TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Breaking News: Bush is not rich!

Breaking News: Bush is not rich!

I think Bush needs to define "rich" at this point:

quote:

Now That's Rich By Al Kamen Monday, July 26, 2004; Page A17 There's always been confusion about how you determine who's rich, middle class or poor. There's rich and super-rich. There's lower, middle and upper middle class. There's working class, working poor and poor. Finally, President Bush weighed in on Tuesday to clarify things with a broad, new definition. Speaking to a campaign crowd in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Bush warned that John F. Kerry was going to blather endlessly about how he was only going to soak the rich to pay for trillions of dollars of new spending. "In the campaign, you'll hear, we're only going to tax the rich," Bush said. "That's what you'll hear. Now, this from a fellow who has promised about $2 trillion of new spending thus far. And only taxing the rich, first of all, creates a huge tax gap, which means buyer beware. "You see, if you can't raise enough by taxing the rich, guess who gets to pay next?" Bush asked. "Yes, the not-rich. That's all of us." So it turns out that Bush, unlike your typical grandsons of senators, sons of presidents and graduates of fancy prep schools, Yale and Harvard business school, is just another "not rich" guy, a regular working stiff. The Bureau of Labor Statistics says the average annual wage for the Cedar Rapids area is $34,600. So that crowd was clearly "not rich." But who else are the "not rich"? Well, Bush last year reported an income of only $822,000, and his assets were worth as much as $19 million. That includes his 1,583-acre ranch in Crawford, Tex. Clearly not rich. But Bush didn't define the minimum wage and assets needed to be considered rich. Would Vice President Cheney be in that class? Cheney reported income of almost $1.3 million and had assets in 2002 worth between $19.1 million and $86.4 million. Surely close, but not quite there. These class divisions are, by definition, subjective and arbitrary. So let's set the standard: Rich means a yearly income of at least $2 million, assets of more than $100 million and ranches larger than 2,000 acres. Everyone else is "not rich." That would mean that "fellow," Sen. Kerry, would be trying to raise those trillions from a relative handful of people, including his own wife. Absolutely impossible. So all of us "not rich" better beware, we're gonna get hammered if Kerry wins. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...anguage=printer

after scraping by to make cash and contacts in the Texas oil fields, he accomplishes...

quote:

