Political Donations

"Debt panelists got special-interect money" is a quote from an AP article written by Jack Gillum.

The article claims the six D's and six R's received more than $3 million during the past five years. The extent of potential conflicts could be even greated since the AP measured contributions, "didn't capture amounts" all sources.

Yeah, great idea - 12 members of congress whose interests are first to themselves and their career, next to their major contributors and lastly to the common good.
 
Isn't it time to get the money out of politics?

Would you support changes in the tax code disallowing all write-offs for political donations?

Would you support changes in the tax code making the acceptance of any political donations income and taxable?

Of course the devil is in the details of any such proposal, but in principle, shouldn't donations be called what in fact they truly are: BRIBES?

Political donations are not tax deductible. Why waste time fixing something that already does not happen?
 
I'm not so sure about the donation thing. I do think that it should be illegal for any political candidate to spend more on the election campaign than what the job pays. Example, if the political office pays $200,000 per year than no more than $200,000 could be spent on the campaign. It amazes me how many millions are spend on a Presidential election. I think the whole process is corrupt.

I like that idea, even if I think it is unconstitutional.
 
Abolishing the IRS and going with a flat tax would be great.

I agree. I'll vote for you if you run for President.

Explain if you will why both of you support a flat tax? I support a progressive income tax for the simple reason it helps prevent a nobility rising in America.

The UK has a much more "progressive" income tax than we do, yet they have nobility. Maybe we should try a regressive tax if your goal is to prevent nobility.
 
Free airtime for qualified candidates would go along way

Radio and TV stations are in business to make money. They have expenses including salaries for their employees.

Perhaps you should buy a TV station and provide free airtime for all 535 Senators and Representatives and all of the Presidential candidates.

There are also 50 states that have Governors and state legislators in the thousands that need that free airtime.

When you get that TV station, I am going to run for President, so reserve me some of that free airtime.

You will probably stay in business for 10 or 15 seconds.

I have for a long time suggested a Cable Network that was devoted to all things political... much like this site! Where candidates were given ad time, debates were covered as was political news and information.

That would allow us to tune in when we wanted and make up our own mind.

Last night's debate for instance could be broadcast at 9pm, 12am, 6am and 9am. Anyone that wanted to watch it could tune in and see what they missed. Anyone that fell asleep during the event could catch it later.

Important topics such as abortion, the economy, the debt ceiling etc. etc. etc. could be covered from multiple points of view.

Immie

Something like C-SPAN?
 
Radio and TV stations are in business to make money. They have expenses including salaries for their employees.

Perhaps you should buy a TV station and provide free airtime for all 535 Senators and Representatives and all of the Presidential candidates.

There are also 50 states that have Governors and state legislators in the thousands that need that free airtime.

When you get that TV station, I am going to run for President, so reserve me some of that free airtime.

You will probably stay in business for 10 or 15 seconds.

I have for a long time suggested a Cable Network that was devoted to all things political... much like this site! Where candidates were given ad time, debates were covered as was political news and information.

That would allow us to tune in when we wanted and make up our own mind.

Last night's debate for instance could be broadcast at 9pm, 12am, 6am and 9am. Anyone that wanted to watch it could tune in and see what they missed. Anyone that fell asleep during the event could catch it later.

Important topics such as abortion, the economy, the debt ceiling etc. etc. etc. could be covered from multiple points of view.

Immie

Something like C-SPAN?

Yes, but more on the lines of politics in general. C-Span covers the actions of the government. I'm thinking more like coverage of the people, places and events in politics in general.

Coverage of Tea Party events. Coverage of Republican and Democrat events. Discussions of major topics in the news of the day from both sides of the aisle such as what you see on all the "news" networks, but someplace that an interested voter could go to simply to get information on topics they want. For instance, time could be devoted to something like the debt crisis from 12 noon to 1pm, followed by a discussion between Republican and Democrat analysts about issues and solutions to the unemployment issue. Speeches by key political figures could be broadcast as well. President Obama's resignation... :lol: okay, wishful thinking ;) or Mitt Romney's speech when he finally explains how Romneycare is not Obamacare. ;)

I certainly do not find that kind of coverage on C-Span.

Immie
 
I agree. I'll vote for you if you run for President.

Explain if you will why both of you support a flat tax? I support a progressive income tax for the simple reason it helps prevent a nobility rising in America.

The UK has a much more "progressive" income tax than we do, yet they have nobility. Maybe we should try a regressive tax if your goal is to prevent nobility.

They also have a King and House of Lords. I suppose I should have placed nobility in single so I didn't confuse you.

Since I do not donate to any politician or political party I didn't know political contributions were not deductable - makes it more obvious they are bribes.
 
Last edited:
I think its outrageous for a sitting president to spend almost a billion dollars ( according to the figures they are saying) on the next election when our economy is in the crapper
 
Explain if you will why both of you support a flat tax? I support a progressive income tax for the simple reason it helps prevent a nobility rising in America.

The UK has a much more "progressive" income tax than we do, yet they have nobility. Maybe we should try a regressive tax if your goal is to prevent nobility.

They also have a King and House of Lords. I suppose I should have placed nobility in single so I didn't confuse you.

Since I do not donate to any politician or political party I didn't know political contributions were not deductable - makes it more obvious they are bribes.

