Trouble in Paradise

Apparently there is trouble between the McCain and Palin camps. According to CNN:

[A] McCain source says she appears to be looking out for herself more than the McCain campaign.

“She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone,” this McCain adviser said. “She does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else.

“Also, she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: Divas trust only unto themselves, as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom.”

Things are definitely breaking down. The campaign appears to be in serious disarray. But the point is not to gloat, but to recognize the lack of leadership and unity. As I said before, it matters.

, , ,

  1. #1 by Leo Brown on October 28, 2008 - 6:36 am

    The claim is that Senator McCain and Governor Palin are both mavericks, and this bears it out. In their defense I would say that that is not the worst thing in the world. The economic meltdown is a gale force headwind. This just isn’t a GOP year, no matter what the GOP does or doesn’t do. As for picking up the pieces after November, I don’t think Palin will lead the party in 2009. Governor Romney is the logical alternative, but the task will be very daunting for anyone.

  2. #2 by Becky Stauffer on October 28, 2008 - 7:20 am

    I agree with you on Palin. She is damaged goods. It was a mistake to try to sell her to the American people as qualified to be president when she so clearly is not. I suspect as governor of Alaska, she has risen to her level of incompetence.

  3. #3 by Anonymous on October 28, 2008 - 7:50 am

    What is interesting about her level of incompetence is under the renegotiated deal with the oil majors operating in Alaska, every man, woman, and child in Alaska received the largest dividend check for state oil revenues ever.

    3200 dollars each. I think the next highest was around 1900 dollars. So for the Palin family, about 23,000 k this year.

    That’s the kind of incompetence you can take to the bank.

  4. #4 by Becky Stauffer on October 28, 2008 - 9:12 am

    Right, anon, a nice kickback, er, entitlement program to benefit only Alaskan citizens, while the oil companies pass along those costs to all consumers. Not exactly Country First.

  5. #5 by Bob S. on October 28, 2008 - 10:12 am

    I’m confused, isn’t this spreading the wealth, exactly like Obama wants to do?

    People don’t have to work for the money, someone else does that. People having a higher income don’t get more of the money, it’s a fixed amount. This means those making less get a higher percentage income boost.

    This appears to be everything that Obama wants to do, but I see Becky complaining that the Oil companies pass it along to the consumer.

    By the way, isn’t that exactly what will happen if Obama raises the tax rates for businesses?

  6. #6 by James Farmer on October 28, 2008 - 11:08 am

    Bob:

    The better way to look at the Alaska situation is whoring your natural resources to the highest bidder. There is absolutely nothing to compare with Obama’s plan.

    You’d make a better case arguing Bar Stool Economics – you know, that totally ridiculous oversimplified argument that republicans love because they think they are all economists armed with everything they need to know after reading it.

  7. #7 by Cliff Lyon on October 28, 2008 - 11:22 am

    Don’t talk to Bob. He just shilling for Fox. “Spreading the wealth” is a canard.

  8. #8 by Bob S. on October 28, 2008 - 11:44 am

    Cliff,

    So you agree that it is wrong to spread the wealth, that is it a canard?

    Thanks :)

    2001 – Redistribute the wealth
    2008 – Spread the wealth to Joe the Plumber
    Multiple references to economic & social justice….all canards by the candidate of change.

    By way, responding to Obama’s talking head; many people are accusing of McCain of socialism also. It’s just he’s less socialist then Obama.

  9. #9 by Becky Stauffer on October 28, 2008 - 11:54 am

    That’s right, Cliff and James. Bob knows perfectly well that most U.S. corporations pay no taxes at all and that loopholes in the tax code are geared specifically toward letting the rich keep more and more of their money while an increasingly unfair burden falls to the middle class. Bob is well aware that Obama’s plan only seeks to refine the tax code to help the middle class keep their collective noses above water. The middle and poor classes will not be coming anywhere near rich as a result.

    By the way, good clip, Cliff. I got a kick out of Megan halfway through saying that a Rasmussen poll showed that Americans think that Fox is the LEAST biased of all the networks. Hahaha. I had to pause the video until I stopped laughing!