1988 October: While helping manage his father's presidential bid, George W. Bush learns that Bush family friend and Fort Worth oil man Eddie Chiles is putting the Texas Rangers up for sale. (His father is elected president in November.) 1989 January: Bush is first mentioned in news reports as a potential candidate to run for governor of Texas in 1990, despite never having held public office. Republican leaders express concern about his lack of credentials and experience. April: Bush helps arrange a syndicate to purchase controlling interest in the Texas Rangers for $89 million. He borrows $500,000 to buy a small stake in the team and convinces the investor group to make him managing general partner. Bush becomes the public face of the team, while co-general partner Rusty Rose assumes control over the financial side. He receives a reported salary of $200,000 and begins lobbying for a new stadium for the club, which plays in a renovated minor-league facility, Arlington Stadium. September: The Rangers fail to make the playoffs. But with new free agent pitcher Nolan Ryan, they post their first winning record in three years (83-79) and surpass 2 million in attendance for the first time in franchise history. 1990 April: Bush buys an additional $100,000 ownership stake in the Rangers. October: Arlington Mayor Richard Greene crafts a deal that will go before voters and devote $135 million toward a new stadium for the Rangers by raising the sales tax by a half-cent. At the time, Greene is among a group of former executives being sued by federal regulators for his role in the widespread savings-and-loan scandal. 1991 January: Arlington citizens, by a 2-to-1 margin, approve public funds for the new $191 million ballpark. Two weeks before the vote, federal regulators dismiss their lawsuit against Greene after he pays a $40,000 penalty. April: The Rangers shepherd through the Texas legislature a bill that creates the Arlington Sports Facilities Development Authority (ASFDA), a quasi-governmental entity that is given the power of eminent domain. Shortly after the bill is signed by new governor Ann Richards, 13 acres of private property are seized for the Rangers' new ballpark, later prompting two lawsuits. Juan Gonzalez and Ivan Rodriguez break in with the Rangers, giving the team two popular stars in Latino communities of North Texas. Both would later become American League MVP award winners. July: Bush buys another $6,302 ownership interest in the Rangers, increasing his financial investment to $606,302. 1993 January: President George H.W. Bush leaves the White House, defeated by Bill Clinton. September: George W. Bush announces his intention to run for governor of Texas in 1994, making the decision after expressing some interest in the baseball commissioner's job that has been vacated by Fay Vincent. October: Nolan Ryan, baseball's all-time strikeout leader, retires after 27 years. Ryan, who had become a Bush friend, later campaigns for him for governor. 1994 April: The Ballpark in Arlington, with its retro touches reminiscent of Baltimore's Oriole Park at Camden Yards, opens to much fanfare. A league-leading average of 40,374 fans attend games in the coming months, best in franchise history. August: The end of the season is canceled due to a labor dispute between owners and players, with the Rangers finishing in first place for the first time in franchise history. Among major-league owners, Bush is perceived as a moderate who worked hard to avoid a work stoppage. November: Bush is elected governor with 53.8 percent of the vote, defeating popular incumbent Ann Richards despite her attacks on the stadium deal and Bush's grasp of issues. (She had declared that it was "difficult to run a race against someone who doesn't have a clue.") December: Before taking office, Bush resigns as managing general partner of the Rangers but keeps his ownership stake in the team. At the time, his share is 1.8 percent equity interest, plus another 10 percent bonus if the team is later sold and the investors get back their original investment plus interest (Rose, the other general partner, gets a 5 percent bonus for his role). 1995 July: Baseball holds its All-Star Game at The Ballpark in Arlington. But the Rangers, like other major-league teams, continue to suffer from the fans' adverse reaction to the labor stoppage. The team averages only 27,582 fans. That, in turn, reduces the value of the franchise to $138 million, from $157 million the year before, according to the annual Financial World magazine evaluation. 1996 October: The Rangers win the American League West, making the playoffs for the first time in franchise history. Attendance rebounds to 36,113 for the team, whose stadium revenues ($25.5 million) are deemed tops in baseball by Financial World. The magazine raises the estimated value of the franchise to $173 million. 1998 June: Tom Hicks purchases the Rangers for $250 million, the second-most ever paid for a Major League Baseball team. With his 10 percent escalator bonus, Bush receives $14.9 million for investment.

look everybody. an American makes do with what he has. lets play the class warfare game! it has such deep meaning
is it about class warfare today Opus?

Sheesh--compared to Kerry/Edwards, Bush/Cheney might as well live in a cardboard box!




Posted a couple of weeks ago...by yours truly


What's your point, Opus? Kerry is still out of his mind to think that he can somehow relate to the "working class" that he is so eager to tell people he represents. Same goes for Edwards.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Sheesh--compared to Kerry/Edwards, Bush/Cheney might as well live in a cardboard box! Posted a couple of weeks ago...by yours truly What's your point, Opus? Kerry is still out of his mind to think that he can somehow relate to the "working class" that he is so eager to tell people he represents. Same goes for Edwards.

Edwards was raised from a working poor family.. dint really get what you said, hence I thought you knew.

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX Edwards was raised from a working poor family.. dint really get what you said, hence I thought you knew.

He's still worth more than both Bush and Cheney. I don't see why it really matters provided the money was earned vs. slept with(Kerry). Why wouldn't we want to elect someone who has made a successful, honest living, achieving the American Dream?

I don't like Edwards, in large part, due to his trial lawyer history. If you've ever sat on a jury, you should know that Trial Lawyers are among the lowest form of life. They exploit emotions for their own riches, usually at a much greater cost to the general public in the form of higher costs, insurance premiums, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Sheesh--compared to Kerry/Edwards, Bush/Cheney might as well live in a cardboard box! Posted a couple of weeks ago...by yours truly What's your point, Opus? Kerry is still out of his mind to think that he can somehow relate to the "working class" that he is so eager to tell people he represents. Same goes for Edwards.