I never said they weren't, which is why I scoff at people who think that someone who spends 7 or 8 figures to get a job that pays 5 or 6 care about poor people or the middle class.
 
I agree. I'll vote for you if you run for President.

Explain if you will why both of you support a flat tax? I support a progressive income tax for the simple reason it helps prevent a nobility rising in America.

The UK has a much more "progressive" income tax than we do, yet they have nobility. Maybe we should try a regressive tax if your goal is to prevent nobility.

Except nobility preceded the tax. Don't see it on the rise, do you?
 
Isn't it time to get the money out of politics?

Would you support changes in the tax code disallowing all write-offs for political donations?

Would you support changes in the tax code making the acceptance of any political donations income and taxable?

Of course the devil is in the details of any such proposal, but in principle, shouldn't donations be called what in fact they truly are: BRIBES?

No
 
Free airtime for qualified candidates would go along way

Radio and TV stations are in business to make money. They have expenses including salaries for their employees.

Perhaps you should buy a TV station and provide free airtime for all 535 Senators and Representatives and all of the Presidential candidates.

There are also 50 states that have Governors and state legislators in the thousands that need that free airtime.

When you get that TV station, I am going to run for President, so reserve me some of that free airtime.

You will probably stay in business for 10 or 15 seconds.

I have for a long time suggested a Cable Network that was devoted to all things political... much like this site! Where candidates were given ad time, debates were covered as was political news and information.

That would allow us to tune in when we wanted and make up our own mind.

Last night's debate for instance could be broadcast at 9pm, 12am, 6am and 9am. Anyone that wanted to watch it could tune in and see what they missed. Anyone that fell asleep during the event could catch it later.

Important topics such as abortion, the economy, the debt ceiling etc. etc. etc. could be covered from multiple points of view.

Immie
So who would control the content?
 
In a nation seriously interested in putting the DEMOCRATIC in a democratic republic, there would be absolute limits to how much any person can donate to a political campaign or party.

Don't count on such a thing happening is this shamocratic republic, though.

So you advocate the majority limiting the rights of a minority? You think that it's fine for government to limit the free speech of rich people, but somehow evil for the majority to limit marriage to 2 people of the opposite sex.
 
Radio and TV stations are in business to make money. They have expenses including salaries for their employees.

Perhaps you should buy a TV station and provide free airtime for all 535 Senators and Representatives and all of the Presidential candidates.

There are also 50 states that have Governors and state legislators in the thousands that need that free airtime.

When you get that TV station, I am going to run for President, so reserve me some of that free airtime.

You will probably stay in business for 10 or 15 seconds.

I have for a long time suggested a Cable Network that was devoted to all things political... much like this site! Where candidates were given ad time, debates were covered as was political news and information.

That would allow us to tune in when we wanted and make up our own mind.

Last night's debate for instance could be broadcast at 9pm, 12am, 6am and 9am. Anyone that wanted to watch it could tune in and see what they missed. Anyone that fell asleep during the event could catch it later.

Important topics such as abortion, the economy, the debt ceiling etc. etc. etc. could be covered from multiple points of view.

Immie
So who would control the content?

Control the internet?

Pfffttt..... ME of course!
 
Why do liberals wish to deny the public access to free speech? Money is equal to free speech according to the Supreme Court. So why the desire to stop it? Difficulty in ruling people when they have economic freedom?
 
Radio and TV stations are in business to make money. They have expenses including salaries for their employees.

Perhaps you should buy a TV station and provide free airtime for all 535 Senators and Representatives and all of the Presidential candidates.

There are also 50 states that have Governors and state legislators in the thousands that need that free airtime.

When you get that TV station, I am going to run for President, so reserve me some of that free airtime.

You will probably stay in business for 10 or 15 seconds.

I have for a long time suggested a Cable Network that was devoted to all things political... much like this site! Where candidates were given ad time, debates were covered as was political news and information.

That would allow us to tune in when we wanted and make up our own mind.

Last night's debate for instance could be broadcast at 9pm, 12am, 6am and 9am. Anyone that wanted to watch it could tune in and see what they missed. Anyone that fell asleep during the event could catch it later.

Important topics such as abortion, the economy, the debt ceiling etc. etc. etc. could be covered from multiple points of view.

Immie
So who would control the content?

Who controls the content on the Discovery Channel? The History Channel? Animal Planet? Etc. Etc. Etc.

It sure as hell would not be publicly run. That would be the last thing in the world we would want. I'm not talking about NPR or PBS here.

Immie
 
I have for a long time suggested a Cable Network that was devoted to all things political... much like this site! Where candidates were given ad time, debates were covered as was political news and information.

That would allow us to tune in when we wanted and make up our own mind.

Last night's debate for instance could be broadcast at 9pm, 12am, 6am and 9am. Anyone that wanted to watch it could tune in and see what they missed. Anyone that fell asleep during the event could catch it later.

Important topics such as abortion, the economy, the debt ceiling etc. etc. etc. could be covered from multiple points of view.

Immie
So who would control the content?

Control the internet?

Pfffttt..... ME of course!

I think you missed it, but I was talking about a Cable TV Network ;)

Immie
 

Forum List

Back
Top