# Hypocrisy of Edwards and Kerry



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Liberal Loopholes, How anybody can think these guys are for the average citizen defies logic! :eyeroll: 
Edwards and Kerry want to raise taxes, but aren't wild about paying them.

In embracing John Edwards, John Kerry has also endorsed his populist "two Americas" rhetoric and has put tax increases at the center of the election campaign. So it's fair to ask the two Democrats: How much of those tax increases will actually hit the super-rich like yourselves, _and how much will end up on the backs of upper middle-class wage earners?

For an answer, let's look at what the two Senators have themselves been paying in taxes. It turns out that the Kerrys and Edwards have exploited plenty of tax loopholes over the years. Of course, nobody is obligated to pay more than what the letter of the law requires. But the complex tax code benefits the wealthy, who can afford tax attorneys and complicated schemes to skirt the law. And high marginal rates give them plenty of incentive to do so.

Senator Edwards talks about the need to provide health care for all, but that didn't stop him from using a clever tax dodge to avoid paying $591,000 into the Medicare system. While making his fortune as a trial lawyer in 1995, he formed what is known as a "subchapter S" corporation, with himself as the sole shareholder.

Instead of taking his $26.9 million in earnings directly in the following four years, he paid himself a salary of $360,000 a year and took the rest as corporate dividends. Since salary is subject to 2.9% Medicare tax but dividends aren't, that meant he shielded more than 90% of his income. That's not necessarily illegal, but dodging such a large chunk of employment tax skates perilously close to the line.

The Internal Revenue Service takes a dim view of such operations and "may collapse the structure entirely and argue the S corporation is not truly a separate entity," in the words of Tax Adviser magazine. Attorney CPA magazine lists it as No. 11 of its "15 best underutilized tax loopholes," but warns that the IRS "has successfully litigated cases against individuals, particularly sole shareholders of personal service S corporations, reclassifying such deemed distributions as wages subject to social security taxes." 
*As a political matter, the dodge is especially hypocritical because the income limits on which Medicare taxes are paid were lifted by Democrats in 1993 specifically to hit "the rich," as Mr. Edwards likes to call people in his tax bracket. *And the supreme irony? Mr. Edwards has claimed that he set up the subchapter S company to protect himself from legal liability. *You know it's time for tort reform when even the trial lawyers say they're afraid of getting sued*.
Senator Kerry's personal finances are not so complicated, since most of his income comes from his government salary and a modest inheritance. But he owes his jet-setting lifestyle and indeed some of his political success to the wealth of his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry. Her personal assets have been estimated at up to $3.2 billion, and the couple travel among their five houses scattered around the U.S. on a $35 million Gulfstream V jet. During a tough election for the Senate in 1996, Mr. Kerry sidestepped a gentleman's agreement with opponent William Weld to limit the spending of personal wealth on either side to $500,000 by having his campaign borrow $1.7 million from his wife.

Mrs. Heinz Kerry's finances remain largely a closed book, since she has so far refused to release her tax returns. What we do know so far is that she has prepaid $750,000 in federal taxes on $5.1 million in income for 2003--an effective tax rate of 15%. That is because a significant portion of the income came from tax-free municipal bonds, which is perfectly legal.

Even so, her net income must be much higher. We know that since the death of her husband John Heinz in 1991, Mrs. Heinz Kerry has invested shrewdly and possibly even doubled her inheritance. Even if one takes a conservative estimate of her net worth, say $1 billion, an income of $5.1 million means a paltry return of just 0.5%. More likely, the majority of her investment income is sheltered within trusts so that tax is deferred until she or her family actually wants to spend it. *Again, perfectly legal, but this is a luxury that the average middle-class professional working for a wage does not have. These are the non-rich who will pay the bulk of any Kerry tax increase.*

So when John Kerry and John Edwards say that they want to tax the wealthiest Americans, let's be clear about what they really mean. *They want to tax the most productive people at higher marginal rates and close loopholes for corporations, while they themselves dodge taxes by exploiting loopholes they plan to preserve.*
*Mr. Edwards is right that there really are two Americas. The people who work for their money and want to keep more of their own paychecks. And wealthy politicians who want to raise taxes on the middle class secure in the knowledge that they won't have to pay*._


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

"Edwards and Kerry want to raise taxes"

Sweet deal bob, I agree lets keep the taxes down so we can just shove the national debt on to the next guy. Pull your head out of your hiney, there is no way to get out of debt without tax raises, and bush isin't going to give them.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

The message we need to send to our politicians, like Bobm has said in the past, is that the money we as citizens earn does not belong to the government.

