The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Archives

John McCain

Cindy McCain Releases 2007 Tax Return

By Michael D. Shear
Cindy McCain, the wife of Republican presidential candidate John McCain, paid $1.13 million in taxes during 2007 on income of more than $4.1 million.

McCain's campaign released a two-page summary of her tax return on Friday evening, saying in a statement that she had received an extension until Oct. 15 because she had not received all the information needed to file by the April deadline.

The tax return indicates that most of Cindy McCain's income -- about $2.9 million -- came from "rental real estate, royalties, partnerships, S corporations, trusts, etc." The heir to a beer distributorship, McCain also has several homes, including rental properties.

Cindy McCain also reported $746,000 in capital gains and a $297,000 salary.

The couple has always reported their income separately. John McCain had previously released his tax returns for 2006 and 2007, showing income of about $500,000, largely from his Senate salary, book royalties and retirement income.

Cindy McCain had initially resisted releasing her tax returns, citing disclosure the couple made in Senate filings. But she later relented.

Posted at 7:20 PM ET on Oct 17, 2008  | Category:  John McCain
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: McCain Called Joe the Plumber Today | Next: McCain Campaign Launches Pre-emptive Strike on NYT


Add 44 to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



LKM2:

Do you still think that the McCains give away all that money "to keep it"?

Posted by: JakeD | October 19, 2008 1:03 PM

Michelle Bachmann is an incredibly stupid individual. Her escapades of attacking constituents in bathrooms, hiding behind bushes during rallys (all caught on tape)
making the most uninformed statements anyone can make, kissing GWB on camera and much more only speak for itself. Bachmann is holding out at this time on an extremely important piece of legislation, HR 1279 which is designed to help Direct Support Professionals (DSP's), in the private sector, gain livable wages and health insurance. Bachmann apparently does not believe that hard working DSP's, who work with the disabled, senior citizens, the seriously mentally ill, veterans, etc. are not worthy of livable wages. There is an average of $9.00 per hour difference in wages between DSP's in the private sector (where most of the jobs are) and state paid DSP's for doing the exact same job. And as far as John McCain's character, leoruler hit the nail on the head! Here is a man who dumped his first wife because she was disabled from a car accident of which she did not want to worry her husband about. John McCain knows nothing about disabilities or challenges because he was spoiled and silver spoon fed his whole life. His temper, lack of compassion, ignorance of the "real world"
and abuse is all coming back around to him. Character, the man and his wife (the McCain's) have none!!!!!

Posted by: LKM2 | October 18, 2008 5:58 PM

Please read this article and get to know the Real John McCain. This is sad! You can tell a lot about a man’s character by the way he treats his love ones…..
This is a quote, but read the article from the link below...
"Ted Sampley, who fought with US Special Forces in Vietnam and is now a leading campaigner for veterans’ rights, said: ‘I have been following John McCain’s career for nearly 20 years. I know him personally. There is something wrong with this guy and let me tell you what it is – deceit.
‘When he came home and saw that Carol was not the beauty he left behind, he started running around on her almost right away. Everybody around him knew it.
‘Eventually he met Cindy and she was young and beautiful and very wealthy. At that point McCain just dumped Carol for something he thought was better.
‘This is a guy who makes such a big deal about his character. He has no character. He is a fake. If there was any character in that first marriage, it all belonged to Carol."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html

Posted by: leoruler | October 18, 2008 4:58 PM

Time for a donation to:

http://www.tinklenberg08.com/

"Bachmann comments raise at least $150k for opponent

It's unlikely that the American media will produce the "penetrating exposé" into whether members of Congress are "pro-America or anti-America" that Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) called for Friday, but there has been at least one consequence she may not have expected: Her congressional opponent, Democrat El Tinklenberg, has been showered with cash from all parts of the country — America, that is — as apparently insulted Americans respond to Bachmann's request."

"Bachmann on Friday told MSNBC's Chris Matthews that Barack Obama is not the only anti-American member of Congress. "The news media should do a penetrating exposé and take a look. I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out: Are they pro-America or anti-America? I think people would love to see an exposé like that," she said."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1008/Bachmann_comments_raising_money_for_opponent.html

Posted by: nowanna3 | October 18, 2008 3:58 PM

WHAY HYPOCRICY!
This income is a drop in the bucket compared to 2004 Democrat Presidential nominee John Kerry's wife heiress Teresa Heinz. And of course, the BIAS MEDIA NEVER pushed for her taxes and they NEVER pushed for Barack Obama to show his Daily schedules and Appointments while in the State and U S Senate! BUT they DID for Hillary Clinton? And then put all their staff to work to try and find something! Can you imagine the names on the appointment schedule that Obama must have had? Rezko, Wright, Ayers....
WHY THE OBAMA MEDIA? BECAUSE HE BOUGHT YOU? OR YOUR OWN SELFISH REASONS?
This bias has ruined the media. You, the Media, have lost ALL creditability.

Posted by: Texan2007 | October 18, 2008 3:44 PM

I suspect from reading these comments that the commentors are mostly young. Some long term observations:

Clinton's proven formula is actually Reagan's so called (by detractors) trickle down tax plan, with some minor bumps in tax brackets.

