. . .son, Andrew, at Duke University for an interview. I think that the left-wing newspaper's editors are attempting to damage Rudy Giuliani in a way they never would have with Bill Clinton. Can anyone imagine Times' reporters harassing a young Chelsea Clinton concerning personal problems with her father? The answer is, of course, self-evident.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/03/us/politics/03rudy.html?bl&ex=1173243600&en=11906fa942fd62ea&ei=5087

3/8/2007 12:20:05 AM

So, he can refuse. They just want to ask some questions. Perhaps if people would have asked more questions before the 2000 election, we wouldn't have such a terrible and corrupt executive in power.

3/8/2007 12:27:21 AM

^ Was Chelsea questioned about her father's infidelity in this way?

3/8/2007 12:47:49 AM

you want to see bitching about Giuliani

look towards the christian right

3/8/2007 12:51:25 AM

^^ I'm sure someone tried to get the interview
^ you're right, the evangelicals have probably been his loudest critic at this stage

3/8/2007 1:00:56 AM

umm, at this point before the 1992 election, Chelsea was 11 years old. I don't think it would have done much good to "track her down" and question her about her dad. A 21 year old son living on his own in North Carolina is a little different....

not to mention, once Bill was elected, the conservative talking heads had a field day with her. Anyone remember this gem from Rush Limbaugh, talking about a 13 year old girl?

Quote :

""Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat; Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?" He then pointed to a video monitor, which switched to a picture of Chelsea."

3/8/2007 7:31:30 AM

cnn also ran a story about it last week

3/8/2007 7:51:39 AM

if the new york times is so liberal, why does the white house go to them to print their propaganda spin?

3/8/2007 8:26:26 AM

Are you really suggesting that the NYT is a mouthpiece for this Republican Administration?


reeeeeeeealllly?

3/8/2007 8:32:03 AM

When they want to set one of their own up to take the fall, sure, why not?

hooksaw has made me realize, that the worst conservative is the ones that are "scared" of liberals and what they might do to this country.

I don't get it. If conservative ideals are clearly superior, what's to worry about?

Do they honestly think the country will go to hell in a hand basket if liberals start doing liberal things?

[Edited on March 8, 2007 at 9:07 AM. Reason : a]

3/8/2007 8:59:09 AM

yes. Let's start with tax increases. This country will be doomed to economic and permanent recession as long as liberals are allowed to control tax policy (richest Americans were taxed 90% in the 70s)

3/8/2007 9:09:50 AM

Quote :

"(richest Americans were taxed 90% in the 70s)"

Oh come on, you know as well as I do they found ways around that tax rate, many of them probably not paying any tax at all (just like today).

Something I thought was clever that I heard on NPR the other night. Guy calls in, is making about 130k combined with his wife. He calculated a year ahead and could see he was going to get hit with the AMT. Since money was (still relatively is) cheap, he maxed his 401k out and took out a loan (not sure if it was home equity) to cover the gap for his living expenses, and he'll end up paying less money in interest than he would AMT.

And he isn't a CPA or anything like that.

[Edited on March 8, 2007 at 9:20 AM. Reason : a]

3/8/2007 9:17:51 AM

Quote :

"(richest Americans were taxed 90% in the 70s)"

really? i had never heard that before

3/8/2007 9:18:35 AM

it was the 60s.



[Edited on March 8, 2007 at 9:36 AM. Reason : .]

3/8/2007 9:34:50 AM

^thats just marginal rates, correct?

3/8/2007 9:37:48 AM

not sure if this graph is marginal or not...

It is interesting that the income tax receipt is constant... very noteworthy. Raising taxes does not guarantee more income tax receipt because of the economic climate higher taxes creates.

Shhh... don't tell Keynes...



[Edited on March 8, 2007 at 9:40 AM. Reason : .]

3/8/2007 9:39:20 AM

Are the reciepts adjusted to one specific year's valuation of the $?

3/8/2007 9:58:15 AM

They'd have to be... but the link doesn't say.

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/budgetchartbook/charts_T/t1.cfm

3/8/2007 10:05:05 AM

oops

[Edited on March 8, 2007 at 10:09 AM. Reason : x]

3/8/2007 10:09:03 AM

Fuck Rudy


and fuck 99% of the politicians running for office

3/8/2007 11:15:57 AM

Why don't you run for office?