Many in our government think that people who work are doing so so the governement can keep paying the hardworking people's money to the lazy.

We need to make our government learn to work on less. At the rate we are going socialism will be a reality in my lifetime.


----------



## pointer99 (Jan 16, 2004)

gandergrinder said:


> The message we need to send to our politicians, like Bobm has said in the past, is that the money we as citizens earn does not belong to the government.
> 
> Many in our government think that people who work are doing so so the governement can keep paying the hardworking people's money to the lazy.
> 
> We need to make our government learn to work on less. At the rate we are going socialism will be a reality in my lifetime.


that is a very good post.

i am an s corp but think of it this way. who among us could afford a full time team of accountants to stategise their tax situation. most likely no one on this board. a lot of people use a service much like h&r block to handle taxes. it comes down to they say it and you pay it. why? because they are not going to take questionable loopholes like senators kerry and edwards do because of the liability on their part.

edwards and kerry and bush and the like can take these loopholes and later if the irs has questions their team of liigators and accountants can tie up the process for years. by the time they have to settle they have made enough money on the loopholes to cover the taxes or the problem just goes away.

if you have every been through an irs adudit and are a small business it has been described as akin to an interogation by the gestopo.

at least bush does say that it is not the governments money but your money.kerry and edwards have promised a tax increase. who will pay it? certainly not them. it will be on the backs of the working folks.
:eyeroll: 
pointer


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

MT you ought to send me some tuition for all the things I have to explain to you.
You said,


> Pull your head out of your hiney, there is no wasy to get out of debt without tax raises, and bush isin't going to give them.


I'll ignore the hiney nonsense and cut to the chase. It is well documented that every time taxes are lowered total revenue to the federal goverment goes up. Think of it this way when you tax anything its a disincentive to do that activity, in this case the activity is to conduct business. If you allow people to keep more of their money they will go out and work harder to make more because the incentive is greater. 
The problem in the past is that as soon as revenues climb the idiots in Congress spend it ever faster! The point is lower taxes combined with spending restraint in congress will provide the money needed to reduce the debt. And proivide for grwth in the economy with the additional benefits of jobs higher wages ect.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Now how about some quotes about the hypocrisy of Kerry and Edwards about the war in Iraq
"People of good will disagree about whether America should have gone to war in Iraq." - Democratic-platform draft language

What to make of a political party that doesn't officially have a position on the biggest policy question in our politics? The Democratic-platform language on Iraq is almost meaningless. People of good will disagree about most everything, up to and including abortion and child labor - yet the Democrats manage to have positions on those issues. Iraq war, yes or no? *The Democrats answer with a definite maybe.* :eyeroll:

This campaign will witness a stark battle of dueling strategic viewpoints. President Bush's radical new national-security doctrine is "preemption." John Kerry's is "cognitive dissonance." The Massachusetts senator is a dovish-hawk or hawkish-dove depending on which set of feathers might suit his particular political circumstance at the moment, molting on command to avoid following any given statement to what might reasonably be considered its logical conclusion.

Kerry has suggested Iraq was not a war of necessity. But Kerry voted to authorize the war. So Kerry made it a practice as a senator to vote for wars of choice? Isn't that irresponsibility worthy of a long, unflattering portrayal in Michael Moore's next film? Kerry has said that Bush should have given diplomacy more time to work. So a war of choice is wrong if it is launched on March 19, 2003, but O.K. if it's launched on June 19, 2003? A war of choice is fine if it is approved by France, even though it is Americans who will still do almost all the dying?

And let's add a bit more discord to the mix, by recalling what Kerry's running mate John Edwards said about Iraq to Chris Wallace

Edwards on Iraq, September 12, 2002:


> "We know that for at least 20 years, Saddam Hussein has obsessively sought weapons of mass destruction through every means available. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today. He has used them in the past, and he is doing everything he can to build more. Each day he inches closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability - a capability that could be less than a year away.
> 
> I believe that Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime represents a clear threat to the United States, to our allies, to our interests around the world, and to the values of freedom and democracy we hold dear...
> 
> The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards. But the path of inaction is far more dangerous. This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker. Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters. We cannot wait for such a terrible event - or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse - to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq


Sure doesn't sound like the BS Edwards is spreading now does it??