Obama's tax plan is not relevant, we need to know the Pelosi and Reid tax plan as Congress makes tax law. You must suspend disbelief to think that they will only raise taxes on the top 5% of the population. Does anybody believe Obama will veto his Congress?

Clinton ran on a middle class tax cut in 1992, then the democratic Congress promptly raised taxes on the middle class.

Politicians always talk about taxing the rich but never define the rich. My observation over the past 40 years is that anybody with a good paying job is "rich" by political definition. The middle class is taxed for the same reason Willie Sutton robbed banks; "that's where the money is."

The importance of high tax rates on corporations and small business owners has nothing to do with "fair" or "fat cats". By taxing 35-45% of profits on business enterprises, it is difficult to impossible for businesses to retain enough capital to fund their growth and operations. Therefore, business must operate on borrowed money. Can you say "credit crises"?

The prosperity of the middle class is driven by the success of business. Burdening business with taxes may increase the prosperity of the politically favored class in the short run, but the long run consequence is to beggar the middle class.

Posted by: STEVEND2 | October 18, 2008 2:29 PM

LMM48...Well said!.

Posted by: LKM2 | October 18, 2008 1:54 PM

Ok, McShame states he understands the needs of Americans, although he refuses to to refer to "middle class" in his speeches.

He said in the second debate that he was raised mostly by his mother because his Admiral father was abroad. For those who do not know about how those with ranks of Admiral or General live, well the saying "raised with a silver spoon" is accurate.
McShame forgot to mention the maid, the driver, the Admiral assistant-usually a LTJG or LT, and the cook in addition to his mother in their household.

McShame is NOT ONE OF US (MIDDLE TO LOW INCOME BRACKETS)NOR HE UNDERSTANDS THE NEEDS OF THE AVERAGE AMERICAN, INCLUDING HIS JOE THE PLUMBER." And Palin, she is not any middle class Jane sixpack- anyone with assets WORTH 2.1 million fails to be cataloged as MIDDLE CLASS.- she would be more Jane Champagne. Of course they are fighting Obama's tax plan, they fall in the $250k and above mark...

Posted by: LMM48 | October 18, 2008 1:40 PM

CoolPillow:

Michelle Obama's.

Posted by: JakeD | October 18, 2008 11:42 AM

The fact is Obama's tax plan is just a return to the PROVEN system Bill Clinton used during the prosperity of his term in office. Bill Clinton left office with huge budget surpluses.
-Seemstone
?????????????????

From the SanFrancisco Chronicle

Social Security rehab died first under Clinton
Lewinsky scandal, impeachment ended his overhaul attempt
Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau

Monday, April 11, 2005


Seven years ago, the first Baby Boomer president traveled the country to warn that his generation's impending retirement -- 76 million people, equal to the populations of California, Texas and Florida combined -- would bankrupt the generations to follow.

"It would be unconscionable if we failed to act," President Bill Clinton said at a forum in 1998, when he made fixing the nation's retirement program a top priority of his second term.

Clinton's efforts then, in light of President Bush's now, induce an extraordinary sense of déjà vu.

Clinton appointed a bipartisan commission, which delivered in 1997 three options to save the giant retirement program. They included a now-familiar list of possible benefit cuts, from changing indexing formulas to raising the retirement age.

One of the options would have allowed workers to divert 5 percentage points of their payroll taxes to personal accounts -- the first such proposal by a government commission.

Clinton started campaigning for changes, without saying what he endorsed. "I don't want to dodge any of that," he said, but "if I advocate a specific plan right now, then all the debate will be about that. The first thing we've got to do is get the American people solidly lined up behind change."

So he traveled the country in 1998, giving speeches, radio addresses, and holding town hall meetings with young workers and retirees.

He warned that it is better to "fix the roof when the sun is shining," and ran through the familiar arithmetic of the declining number of workers supporting every retiree. He urged finding ways to allow poorer workers to build wealth so they could "own a share of our nation's prosperity."

He pleaded for bipartisanship, promising that all ideas were on the table.

But he said there were really only three options: "We can raise payroll taxes again, which no one wants to do because the payroll tax is regressive ... We can cut benefits ... or we can work together to try to find some way to increase the rate of return."

Seemstone (you seem to have stone for a brain)- CLINTON SAID NO ONE WANTS TO DO WHAT OBAMA WANTS TO DO BECAUSE IT'S REGRESSIVE!!!

Posted by: thecannula | October 18, 2008 11:24 AM

What is more disturbing?
Cindy McCain's tax returns or Michelle Obama's (poorly written) Princeton thesis:

"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. "I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second."


The thesis, titled "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community" and written under her maiden name, Michelle LaVaughn Robinson, in 1985, has been the subject of much conjecture on the blogosphere and elsewhere in recent weeks, as it has been "temporarily withdrawn" from Princeton's library until after this year's presidential election in November. Some of the material has been written about previously, however, including a story last year in the Newark Star Ledger.


Obama writes that the path she chose by attending Princeton would likely lead to her "further integration and/or assimilation into a white cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant."


Posted by: CoolPillow | October 18, 2008 10:53 AM

The fact is Obama's tax plan is just a return to the PROVEN system
Bill Clinton used during the prosperity of his term in office.
Bill Clinton left office with huge budget surpluses.