Well we fully know where Bush stands after 4 years so I am more than willing to give Kerry/Edwards the chance to prove what their priorities are about. Sounds to me like the Republicans are getting nervous because Kerry and Edwards actually have called them out on promoting a positive and prosperous American future, united in dealing with our issues at home and abroad, unlike the abrasive, arrogant and condascending tone set by this current administration at home and abroad on behalf of all Americans.

They'll do better in sticking to slinging their mud and questioning the patriotism of Americans as has become the norm for those who speak up against this administration's putrid policies. Is it mere coincidence that their policies are so despised and America is an international pinhada for every thing that goes wrong in the world today, ask ourselves why or maybe we can go on saying we just don't care, how appropriate since that matches the mentality of the current "administration"

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka He's still worth more than both Bush and Cheney. I don't see why it really matters provided the money was earned vs. slept with(Kerry). Why wouldn't we want to elect someone who has made a successful, honest living, achieving the American Dream? I don't like Edwards, in large part, due to his trial lawyer history. If you've ever sat on a jury, you should know that Trial Lawyers are among the lowest form of life. They exploit emotions for their own riches, usually at a much greater cost to the general public in the form of higher costs, insurance premiums, etc.

I take you like Cheney over Edwards... if so, why?!

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX I take you like Cheney over Edwards... if so, why?!

Sorry, I just don't buy the big Cheney conspiracy. I liked him when he was Secretary of State under Bush I, and I continue to like him now. I think he's a smart, successful guy that lefties love to hate.

My primary gripes against the current administration are that they didn't cut spending like I had hoped--yes they increased it substantially, though part of that increase was good because the spending and tax cuts helped reduce the intensity and duration of the recession. I would like to see more fiscal responsibility from them though, particularly since they have majority positions in both houses.

Kerry and Edwards would like to increase the size of the government even more, though, which is even more worrisome to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka I don't like Edwards, in large part, due to his trial lawyer history. If you've ever sat on a jury, you should know that Trial Lawyers are among the lowest form of life. They exploit emotions for their own riches, usually at a much greater cost to the general public in the form of higher costs, insurance premiums, etc.

Gee, well I suppose that Bush and Cheney must have some real prim and proper, honest stand up friends who earned their dollars in real chivalrous ways, astounding all the garbage surrounding Halliburton and their behavior in Iraq. These corporations who are certainly best of friends with the current lot in office would sell their parents for a bottom line profit. If you think that Edwards is a slimeball trial lawyer then what do you make of Cheney and his links to Halliburton and their conduct as well, or its not important because it's all legit and Cheney had nothing to do with them getting the fattest contracts in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Gee, well I suppose that Bush and Cheney must have some real prim and proper, honest stand up friends who earned their dollars in real chivalrous ways, astounding all the garbage surrounding Halliburton and their behavior in Iraq. These corporations who are certainly best of friends with the current lot in office would sell their parents for a bottom line profit. If you think that Edwards is a slimeball trial lawyer then what do you make of Cheney and his links to Halliburton and their conduct as well, or its not important because it's all legit and Cheney had nothing to do with them getting the fattest contracts in Iraq

Of course you have proof of all of this, right? And you can name me how many other companies that have the actual capabilities to rebuild an oil infrastructure like that of Iraq?

Newsflash: The oil is still in Iraq, not in Cheney's swimming pool.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka My primary gripes against the current administration are that they didn't cut spending like I had hoped--yes they increased it substantially, though part of that increase was good because the spending and tax cuts helped reduce the intensity and duration of the recession. I would like to see more fiscal responsibility from them though, particularly since they have majority positions in both houses.

Careful Shakka you're setting yourself up for a classic quote, this has to be the understatement of the year. They have done anything and everything but demonstrate "fiscal responsiblity" Is that a term that even has significance in the jargon of the current leadership, I think the judgement is pretty clear on that. I have this strange feeling that in their eyes deficits are of no significance.

of course cheney frontloaded it. its only the largest most capable oil rigging/safety co. in America. who else could have done the job?
it's called oppurtunity.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Of course you have proof of all of this, right? And you can name me how many other companies that have the actual capabilities to rebuild an oil infrastructure like that of Iraq? Newsflash: The oil is still in Iraq, not in Cheney's swimming pool.