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

A friend from AK asked me to pass this on... 8)

MRS. JOHN KERRY OF THE HEINZ FAMILY

Do you find it strange that Kerry's wife is never with him? Do you find it strange that you never hear any thing about her? This may be why.

As time goes on, we're just getting to know the possible future First Lady of the United States of America, and it is quite interesting. You'll be hearing even more about Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of Democratic front-runner.

She has quite a track record, especially when it comes to the causes she donates to. One of her favorite charities is the Tides Foundation. What is that, you ask?

This foundation sends hundreds of millions of dollars to groups that protested the invasion of Iraq; that demands open U.S.
borders; and provides legal defense for suspected terrorists.
Among other groups supported by Kerry's wife: Ramsey Clark's
international Action Center. This is the same Ramsey Clark
that offered to defend Saddam Hussein. Another group seeks to
ease restrictions on immigration from terrorist nations. Another group has links to the terrorist group Hamas. And on and on.

American jobs are OUTSOURCED by John F. Kerry and his wife Teresa Heinz-Kerry!

We need to ask: Why not manufacture in America and ship finished products overseas? How many American workers are in these Heinz overseas factories?

HEINZ WATTIE'S AUSTRALASIA - Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
HEINZ SINGAPORE PTE. LTD. - Republic of Singapore
HEINZ WATTIE'S LIMITED - Auckland, New Zealand
HEINZ JAPAN LTD - Tokyo, Japan
HEINZ-UFE LTD. - Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
HEINZ COSCO - Qingdao, People's Republic of China
HEINZ KOREA LTD. - Inchon, South Korea
HEINZ WIN CHANCE LTD. - Bangkok, Thailand
HEINZ INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED - Mumbai, India
PT HEINZ ABC INDONESIA - Jakarta, Indonesia
PT HEINZ SUPRAMA - Surabaya, Indonesia
HEINZ UFC PHILIPPINES - Manila, the Philippines
HEINZ HONG KONG LIMITED - Wanchai, Hong Kong
H. J. HEINZ (Botswana) (Proprietary) LTD. - Gaborone, Botswana
KGALAGADI SOAP INDUSTRIES (Pty) LTD. - Gaborone, Botswana
REFINED OIL PRODUCTS (Pty) LTD. - Gaborone, Botswana
OLIVINE INDUSTRIES (Private) LIMITED - Harare, Zimbabwe
CHEGUTU CANNERS (Pvt) LTD. - Chegutu, Zimbabwe
HEINZ SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD. - Johannesburg, South Africa
HEINZ WELLINGTON'S (PTY) LTD. - Wellington, South Africa
HEINZ EUROPE - Hayes, Middlesex, England
H. J. HEINZ COMPANY LIMITED - Hayes Park, Hayes, Middlesex,
England
H. J. HEINZ COMPANY LIMITED - Rovereto, Italy
H. J. HEINZ COMPANY LIMITED - Telford, England
JOHN WEST FOODS LIMITED - Liverpool, England
H. J. HEINZ FROZEN &CHILLED FOODS LIMITED - Hayes,
Middlesex, England
H. J. HEINZ COMPANY (IRELAND) LIMITED - Dublin, Ireland
H.J. HEINZ COMPANY OF CANADA LTD - North York, Ontario,
Canada
OMSTEAD FOODS LIMITED - Wheatley, Ontario, Canada
ALIMENTOS HEINZ C.A. - Caracas, Venezuela
DISTRIBUIDORA BANQUETE, S.A. - San José, Costa Rica
HEI NZ ITALIA S.r.l. - Milan, Italy
FATTORIA SCALDASOLE, S.p.a. - Monguzzo, Italy
COPAIS FOOD AND BEVERAGE COMPANY, S.A. - Athens, Greece
HEINZ POLSKA Sp. Z.O.O. - Warsaw, Poland
PUDLISZKI S.A. - Pudliszki, Poland
WODZISLAW, S.A. - Wodzislaw, Poland
ETS. PAULET S.A. - Douarnenez, France
H. J. HEINZ FROZEN S.A.R.L. - Paris, France
HEINZ IBERICA S.A. - Madrid, Spain
IDAL (Industrias de Alimentacã, Lda.) - Lisbon, Portugal
MIEDZYCHOD S.A. - Miedzychod, Poland
HEINZ C.I.S - Moscow, Russia
HEINZ GEORGIEVSK - Georgievsk, Russia
CAIRO FOOD INDUSTRIES SAE - Cairo, Egypt
HEINZ REMEDIA LIMITED - Tel Aviv, Israel
STAR-KIST FOOD DÂ'OR LIMITED - Haifa, Israel
H. J. HEINZ GMBH - Dusseldorf, Germany
SONNEN BASSERMANN - Seesen, Germany
KONINKLIJKE DE RUIJTER BV - The Netherlands
HAK BV - The Netherlands
FOODMARK - The Netherlands
HONIG MERKARTIKELEN BV - The Netherlands
DRUKKERIJ DE GROENBOER - The Netherlands
H. J. HEINZ B.V . - Elst, The Netherlands
H. J. HEINZ BELGIUM S.A. - Brussels, Belgium
SERV-A-PORTION - Turnhout, Belgium
Arimpex Industrie Alimentari S.R.L. - Rovereto, Italy
Comexo S.A. - Chateaurenard, France
HEINZ EUROPE - UK and IRELAND - Factories: Chorley,
Fakenham, Grimsby,
Kendal, Kitt Green, Leaminton, Luton, Okehampton, Telford,
Westwick