McCain's tax plan is just an extension of the PROVEN failure of the Bush tax system of rewarding the wealthy and corporations at the expense of the middle class. The middle class is now cleaning up his mess.

People like to argue theory and statistics but it's as simple as this: Are you better off now then you were eight years ago?

Posted by: seemstome | October 18, 2008 10:50 AM

LKM2:

Please update your talking points -- the current attack on the McCain's charitable giving is that it goes to their children's schools -- it doesn't even make sense that they GIVE IT AWAY to "keep it". Now, if you had said to "store treasure in Heaven", I would have bought that.

Posted by: JakeD | October 18, 2008 10:10 AM

Chritable donations are designed to lower taxes and are just another way of getting your money back. Anyone who would assume that the McCain's really care about the charitable organizations need to wake up and open their eyes. Cindy McCain is a fraud who has stolen from her own charities. The McCain's are true republican's living their almighty motto of "oppress the middleclass and make more money!!!!"

Posted by: LKM2 | October 18, 2008 8:41 AM

To Techrat, by looking at your comments, it appears you are probably a 20-something who does not know what he is talkig about but spouts the socialist rhetoric and talking points. The Middle East has been a mess for years. Who knows where things might have gone if we sat with our head in the sand and did nothing? Maybe if Bill Clinton had given the order to shoot Bin Laden when special ops had him in their sights, we would not have had 9/11 or be where we are today. I agree that exec salaries and golden parachutes are out of hand; they should be tied to performance. No, these guys may not work thousands of hours a week (no one does) but they run companies that generate profits for their shareholders, and if you have a retirement plan, you want the stocks in it to do as well as possible, don't you? I don't think, however, that when you are forced out for poor performance (company is losing money, doesn't perform as you claim, e.g., Franklin Raines who lied about Fannie earnings to boost his bonuses), then the exexs should not get those golden parachutes or bonueses. A golden parachute should be for an exec who is doing a good job but whose position is eliminated because the company is bought or some similar situation. Techrat, you sound like the kind of person who - when you get what you want, a socialist society - are going to complain about that. Why don't you rent the movie "Reds" because it's a great depiction of how what sounds good in theory turns out to be crap in reality (and it is based on a true story during the Russian Revolution).

Posted by: rld2 | October 18, 2008 8:17 AM

I love the comments about giving to his "rich" friends. Did the aricle talk about the hundreds of thousands of dollars the McCains give to charity?If you want to talk about hypocrisy, find Obama's returns for 2000 to 2006. The actual schedules and returns are on-line; just Google. Let's see - during the years he made $250,000 to $300,000, he gave under $2,500 per year! That's not even 1%. Even taking into consideration his net inocme is less than $250,000, he could have given more than that, especially since he says it is fair and patriotic to pay more taxes if you earn that much. I bet his policies will increase taxes for those earners by more than $2,500 per year. When he made $1.7 million and around $1 million in 2005 and 2006, he still gave only $73,000 at most. Taking taxes into consideration, even if he only netted $750,000, that's still a paltry sum from someone who wants everyone else to give to those less fortunate. And for those who think your taxes are not going to be affected because you don't make $250,000 - think again. He wants to let the tax cuts expire, and to pay for all his programs he is going to have to get it somewhere. Soon "rich" will be defined in the $100,000's. (Also, when he starts taxing businesses, you will pay more for products and services.) I suggest you keep you returns and schedules and as a test, run your taxes under Obama's plan and the existing plan using same income and facts, just so you can see the difference it will make.

Posted by: rld2 | October 18, 2008 8:08 AM


IF PALIN IS SO QUALIFIED...

Then why didn't she run for president?

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 18, 2008 7:12 AM

I love how all you cretins prattle on about how Obama is going to take your hard earned money and redistribute the wealth.

Really?

Are all of you making $250,000 per year? Damn, I must be doing something wrong. I'm a computer geek with a college education and I'm only making $80,000.

And I work a lot of hours per week. More than 40. More than 50 usually.

So I figure that to earn those millions you guys are getting, you must be working really hard.

Like, 100 hours per week or more.

I'm sure those billionaires are working really, really hard, like thousands of hours per week.

Wait a minute, there aren't thousands of hours in a week.

So, what amount of work are they doing that justifies that kind of income?

Do you really think the CEO of a company works 400 times harder than you?

He doesn't. In fact, he probably works far less than you do. I worked for a company where the CEO was paid in the tens of millions per year, and the guy it turns out was smoking pot and playing bridge while the company faltered.

And he still walked away with hundreds of millions over the course of his tenure while he drove the company into the ground.

Really now, was he working hard for that cash?

Posted by: techrat | October 18, 2008 5:32 AM

The Republicans "redistribute wealth" as well. From 99% of America to their Rich Friends.

Witness how Dick Cheney redistributed Wealth from our tax dollars to no-bid contracts in his Haliburton Company, making him wealthy beyond measure.

Witness how "oil man Bush" redistributed our hard-earned money to his Saudi Arab Terrorist Friends via The Carlyle Group to the tune of 700 Billion per year, by destanblizing the Middle East and making the price of Oil shoot through the roof!

Are you happy paying $4 a gallon for gas? Who's fault is that? Maybe someone who has an oil-tanker named after her?

You can talk all you want about Socialism, but what it's really all about is just the rest of us trying to get some of our money back after being robbed blind by the millionaires and billionaires.