3/8/2007 11:23:40 AM

I would honestly, I am tired of career politicians

but if I were to run for office my past and personal life would be brought up quickly by my opposition and that would be the end of it



I guess I'll just not vote this time around

3/8/2007 11:28:02 AM

Quote :

"I guess I'll just not vote this time around"

3/8/2007 11:28:47 AM

OMG HOW CAN YOU NOT VOTE WHEN YOU DONT LIKE ANY OF THE CANDIDATES, YOU MUST EXERCIZE THAT RIGHT TO VOTE EVEN IF YOU DONT WANT TO, VOTE OR DIE

3/8/2007 11:29:10 AM

You don't actually have to run for office though to be a part of the democratic process. Why not help out in a campaign of the candidate of your choice?

It seems like you really really detest the current state of politics, to the point that I'd expect someone this motivated to actually do something about it.

But instead, you choose not to vote?!

And I'm not trying to bash your balls here, we need guys like you to actually do something, rather than talk about it.

3/8/2007 11:31:07 AM

Quote :

"But instead, you choose not to vote?! And I'm not trying to bash your balls here, we need guys like you to actually do something, rather than talk about it. "

agreed

3/8/2007 11:32:28 AM

Quote :

"Why not help out in a campaign of the candidate of your choice?"

How would he find a candidate of his choice to work with when he just said none of them are even worth voting for? You gonna work for someone and then be like "I like you and your views enough to work on your campaign, but I'm not going to vote for you"

3/8/2007 11:32:41 AM

Quote :

"How would he find a candidate of his choice to work with when he just said none of them are even worth voting for?"

he never said none of them are worth it, he said 99%.

find that 1% and help promote them. chances are others feel the exact same way.

3/8/2007 11:34:03 AM

If you don't vote then you don't get to complain about anything. You are giving up a right that alot of people do not have. You might think that your vote doesn't matter and you dislike both party's running but still vote. Not votting is like saying i hate this professor so I am not going to his class anymore. Then at the end of the semester complaining because you failed for not showing up. RETARDED!!

3/8/2007 11:34:36 AM

^more like that analogy is retarded

Quote :

"You are giving up a right that alot of people do not have"

a lot of people? like women in the middle east and people in the US under 18? or are you acting like its the early 19th century or something?

Quote :

"You might think that your vote doesn't matter and you dislike both party's running but still vote. Not votting is like saying i hate this professor so I am not going to his class anymore"

I don't care if you dislike being shot and dislike being stabbed, you must pick one. Not voting is like changing your schedule since you have the option of what classes you want to take

and i love the whole "if you dont vote you cant complain" bullshit...i cant complain about the candidates that we have to choose from?

VOTE OR DIE! EVEN IF YOU DONT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE ISSUES OR CANDIDATES...JUST VOTE! WHY? BECAUSE YOU CAN! SO THEREFORE YOU SHOULD!

[Edited on March 8, 2007 at 11:43 AM. Reason : .]

3/8/2007 11:38:14 AM

Quote :

"if you dont vote you cant complain about policy"

there, thats better.

3/8/2007 11:42:04 AM

Write in candidates? You have unlimited choices. Why are you so dumb?

3/8/2007 11:45:31 AM

yeah lets go work on a campaign for a write-in candidate

i mean the fact that they're not listed on teh ballot and you have to write their name in means they really have a legitimate chance of winning

brilliant idea

the constitution not only says i have the right to vote, but that i have the right to practice a religion freely...i guess i must practice a religion even if i dont like religions because its a right that some people dont have!

VOTE PRACTICE RELIGION OR DIE

[Edited on March 8, 2007 at 11:50 AM. Reason : .]

3/8/2007 11:47:58 AM

......................................__................................................
.............................,-~*`¯lllllll`*~,..........................................
.......................,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,....................................
..................,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,..................................
...............,-*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.\.................................
.............;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll\................................
..............\lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/.........\;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,...........................
...............\lllllllllllllllllllll,-*...........`~-~-,...(.(¯`*,`,..........................
................\llllllllllll,-~*.....................)_-\..*`*;..)..........................
.................\,-*`¯,*`)............,-~*`~................/.....................
..................|/.../.../~,......-~*,-~*`;................/.\..................
................./.../.../.../..,-,..*~,.`*~*................*...\.................
................|.../.../.../.*`...\...........................)....)¯`~,..................
................|./.../..../.......)......,.)`*~-,............/....|..)...`~-,.............
..............././.../...,*`-,.....`-,...*`....,---......\..../...../..|.........¯```*~-,,,,
...............(..........)`*~-,....`*`.,-~*.,-*......|.../..../.../............\........
................*-,.......`*-,...`~,..``.,,,-*..........|.,*...,*...|..............\........
...................*,.........`-,...)-,..............,-*`...,-*....(`-,............\.......
......................f`-,.........`-,/...*-,___,,-~*....,-*......|...`-,..........\........