Think of the conflict of interest a President would have who's wife owns business interests in all of these countries....
I don't think John Kerry's Vietnam service is going to make
people look the other way on this stuff. Pass this on!

NOTE: All of the above facts are available in local libraries in most communities throughout the country. Let's hope people get out and look up the facts for themselves.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Our ex-senator is one sick man :eyeroll: 
Sunny John Edwards, as we've noted before, is singularly ill-suited to the traditional vice-presidential role of political hatchet man. So the Kedwards ticket has outsourced that job to a surrogate, someone John Kerry apparently never seriously considered as his running mate: Max Cleland, the patriotic former senator from Georgia.

Agence France-Presse reports that in a conference call with reporters yesterday, "Cleland said that Bush went to war 'because he concluded that his daddy was a failed president and one of the ways he failed was that he did not take out Saddam Hussein' in the 1991 Gulf war. 'So he (Bush junior) is Mr. Macho Man.' " *Cleland did not note that Bush also went to war because he was authorized to do so by Congress, or that Cleland himself was among the 77 senators who voted in favor of the war*.

There's no nice way to say this: *Cleland is talking like a lunatic*. "His daddy"? "Mr. Macho Man"? This is how the Democratic Party talks about matters of war and peace? And when Cleland suggests that the Iraq war is some sort of personal psychodrama for the president, he is engaging in what psychologists call "projection"--attributing one's own faults to others. As a devastating Los Angeles Times profile points out, Cleland claims his 2002 Senate re-election loss was more traumatic than being maimed in Vietnam:

As difficult as it is physically, Cleland has visited more than 20 states, appearing at countless VFW halls and veterans' memorials and barbecues and picnics and Democratic fundraisers. He has to, he says, to preserve his mental health and stability. Inside, he's a mess.

For months after his defeat, Cleland sank into a black hole. He joined the support group Al-Anon, and doctors prescribed three kinds of medication to treat his depression. It was "worse than coming back from Vietnam," he says. "Worse than being blown up."

"The Senate gave me a sense of meaning, purpose and destiny," Cleland says in his soft drawl. "When you lose that you've lost something profound. It's more than an arm. It's more than a leg."

Cleland insists his election crusade is not motivated by hatred or vengeance. It's the best tonic, he says, for the emotional upheaval he still suffers.

The article notes that "it is striking to hear Cleland speak with such ambivalence about becoming, as he puts it, 'the poster boy for what the Republicans did to me.' " Cleland adds: "I'm a veteran, not a victim. I've never been comfortable with that role." *The Kerry campaign apparently views the dignity of a patriot like Max Cleland as a small price to pay if it'll help beat George W. Bush.* :eyeroll:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

At least 30% .. and quite probably over 40% of the voters who go to the polls in November will cast their ballots with one thought in mind. *They will look at the names on the ballot and cast their vote for the candidate whom they believe will do the most to take money away from other people and either spend it on them or find a way to put it in their pocket. *_The name that fits that bill is John Kerry_. Listen to Kerry on the campaign trail. Audit his website. If he enacts every government spending program he has promised the voters the tab will more than double the federal budget. *It's all about buying the votes ... and the votes are surely there to be bought.* uke:

Tell me, when was the last time you met someone who felt that his life was his responsibility, not the government's? Bring me the man or woman who feels that the only role of government is to stand firm against those who would interfere with their pursuit of happiness ... but not to fund that dream with money taken from others.