Posted by: techrat | October 18, 2008 5:24 AM

What is it with the Republican conservative "base", that only REAL AMERICANS, that are patriotic, have to be ignorant small-minded, racist, gay-bashing, gun-toting rednecks who are proud of their stupidity and can't even form english sentences?

Look at how the right wing media have twisted everything. Nowadays, you can't run for president unless you drop "g"'s from every sentence, or speak like a child. If you even attempt to use a vocabulary higher than 4th grade, you're an "elitist".

I don't get it. Is America supposed to be "number One" because it can't count any higher?

How are we going to compete in the world if we're the dumbest country on Earth?

You guys need to get it out of your heads that education isn't "elitist", and being able to communicate clearly isn't a vice, it's an advantage.

Stop thinking about who you'd rather have a beer with for president, and start thinking about which candidate has the brains to help us get us out of the mess we're in.

If we keep putting dumbasses in the oval office, then we get what we deserve.

Posted by: techrat | October 18, 2008 5:14 AM

thecannula wrote:

Hey Camp Obama-

Blah, blah, blah...

----------------------------------------

Hmm, yeah, I'd take whatever the New York Post says as gospel. Let's just give the benefit of the doubt and say it is true, so what? Do you think Cindy and John ate at Nathan's or the Automat? Do you know who paid the bill? No. But not knowing the facts doesn't seem to be very troublesome does it?

Posted by: wes1155 | October 18, 2008 2:59 AM


NYPOST: October 17, 2008 --

THOUGH he's battling GOP accusations that he's an Ivy League elitist, Barack Obama has a lifestyle of the rich and famous, like TV show host Robin Leach , who always signed off, 'Champagne wishes and caviar dreams!' While he was at a meeting at the Waldorf-Astoria at 4 p.m. Wednesday, Michelle Obama called room service and ordered lobster hors d'oeuvres, two whole steamed lobsters, Iranian caviar and champagne...

Hey Camp Obama-
Some of your $5 donations to Obama and the Palestinians $1000
donations went to Caviar and Champagne on Obama's room service tab at the Waldorf Astoria last night....I hope he saved some to give to ACORN to use in Ohio to bribe more young "voters" to register 72 times!

Posted by: thecannula | October 18, 2008 2:12 AM

Hurt2008:

You seem like a nice person, but you are dealing in stereotypes, not real things and people.

Will Rogers said, "In America, it's not a crime to be poor -- but it might as well be."

There are no poor people living high on the hog because of huge government subsidies. That's a fairy tale conservatives tell each other. I don't see any of them quitting their jobs to live off government checks, though.

What we're talking about is whether the middle class wants to subsidize more tax cuts for the very wealthiest citizens. Look at the income charts over the last several years. The poor are poor and stay poor, just like always. The middle class used to get better every year, but now they stay the same or get worse. The only class that's doing well are the very richest. And McCain wants to give them another tax cut. Obama thinks maybe it's time for them to help out the rest of us a bit, before we look like Haiti with a few rich families living in walled estates surrounded by the starving beggars that used to be called the middle class.

Is that socialism or common sense? Because Eisenhower taxed our very richest citizens at 91%, and no one ever called him a socialist. Obama wants to tax them something in the thirties, and everyone says he's a socialist.

Posted by: nodebris | October 18, 2008 1:46 AM

wes1155:

I am not a Republican -- I am a registered Independent -- so, I can see the good in Buckley AND Dershowitz.

Posted by: JakeD

------------------------------------------

Me too JakeD, but in my state we don't register as independents unless you ARE an Independent. :) Unfortunately it also means independent voters don't get to participate in the primaries.

I agree though, I have voted for republicans and I have voted for democrats and I have voted for neither and written in my choice. Frankly I don't much care for dogma no matter which direction it comes from and a good idea or policy is still good no matter who proposes it and what their party affiliation is.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 18, 2008 1:38 AM

Hurt2008,

Maybe you and others need to listen more closely. What you will hear is Obama of the two candidates for president, is the one who consistently stresses not only the government's responsibility and accountability, but also for the individual. It is actually a very bold assertion for him to make during an election.

It wasn't only the government or fat cat Wall Streeters or greedy mortgage brokers who got us into this mess, it was everyone who was all too willing to live beyond their means. Not only the low income people who couldn't afford a house, but people who were buying second, third and fourth properties to turn them quickly for a profit and ended up getting stuck with them.

All those who willingly participated in this fiscal debauchery are collectively responsible for this mess. Whether it be buying a house you can't afford, buying a property to turn a quick profit, buying too much Chinese made junk you don't need with money you don't have at Wal Mart or creating securities no one can understand or failing to regulate where it is called for.

The only way this will finally be solved is people are going to have to at least as perceived in their minds, sacrifice if living within your means is sacrificing. What a novel concept, saving to buy something rather than impulsively purchasing it.

And were do you come off about Obama's heath care plan? You'd should actually read about it rather than get it filtered. Which is something I find very disingenuous about McCain. He has no idea what it means or will mean to be without heath coverage, he's set for life being a member of congress, before that he was covered in the military. His reference to "Cadillac" health care coverage is irritating and so far out of touch with reality. I suppose it is an easy claim to make for someone who has such coverage and has it gratis for life.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 18, 2008 1:32 AM

wes1155:

I am not a Republican -- I am a registered Independent -- so, I can see the good in Buckley AND Dershowitz.