3/8/2007 11:52:25 AM

Strom Thurmond is rolling in his grave.

3/8/2007 11:56:18 AM

see, the problem is, people like me vote for the "lesser of two evils"

that may have been Kerry for some, Bush for others

well, I voted for Bush, only to have him expand government and trample the constitution with the Patriot Act

sadly, I don't think there is any politician that is going to be on a ballot that won't screw over citizens and the constitution for votes... they all do it and I'm tired of it

the only person I'd consider voting for has some ideas about federal currency that would keep him from being elected(Ron Paul)
http://www.house.gov/paul/

3/8/2007 2:19:14 PM

I will be running for president. 2028 is all mine.

3/8/2007 2:26:59 PM

what about local politics? most people just scoff at local elections, when i reality, those are the ones that more then likely will have the biggest impact on your everyday life.

also, there are other options outside of the republican and demecratic parties. the more support they get now, then the more viable they will be in the future. some people look at voting for a third party as throwing away their vote, but it could help the future more then you would think. voting isnt only about whats going on here and now.

3/8/2007 2:27:38 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0xKoSN6BR8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ewonkette%2Ecom%2F

imbed please

3/8/2007 6:27:51 PM

3/8/2007 6:43:02 PM

Quote :

"Are the reciepts adjusted to one specific year's valuation of the $? "

It doesn't matter because they are showing a percentage of the respective year's GDP in that graph.

That graph doesn't have a lot of meaningful info though. Why not keep the tax on the middle class very low, and raise it on the upper class, if it doesn't affect tax receipts, doesn't the chart support that?

[Edited on March 8, 2007 at 6:50 PM. Reason : ]

3/8/2007 6:48:10 PM

Quote :

"Was Chelsea questioned about her father's infidelity in this way? "

there are some big differences. at the time the scandal broke:

chelsea was the 17 year old minor daughter of the sitting US President.
chelsea's father warned the press corps to stay away from his minor daughter
did i say chelsea's das was the sitting US President?

furthermore...

chelsea's dad and mom were not divorced.
chelsea was not estranged from her father.
chelsea was not financially independent of her father.

now in contrast...

andrew giuliani is a 21 year old man.
andrew's mother and father are divorced
andrew is estranged from his father
andrew is financially independent of his father
andrew's father doesnt talk about his children ever.
andrew's father doesnt mention his children anywhere in his campaign literature.
andrew's father apparently doesn't care who talks to his children.

-------

whats more, anyone can go interview chelsea clinton now that shes an independent adult. you, personally, can go ask her any questions you want about any of the clinton dick sucking cigar stuffing behavior.

you really should, too.

and hurry back with your results. i'd like to hear about it.

3/9/2007 3:24:08 AM

^ Okay. When Chelsea reached the magic age of 21, was she asked by The New York Times or any other liberal news organization about her thoughts concerning her father's impeachment?

V I'm not so sure that she's been asked--ever.

[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 8:53 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2007 8:43:08 AM

I'm sure she has been asked several times but she probably said the magic words, 'no comment, ever.'

3/9/2007 8:47:07 AM

hooksaw loses again

3/9/2007 9:03:46 AM

i think some of you are overlooking that the media is a lot bigger than it was during clinton's term...anybody will get asked more nowadays about anything

3/9/2007 10:45:00 AM

^ im not sure thats the case.




[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 11:26 AM. Reason : ^ ]

3/9/2007 11:24:41 AM

so you dont think media coverage has grown a good bit in the last 6-7 years...

3/9/2007 11:33:06 AM

These cases simply are not related.

Between 1992-2000, Chelsea was 12-20 years old. Before the election and for 6 years after Clinton was elected, she was still a minor.

Giuliani's son, 2 years before the election, is already 21 years old. He's an adult in his own right, has apparently severed some or most ties from his father, and can handle the media on his own.

^ yeah, media over-exposure from the likes of CNN and Fox News certainly has grown since the 90s. But this was reported by the NY Times, which certainly isn't a new or growing news organization

[Edited on March 9, 2007 at 11:36 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2007 11:35:44 AM

^i think every news organization is growing simply because a lot more people get their news online nowadays

I just think ANY issue with ANY candidate gets more exposure nowadays

3/9/2007 11:38:22 AM