Consider, please, the fact that for the fourth consecutive month the Kerry campaign has raised more money in its various fundraising efforts than has George Bush. The Kerry figure for June was three times more than the amount raised by George Bush. That should tell you something, my friends, and that something is that the Democrats have the money they need to buy the votes to win back the White House.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Democrats just love to talk about your "right" and your "access" to health care. You'll never hear them talking about just how government policies make both health care and health insurance more expensive. *There is a government prejudice against an individual purchasing their own private health insurance policy. If your employer purchases the policy for you, your employer gets to deduct the cost of that health insurance on their income taxes. If you purchase the policy for yourself the cost is not deductible. In other words, you get punished for taking personal responsibility for your own health care. [/b]I wonder why Democrats don't think this is a problem? Hell .... I wonder why Republicans don't think this is a problem! 
44 million. 44 million what? 44 million Americans who don't have health insurance. You'll hear that number time after time after time listening to these Democrats. What you don't hear is that most of these people don't have health insurance because they've made a conscious decision not to purchase health insurance. Oh ... they could afford it, but new wheels for the ride are far more important.

That brings us to the concept of individual responsibility. Other than Barack Obama .. the speakers at this convention have paid scant attention to the idea of people being more responsible for their own lives. I guess that goes with the territory when you're waging a war against the very concept of individuality in the first place.

"Barack" and "Obama." Two words that have now been added to spell checkers on the computers of virtually every journalist in the free world. This guy is refreshing, maybe there is hope for the Democrats.

A mouthpiece for Tereeeeeza Heinz Kerry said that the future first lady's remark that Ted Kennedy is a "perfect bastard" is "water under the bridge." Unfortunate choice of words for Mary Jo his drowned girl friend.

Boston's Howie Carr calls Ted Kennedy and Tereeeeeza "... two poster children for the debilitating soul-corroding effects of unearned wealth." :beer:*


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

For years, John Kerry has been telling the story that he spent Christmas in Cambodia, fighting a secret war there while serving his tour of duty in Vietnam. In their book 'Unfit for Command,' many other soldiers, including ones that were up and down Kerrys chain of command, say it didn't happen. He wasn't there. *In other words, they're saying Kerry made it all up. So now what?*
Drudge is reporting that a Kerry historian is readying a piece for the New Yorker which will supposedly set the record straight on Kerrys whereabouts during that time. The latest is that no, he wasn't in Cambodia at Christmas time in 1968 fighting Nixon's secret war (of course, Nixon wasn't in office yet, but why argue the fine points.) Now they're going to say Kerry was in Cambodia in January.

This won't fly, however. *Kerry said *on the floor of the Senate that *he specifically remembers sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia on Christmas.* He even said that they were worried about being hit by fire from South Vietnamese soldiers celebrating Christmas Eve! *How in the hell can Kerry be ducking Christmas Eve celebratory fire in January?* Is the Kerry campaign fixin' to come out with a statement telling us Kerry celebrates Christmas in January?

*The truth*? You want the truth? * Kerry lied on the floor of the Senate*. Simple as that. He lied about what he and our troops were doing in Vietnam. *Now Kerry and his groomers are trying to find a way to wiggle out with an alternate story.* :eyeroll:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Now this was probably the most transparent, idiotic, moronic and childish moment of the campaign thus far. When John Kerry was asked about President Bush's visit to Florida after the passage of Hurricane Charley, he had nothing but criticism. Kerry said that Bush should have waited to visit, because Bush's visit would divert the efforts of "first responders." *There isn't an American alive with enough sense to operate a can opener who doesn't know that if Bush hadn't made a visit to Florida within a few days after the hurricane Kerry would be citing Bush's absence as proof that he doesn't really care about the people of Florida. *:eyeroll:

Slowly ... day by day ... John Kerry reveals to the American people just what a pompous, overstuffed, elitist jerk he is. Hopefully enough Americans will see the real Kerry before they make him our president.


----------