Posted by: JakeD | October 18, 2008 1:11 AM

Hurt2008 wrote: "The more we talk about BO's economic policy, the more I feel like as if I were living in the middle east."

Yeah, but that's just because you don't know anything about either economics or the Middle East.

Posted by: nodebris | October 18, 2008 1:03 AM

I've read plenty, wes1155.

Posted by: JakeD

-------------------------------------

If you have then you must realize W.F.B. would be railing against the so called conservatives of today. I have to give Parker credit because I believe she hit the nail squarely on the head. By the standards applied these days Buckley would assuredly be called elitist.

Heck I used to feel he was rather snobbish when I was a kid watching his show on PBS way back when, but he was intelligent and articulate and although I mostly disagreed with him he could be convincing. The difference was Buckley and his peers would argue civilly, today it all seems to be divisively. Today's Republican party is not the one he and his peers belonged to.

I do so miss the days when the moderates of both major parties were in the majority. I hope we can return to it again. Personally, even though you may have already voted for McCain, if Obama does win, I believe he is going to be much more of a pragmatic moderate than many people, on the left and the right, believe.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 18, 2008 1:02 AM

I can't believe Sarah Palin called certain parts of the country UnAmerican. Look at the words she used. Pro American, Real Americans, and Best of America. What kind of Right Wing nut is Sarah Palin to be running for VP and insulting the same folks she wants to vote for her. I guess its only Obama supporters or anybody who doesn't support their robo calls and low road campaign tactics. I think the media is taking this too lightly. Sarah Palin during a fund raiser said that only certain parts of the country are patriotic and real Americans and she's running to be VP and proberly president. Thats very alarming and I think she needs to explain exactly which part of America does she think is UnAmerican or less patriotic. This is starting to become a narrative. On Chris Mathews today congresswoman Michelle Bockwman said that congress should be integregated on who's American and anti-American. Now Sarah Palin is stating that only certain parts of America are Pro America. This follows 3 weeks of attacks from the Mccain/Palin campaign that questioned Obama's patriotism. The republicans and Mccain/Palin campaign should be questioned about their patriotism its the Republican party that has made the economy worst with their deregulation and their Right Wing policies for the rich. Its the Republican Party that has us in 2 wars thats costing us Billions a month. How patriotic is the Republican Pary when the leader of their Party is leaving the country with 2 wars with no resolution, 11 trillion in debt, and a economy in turmoil? Their the ones if anybody who's patriotism should be in quesion. I think if Mccain/Palin were in the White House the country would be worst with their radical Right Wing beliefs and their decisive nature. KEEP MCCAIN/PALIN OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE. WHY HASN'T THE MEDIA ASK MCCAIN ABOUT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH GORDON LIDEY? IT TOOK DAVID LETTERMAN A NIGHT SHOW COMEDIAN TO GIVE MCCAIN A REAL INTERVIEW. THE MOST EFFECTIVE INTERVIEW MCCAIN HAS HAD THROUGHOUT THIS CAMPAIGN.

Posted by: amosdefnails | October 18, 2008 12:56 AM

[nodebris] We Americans have big hearts and many are stepping forward to help the needy as well as those who are less fortunate. But, if it a free handout without any sense of responsibility being advocated, that handout is socialism. If one has a job, pays taxes, and still can not afford health care insurance, then the government should step forward to help him. I think that is reasonable and he deserves it. That is America. On the other hand, if one does not want to work and pays no taxes and the government takes away the hard-owned money from those working Americans and hand it out to him in the name of tax cuts plus a free windfall health care insurance package like Obama is talking about, I think that is not right and that is un-America. You may not know that in the last debate the media failed miserably to point out that more than 40% of those Obama said will receive tax cuts DO NOT pay taxes at all! That kind of policy will surely bring our country down the drain.

Posted by: Hurt2008 | October 18, 2008 12:53 AM

I've read plenty, wes1155.

Posted by: JakeD | October 18, 2008 12:50 AM

The more we talk about BO's economic policy, the more I feel like as if I were living in the middle east.

Posted by: Hurt2008

-----------------------------

How so?

Posted by: wes1155 | October 18, 2008 12:44 AM

I'm in San Diego. I haven't read Atlas Shrugged.

Posted by: JakeD

-----------------------------

That's right! San Diego. I almost moved there when I was working for a non-military subsidiary of General Dynamics years ago. The headquarters were out in Mission Valley and they used to put us up at the Oakwood Apartments over by Mission Bay (actually I guess it was technically Fiesta Bay). Sweet deal being in San Diego on per diem!

Friends of mine had moved out earlier and when I started looking at housing (in the late 80's mind you) the only thing I could have afforded was out in El Cajon. No thanks! Oh well, I enjoyed my many visits. Later it would be visits to my ex-in laws up in Rancho Santa Fe.

