« Mission CreepFriendly Fire »

Are You Better Off Now

Than you were 8 years ago? Hillary is. So’s Obama. The Bush years have been good to them. Re the Clintons, sounds like people who are so eager to give away more of our money could stand to be a little more generous with their own. 

MSNBC notes a disconnect between Hill’s anti-Dubai stance and Bill’s Dubai dealings, and adds that while the Clintons were generally “conservative” (irony added) in their pursuit of deductions, not taking all they could, they became strangely “aggressive” about home-office deductions in 2003, when cleaning and maintenance cost them nearly $150,000 deductible. Those must be pretty palatial home offices. Judging by the kind of work Bill did in the Oval Office, more diligent cleaning may be in order. The Swamp with more on those business relationships, which have raised shareholder eyebrows. Poligazette suggests shady economics will prove no obstacle.

Steyn, gently, with one last 3 .a.m call for Hillary. OK, a bunch of 3 a.m. calls before she goes quietly into that good … 4 a.m. Though I’m a litte surprised he’s ready to count out the eye-gouger.

Topics: pols, money

  Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:41 am on Saturday, April 5, 2008

7 Responses to “Are You Better Off Now”

1. tanstaafl Says:
   April 5th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

   Mr. Steyn (God bless his sweet soul) does ask the hugely relevant questions :)

   In the latest ad, when she picks up the phone at 3 a.m. to take the emergency foreclosure breaking-news update, she’s got perfect hair and makeup, and she’s immaculately dressed.

   Is having to get up at 2 a.m. to put her face on for the 3 a.m. campaign ad causing her to retreat into Bosnian war fantasies?

2. Vanguard of the Commentariat Says:
   April 5th, 2008 at 2:59 pm

   $109 million for 8 years of “work”, with the only steady employment being the $160K a year Senate gig.

   That’s a nice chunk of change.

   In fact, its a lot more than my entire family has made in the 6 generations or so we have been in America. And yet all we are to these hypocritical bastards is a taxation cash cow for their elite special interests.

   Amazing.

3. Fatty Bolger Says:
   April 5th, 2008 at 4:23 pm

   The problem with Hillary and Obama is that when they say they want to raise taxes on the rich, what they really mean is that they want to raise taxes on the middle class. To them, a family making $75,000 is considered rich. That’s double the national average salary, exactly what a family making the average salary would make. That’s rich?

   The fact is that the *real* rich, like Hillary, are already paying a disproportional share of the tax burden, and pay at a much higher rate overall. I’m happy for her that she doesn’t mind, and if she wants to pay more, she’s welcome to do so. Just leave everybody else alone.

4. Vanguard of the Commentariat Says:
   April 5th, 2008 at 10:17 pm

   $109 mil in 8 years. Nice haul. In fact not bad for only having one regular job between them, the Senate gig at $160K a year. I guess things were tough in George Bush’s America, huh?

   Of course being from the caring and sharing side of things, I am sure they filed separately, so as to make sure the “needy” got more! Heh.

5. Fatty Bolger Says:
   April 6th, 2008 at 12:32 pm

   The problem, Vanguard, is that they use that as part of their argument. Hey, look at how much money we made under Bush! We never asked for that! He’s giving rich people like us all the breaks!

   What they fail to acknowledge is why all that money was available in the first place. Why was there so much money available that people and companies could afford to pay to see Slick Willy exercise his jaw for two hours? Why did people have money to waste on their books? The Clintons didn’t get rich over the last eight years because they got tax breaks. They got rich because there was plenty of money flowing through the economy.

6. Vanguard of the Commentariat Says:
   April 6th, 2008 at 3:03 pm

   I know Fatty,I get so upset about these faux class warriors that I inadvertently repeated my comment. They always portray themselves as the height of political intellectualism, yet when you boil down any idea they have it is mere redistribution. What is so intellectual about that? It was Marx’s big idea and it has been failing spectacularly for 160 years now.

7. MikeH Says:
   April 7th, 2008 at 1:12 am

   If Hil keeps answering the phones at three in the morning, when is she going to have time for her day job?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.