mammals reproduce and therefore does have a place in education.
God gave us free will and if you try to control the free will of someone else, how is that right? I believe in consequences of free will when someone chooses wrong, which is why we have laws in place. I don't believe it's any one person's or party's place to tell another how to live their life, period.
Personally, I'd like to see more parents do their jobs at home so gov't and schools didn't have to do it for them (and all the rest of us too as a result), and sure, ideally I'd like to see more kids abstaining from sex altogether. But I'm also a realist and know that my beliefs and willpower aren't the same as everyone else's. That's what is supposed to be great about USA.
The reality is that not all kids have the willpower to abstain in the heat of the moment, no matter WHAT their upbringing or what wonderful parents they have. As you said, it's everywhere - on TV, movies, ads, games, you name it! It's in their face now more than ever, so to ignore it and act like it won't ever happen isn't the answer, either. No, I don't know what the answer is, either, but I don't think that's it.
When I saw the video of the kids singing....
and of those boys in fatigues doing their routine....it does remind you of the newsreel footage of the "Hitler youth." Not comparing Obama to Hitler, but the PHENOMENON of Obama. Hitler so mesmerized people he convinced them that Jews were the cause of all their problems...and the people bought it. Using the same old socialist techniques...you find the weakness, the thing that enrages people...and you put a face on it. With Obama it is class warfare. With Hitler it was warfare against Jews. The similarities ARE eery. And it is NOT comparing Obama to Hitler per se...just the phenomenon of Obama followers and Hitler's National Socialist Party. 'Nuff to make the hair on the back of your neck stand up.
Kids are meaner than adults
Talk about a jungle where only the strong survive - makes this board look like a tea party with the queen of England.
I think it would be good for kids to do something constructive -
why would you not want your kids to volunteer in the community to do positive things that would also pay them for college in the long run? And why such bitterness about the fact that he is proposing that idea?
It is not mandatory, so it is your choice, but the country is falling apart because nobody wants to do anything anymore!
My kids do community service
They have participated in numerous community service programs and projects, from collecting and packing items for the homeless to refurbishing parks. They ask to participate in them based on the listings in our newspaper. How very sad for your children that you would not allow them to feel invested in their community and would deny them the wonderful feeling that comes from helping others.
if kids are forced to do it, then adults should be too
x
Yep, I knew it would go from slamming her kids to
nm
Yeah, right. Like he could really send his kids
I don't care if he sends his kids to the moon for school and it costs $900K per trip. Just so long as I don't have to look one more day at the current drooling, vacant-looking, substandard specimen of the human species occupying the Oval Office. Talk about a murky gene pool.
marks the location of current message within thread![Image](http://business.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00145/warren-185x185_145353a.jpg" "Image")
![](http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ya/yahoo_messenger/2005805_57541_1_300x250_lrec_freewwcalls_love.gif")