Anyway, if you really want to understand the philosophical underpinnings of the Buckley inspired conservative movement I would highly recommend reading Atlas Shrugged. Yes and suffer through Ayn Rand's inserted conservative philosophical ramblings which are included in the book. Most conservatives I know found that scetion difficult to get through, but it is worth it. If you read it in small doses your brain doesn't become too numb.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 18, 2008 12:42 AM

Well, actually, no, the return doesn't report her salary as $297,500. That's a "community income" split of her wages and her husband's. But Eastern journalists don't understand marriage laws in some Western states.

Posted by: RossPhx | October 18, 2008 12:41 AM

The more we talk about BO's economic policy, the more I feel like as if I were living in the middle east.

Posted by: Hurt2008 | October 18, 2008 12:25 AM

What makes Democrats socialists while Republicans aren't?

Is it redistribution of wealth? Because Republicans redistribute wealth also.

Is it belief in social programs? Because Republicans vote for and initiate new social programs all the time.

Really, I'm wondering. Why are Democrats socialists and Republicans not?

Posted by: nodebris | October 18, 2008 12:13 AM

thecanulla spewed: "pray tell me how you "CUT" the bottom 30% who currently pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX under your friend and mine, George W Bush?"

Give'em a fricken loan to buy their bosses plumbing business. That way EVERYONE can make $250K/yr. -notoriousflavio
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Hey "Nosfaratu"-

The Wizard gave the Scarecrow a diploma instead of a brain - I see you got a BOLD font key!
You go make the money to hand out 250k loans and let me know how it works out for ya-
I'm going to lay off a few workers and toil in my Rezko Memorial Side Yard garden, in order to cut both my outlay and my hours at work instead of giving my hard earned cash to Obama to fund ACORN and AYERS related education programs!


Posted by: thecannula | October 18, 2008 12:12 AM

I'm in San Diego. I haven't read Atlas Shrugged.

Posted by: JakeD | October 17, 2008 11:50 PM

[thenotoriousflavio]: once there is a trickle-on effect as it is decorated now in the BO's policy and the government begins to take the money away from those hard working Americans so that it can distribute it evenly for everyone, I would ask you what kind of message it is sending out to the American people, especially those who are trying to do a little better every day? Do you think that can lead America to be better and stronger by the day? Is this the change BO is talking about? It is really scary. Not to mention other potential ramifications, the hard reality is that the crowd waiting for handouts will grow even bigger by the minute under the BO's socialized policy. We all have witnessed what the entitlement and welfare programs have transformed to. I would trust the big hearts of Americans in deciding the best use of their hard-owned money rather than the government. I have a family and raise two kids and now BO is telling me I am about making too much! Is this America?

Posted by: Hurt2008 | October 17, 2008 11:40 PM

I golfed today at least.

Posted by: JakeD

---------------------------------

You Republican types and your golf. I'll send my brother out to Texas and you both can play a round. :)

I'm curious, what with all the talk of Christopher Buckley, Kathleen Parker and thinking about William F. who I didn't always (ok rarely) agree with, but still respected because he could articulate his position, I wonder how many so called conservatives have ever read Atlas Shrugged? Have you ever read it? I have but than I'm a train nut and it was the vehicle not the politics which I found interesting.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 17, 2008 11:35 PM

My family could live the next 20 years on less than Cindy McCain paid in taxes last year. I don't understand people who make that much money and are crying about a 2-3 percent increase in their taxes. I don't understand why people like me can't get a break after working hard, and people who sit on their ass collecting huge paychecks are whining. Cindy and John should come live in my nieghborhood for a month or two and see what real people have to do everyday to make ends meet.

Posted by: tommyd60 | October 17, 2008 11:29 PM

I golfed today at least.

Posted by: JakeD | October 17, 2008 11:29 PM

Hey JakeD! :) Hope you are behaving yourself.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 17, 2008 10:52 PM

Hi wes1155 : )

Posted by: JakeD | October 17, 2008 10:49 PM

Why is it when someone talks about giving tax breaks to 95% of the tax paying population it is socialism, but giving taxes breaks to the top 5% is capitalism at its finest?

I hate to tell you but Reagan was wrong and George H.W. Bush was correct, it is voodoo economics. It didn't work then and it isn't going to work now. It wasn't "trickle down economics" which drove the economy, it was unadulterated greed allowed to run rampant compounded by a lack of meaningful oversight. Sure the party is great while it lasts, but you know what? Sooner or later you're going to have to pay for it. Now we are paying. It was inevitable with the course we were pursuing.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 17, 2008 10:36 PM

Nice One Wes1155!

These conservadrones are looking for anything to cling onto. The use the most inane arguments to justify their brainwashed views.

Support stem cell research...It's their only chance to grow their own brains.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 17, 2008 10:31 PM

HURT2008 spewed: "[some spew that started off nice but went off into I'm afraid of everthing land

SOCIALISM BUSH started it, McCain voted for it. (if you really consider that socialism, but if were a democratic president, you be breaking out you confederate flag)

TRICKLE DOWN is a Republican concept. TRICKLE DOWN feels more like TINKLED-ON

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 17, 2008 10:27 PM

thecannula,

There is only one minor flaw aside from the basic assumptions you are applying to the statics you are quoting, you aren't factoring in expenses. The $694.1 billion figure is revenue not taxable income.

Also by these same figures and using your rather simplistic example, you will notice that for the minority and women owned small businesses the number of employees averages to slightly more than one. We also don't know from these figures what the makeup of this group is. What percentage are sole proprietorship, LLCs or regular corporations? I am certain most sole proprietorship owners would be very pleased to be pushing the quarter of a million tax bracket.