Okay, but you have to do me a favor first name me the cases in which John Edwards swindled doctors out of their money and it was such a flagrant and malicious act on his part that was totally undeserving and frivolous by his clients. I'll be waiting. You talk of proof but offer none in your claims as well. You should be fully aware of the links between Cheney and Halliburton. If you are telling me that this is the only American company capable of conducting such a task in Iraq I question your knowledge of the subject. Other companies include Baker Hughes, Flowserve, Fisher-Rosemount and Schlumberger all with strong capabilities and subsidiaries.

Maybe you are right though, Cheney had no interest, desire, or agenda to see his old company and his friends benefit from the Iraq reconstruction, how naive of me to believe such a concept, I mean there were weapons in Iraq as well but for some reason I don't believe so, wonder why.

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Okay, but you have to do me a favor first name me the cases in which John Edwards swindled doctors out of their money and it was such a flagrant and malicious act on his part that was totally undeserving and frivolous by his clients. I'll be waiting. You talk of proof but offer none in your claims as well. You should be fully aware of the links between Cheney and Halliburton. If you are telling me that this is the only American company capable of conducting such a task in Iraq I question your knowledge of the subject. Other companies include Baker Hughes, Flowserve, Fisher-Rosemount and Schlumberger all with strong capabilities and subsidiaries. Maybe you are right though, Cheney had no interest, desire, or agenda to see his old company and his friends benefit from the Iraq reconstruction, how naive of me to believe such a concept, I mean there were weapons in Iraq as well but for some reason I don't believe so, wonder why.

Flowserve and Fisher-Rosemount? Please. They're a bit more specialized and nowhere near large enough to take on such a task. We're talking about an entire country bigger than California, not the state of Rhode Island. However if memory serves, Flowserve was involved with putting out a lot of the oil fires that resulted when Saddam's loyalists were setting fire to the oil reserves. Baker-Hughes primarily operates rigs and does more E&P related stuff. Haliburton builds energy infrastructure. They're the most qualified. Schlumberger could probably do it too--OK, so we've come up with 1 alternative. In any event, sure, the administration probably knows the ins and outs of Halliburton much better than that of Schlumberger. Does that mean that they should be disqualified in preference of a company that is not as well known by the people coming up with the plans? Cheney does not own anymore HAL stock specifically so that people won't point to a conflict of interest.

As far as Edwards is concerned, it's now been widely publicized about his lawsuits over Cerebral Paulsey and the now "junk science" that was used to garner huge verdicts. Maybe he didn't know as much back then due to available studies, and maybe, just maybe, Bush didn't lie. In any event, all of the C-sections that have resulted, in part, due to Edwards' cases haven't resulted in any noticable drop-off in Cerebral Paulsey, but have resulted in higher risk deliveries for mothers. The doctors aren't the ones that pay in those situations--it's the insurance companies that pay, and they than hand that cost on to you, me and the rest of John Q Public, meaning we all get the wonderful result of higher insurance premiums. The only person that came out a winner in those trials was Edwards--that's how it works. That's why we NEED tort reform to cap runaway jury verdicts. Edwards will never let that happen.

The democratic solution to higher insurance premiums is to throw more money on the problem, which is the equivalent of throwing gas on the fire. It will only bankrupt our public account even more and cost every person more of their individual freedoms and rights, while doing nothing to attack the root of the problem.

But go ahead and defend a trial lawyer if that's what you really believe.


Government doesn't exist to help the people. Government exists to maintain conditions whereby people can help themselves.

Ya know, I wasn't necessarily implying in any way that Kerry's finances were somehow different from Bush's. I'm not sure how I or anyone else could claim as much.

What I was doing was pointing out a little tidbit spoken by Bush:

"You see, if you can't raise enough by taxing the rich, guess who gets to pay next?" Bush asked. "Yes, the not-rich. That's all of us."

Are they, or are they not (Kerry and Bush) in the same tax bracket?

Does "us" imply Bush is a part of the "not-rich" group?

It was a bit of a misspeak on Bush's part, and I know he was really tryin' to relate to the members of the crowd. He just kinda needs to watch his pronouns a little more.

Sheesh, talk about gettin' your nuts raked across the coals!

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.