Posted by: wes1155 | October 17, 2008 10:24 PM

Being a under achiever is no exciting and no one wants to be in that situation. But in this great nation, you can work hard to change that. Remember, we are always taught to fight the odds and reach for the stars. Unfortunately, the Obama's socialist economic policy will surely have a trickle down effect on the future of this country by making people afraid of becoming achievers.

Posted by: Hurt2008 | October 17, 2008 10:18 PM

IF PALIN IS SO QUALIFIED...

Then why didn't she run for president?


Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 17, 2008 10:07 PM

Hurt2008 spewed "[the classic slippery slope argument]"

We've all heard this cockee-poopoo before.
"Give'em and inch and they'll take a mile"

"Pass one control law, they'll take away are guns

Blah! Blah! Blah!

If that $250K threshold were dropped lower. He would incure the wrath of A LOT of Democrats too.

Obama would most likely just raise the rate on people making over $250K insead.

AH HA! Scared you didn't I?!?!

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 17, 2008 10:05 PM

MCCAIN IS OUT OF TOUCH WITH MIDDLE-CLASS AMERICA'S ECONOMIC TROUBLES! McCain in April 08 declared that there had been "great progress economically" during the Bush years. On more than one occasion, he diagnosed Americans' concerns over the dismal U.S. economy as "psychological." (Phil Gramm, McCain's close friend and economic adviser supposedly excommunicated over his "whiners" remarks, is back with the McCain campaign full time again.) McCain, a man who owns eight homes nationwide, in March lectured Americans facing foreclosure that they ought to be "doing what is necessary -- working a second job, skipping a vacation, and managing their budgets -- to make their payments on time." And when all else fails, McCain told the people of the economically devastated regions in Martin County, Kentucky and Youngstown, Ohio, there's always eBay. McCain doesn't understand our tanking economy because it doesn't affect him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FD_M2BEl64

*The $100 Million Man*
Courtesy of his wife Cindy's beer distribution fortune (one her late father apparently chose not to share with her half-sister Kathleen), the McCains are worth well over $100 million. (In the two-page tax summary she eventually released to the public, Cindy McCain reported another $6 million in 2006.) As Salon reported back in 2000, the second Mrs. McCain's millions were essential in launching her husband's political career. Unsurprisingly, the Weekly Standard's Matthew Continetti, who four years ago called Theresa Heinz-Kerry a "sugar mommy," has been silent on the topic of Cindy McCain.

*The Joys of (Eight) Home Ownership*
While fellow adulterer John Edwards was pilloried for his mansion, John McCain's eight homes around the country have received little notice or criticism. His properties include a 10 acre lake-side Sedona estate, euphemistically called a "cabin" by the McCain campaign, and a home featured in Architectural Digest. The one featuring "remote control window coverings" was recently put up for sale. Still, their formidable resources did not prevent the McCains from failing to pay taxes on a tony La Jolla, California condo used by Cindy's aged aunt.

*The Anheuser-Busch Windfall*
While John McCain played a critical role in facilitating DHL's takeover of Airborne (and with it, the looming loss of 8,000 jobs in Wilmington, Ohio), Cindy McCain is set to earn a staggering multi-million dollar pay-day from the acquisition of Anheuser-Busch by the Belgian beverage giant, In Bev. As the Wall Street Journal reported in July, Mrs. McCain runs the third largest Anheuser-Busch distributorship in the nation, and owns between $2.5 and $5 million in the company's stock.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxT0s_I5WtA

Posted by: DrainYou | October 17, 2008 10:04 PM

What was Cindy's $297,000 salary for?

Surely not running a non-profit?
Maybe being on a board of directors?

Posted by: DrDan2000 | October 17, 2008 10:02 PM

National Business Association-

Small business statistics highlighted in the 2005 Small Business FAQ include:

· Small businesses represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms.

· Over the past decade, small business net job creation fluctuated between 60 and 80 percent.

· Small businesses generate more than 50 percent of the nonfarm private gross domestic product (GDP).

· Two-thirds of new employer establishments survive at least two years after start-up, and 44 percent survive at least four years.

· Small businesses employ half of all private sector employees.

· Very small firms with fewer than 20 employees spend 45 percent more per employee than the largest firms to comply with federal regulations.

· Minorities own 4.1 million firms that generate $694.1 billion in revenues and employ 4.8 million workers.

· Women own 6.5 million businesses that generate $950.6 billion in revenues, and employ 7.2 million workers.

· In 2004, an estimated 580,900 employer firms opened while an estimated 576,200 closed.


So, If 4.1 million firms generate 694 Billion dollars and 1/3rd close within 2 years, one can assume that the other 2/3 generate the majority of the revenue-
600 billion divided by 4.1 million x 2/3=
$219,780 mean revenue. One can imagine that all small businesses are doing at least as well as minority small businesses.
A profit of 250,000 doesn't seem too farfetched for a significant percentage of small businesses that employ people, since one person ebay sellers are included in these numbers!

Keep it up Obama- I'm one small businessman who will cut payroll AND revenue AND hours worked rather than give my hard earned dollars to ACORN and Ayers related education programs- raise taxes higher and we'll have 12% unemployment before long!


Posted by: thecannula | October 17, 2008 10:02 PM

That's a lot of beer money...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | October 17, 2008 10:01 PM

majorteddy...
Yet another felon pal of John McCain...White House Plumber (there's a coincidence!) G. Gordon Liddy.
This from Carl Bernstein.....
Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain sounded like one. "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family," he gushed. "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."

Posted by: joy2 | October 17, 2008 9:56 PM

Many are fooled by the trick Obama is playing now. He proposes the $250K blacket just for for now. Once elected, he will comes down to $150K, $100K or even $25K in order to have a evenly distributed income. The liberal media failed miserably to point out that more than 40% of those Obama said will receive handouts DO NOT pay taxes at all!

Posted by: Hurt2008 | October 17, 2008 9:54 PM

No wonder they are against the tax for the rich and mock at the tax policies of Obama.

MCcain and Cindy does not want to pay more to the government and keep and enjoy everything to themselves.

How many of us make that kind of money - i am strugling hard to make a decent income with all the hard work!!!

May be i am not lucky or did not have a rich inheritance!

Posted by: kc5658 | October 17, 2008 9:22 PM

I wonder if John McCain will now tell us all about his relationship with a convicted felon, G. Gordon Liddy, a convicted felon and Charles Keating , a convicted felon. McCain keeps palling around with all these convicted felons. He needs to explain this to the American people.

Posted by: majorteddy | October 17, 2008 9:08 PM

" But, wait, how come my tax rate was higher than Cindy McCain's. "

Welcome to the 'trickle down effect'. The more you make, the more your tax rate goes 'down'. Lots of hidden goodies and breaks if you're lucky enough to make over 500K

Most dual income familes don't even come close to Joseph the Plumbob supposed salary.

Posted by: insideman | October 17, 2008 8:58 PM

Joe the Pseudo-Plumber want's to buy a beer distribution business.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 17, 2008 8:57 PM

And the GOP call the democrat's "elite"?

Posted by: concernedaboutdc | October 17, 2008 8:47 PM

IF PALIN IS SO QUALIFIED

Then why didn't she run for president?

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 17, 2008 8:32 PM

kmsoftly, do you have a longer clip (I didn't post that on YouTube)? Joe Biden said basically the same thing: "I don't know ANY plumbers making $250,000 in my neighborhood."

Posted by: MarkInAustin | October 17, 2008 8:26 PM

@ MarkInAustin

Well edited. If you listen to the whole sentence (the first part is missing in this clip) it sounds pretty different. So whom do you try to fool? It's disgusting that some people feel the need to resort in this kind of shameless diffamation instead of trying to convince with arguments. And sadly this is true for both sides.

Posted by: kmsoftly | October 17, 2008 8:22 PM

Unlike the real "Joe the Plumber", I only made 170K last year. But, wait, how come my tax rate was higher than Cindy McCain's. She made a lot more but yet paying only 28% percent while I had to swallow the 33%. I missed Steve Forbes and I want a straight-line income tax rate proposed by him. The real Joe would have agreed with me. Right "Joe"? Or you just don't want to pay?

Posted by: JoeThePlumber100 | October 17, 2008 8:21 PM

Dave27, her 2008 (the current year we are all in last time I checked) taxes are not due until April 15, 2009.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | October 17, 2008 8:18 PM

May be we can expect her to release her 2008 tax return one week before the election? We need distraction, and more distraction. Come on fellows, create more distraction.

The more rich you are, the less you pay in taxes, except for one or two people that may pay 33% tax on their adjusted gross income, and the Joe plumbers that evade tax. Warren Buffef pays 15% tax. Cindy McCain pays 26% tax. Oridany working people with more than 100K adjusted gross income pays 40% tax.

Here is why:
Warren Buffet's income gets taxed at long term gain of 15%.
Cindy gets 15% on quarter of her income and 33% on the rest.
Ordinary people pays 33% plus 7% social sec tax on top of it.

You might say Cindy have to pay social security tax. But social security tax stops after about 90K income, which means those making over 100K gets to keep more of what they make, compared to those struggling to make ends meet.

Posted by: Dave27 | October 17, 2008 8:14 PM

freedomrider1, there are actually Board meetings she attends, so that's at least one day right there.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | October 17, 2008 8:07 PM

This is the elite. Imagine she does not work one day in the year and she makes all this money. I would love to tax her a bit more since she didn't earn a cent. In fact, Cindy is such a cheapo that she will not share a cent with her half sister. Her father had paid the credit cards of the half sister. Cindy made sure to stop the funding to the family. What human value is that?

Posted by: freedomrider1 | October 17, 2008 8:04 PM

thenotoriousflavio, I think that even Cindy McCain would make a better President than either Obama or Biden. Did you ever see that YouTube clip of Obama making fun of Joe (more importantly, any "plumber" making over $250,000 per year)?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSHqxosjyLY

Posted by: MarkInAustin | October 17, 2008 7:36 PM

I'm not the candidate was her excuse for not releasing them before

FLIP-FLOP just like hubby.

Posted by: thenotoriousflavio | October 17, 2008 7:34 PM

Good for her.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | October 17, 2008 7:25 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2009 The Washington Post Company