  10. #10 by Bob S. on October 28, 2008 - 12:10 pm

    Perhaps, I’m not the one passing off canards

    And perhaps these media outlets also should have looked at the size of the companies studied in the GAO report. Kevin A. Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute noted that had they done this, they would have seen that most of the millions of companies examined in the study were small businesses. Businesses tend to structure their affairs to avoid unnecessary taxation. So, for example, a small business owner is likely to pay himself or herself a high salary (and pay individual income taxes), take a wage deduction (and pay wage taxes), and thus reduce his or her profits to zero. Alternatively, if the same small business owner were to keep the profit and then distribute it as a dividend, the owner would be subject to the 35% corporate tax and then a 15% tax on the dividend. So the small business owner isn’t
    avoiding taxes entirely, but, rather, is arranging his or her affairs to legally reduce taxes.

    And onto the next equally shocking reason for the lack of tax liability … in the current economic climate, some corporations, gasp, actually haven’t been making any money, resulting in losses that may be deducted against income of other tax years. Another reason for the lack of tax liability is that some corporations haven’t been making any money, resulting in losses that are allowed to be deducted against income of other tax years. Losing money purposely to avoid taxes is not a good strategy-just ask the auto or airline industries.

    So, not paying taxes for individuals who are struggling, but businesses that are struggling not paying taxes is bad?

    The tax situation for corporations is not all that different from that of individuals. IRS data show that for 2005-the final year of the GAO study-approximately one-third, or 44 million, of the 134 million individual income tax returns filed showed no income tax liability whatsoever.

    In sum, the idea that there is a large pool of corporations not paying taxes that they legally owe is just incorrect. Maybe misrepresenting the data or using it to make deceptive arguments is just the media’s way of turning a report that really says nothing into a scintillating, scandalous story. It wouldn’t be the first time.

    Maybe it is not just the media misrepresenting facts, eh?

  11. #11 by Cliff Lyon on October 28, 2008 - 12:37 pm

    Whats your point Bob?

  12. #12 by Bob S. on October 28, 2008 - 12:55 pm

    Cliff,

    My point is that Becky was wrong when she said most businesses aren’t paying taxes. Simply not true.

    Most of the businesses “not paying” taxes are not paying corporate tax rates on their profits; they still pay payroll or wage taxes, etc.

    So once again, we have a distortion of the facts.

    My point is also the inconsistency in the views expressed here.
    Low income people using the system to pay the least in taxes – good
    Low income businesses using the system to pay the least in taxes – bad.

    Bob is well aware that Obama’s plan only seeks to refine the tax code to help the middle class keep their collective noses above water.

    Sorry, but my reading of Obama’s tax plans and his other proposals doesn’t indicate that at all. Regardless of what Obama says on the campaign, he is a socialist/marxist, his policies reflect that. More and more people will be paying more in taxes so the wealth can be spread around. Not keep the middle class noses above the water

    The middle and poor classes will not be coming anywhere near rich as a result.

    Here is a novel concept, it’s not the government’s job to help the middle and poor classes become rich, it’s not the governments job to take from the rich to help the middle and poor class.
    It is the government’s job to stand out of the way and let the people do for themselves.

  13. #13 by Bob S. on October 28, 2008 - 12:57 pm

    Comment trapped in moderation

  14. #14 by Cliff Lyon on October 28, 2008 - 1:04 pm

    Nothing in moderation. Becky is right. Actual tax revenue from US Companies make the US the second lowest in the industrialized world.

    Its in the GAO report every year.

    But don’t take their word for it, ASK ANY TAX ACCOUNTANT.

  15. #15 by Becky Stauffer on October 28, 2008 - 1:15 pm

    Bob, businesses are able to show on paper they didn’t make a profit for tax purposes by utilizing advantages in the tax code along with accepted albeit sometimes dubious accounting techniques. Please don’t pretend not to know what I’m talking about.

    As for payroll taxes, how will those change under Obama? I thought we were talking income taxes here.

  16. #16 by Becky Stauffer on October 28, 2008 - 1:19 pm

    And let’s not forget the nicest loophole of all–American corporations setting up shop in the Cayman Islands or elsewhere offshore to shield income from U.S. taxes.

  17. #17 by Anonymous on October 28, 2008 - 3:13 pm

    Becky; The state of alaska is about the only instance in the United States history where commodities extractions profits have in any way been distributed to residents of the state where the riches are taken from.

    Becky, you are woefully ignorant of the alaska oil situation. As oil is a commodity that is very expensive, risky, and time consuming to transport, it is generally sold to markets that desire it. which are in best proximity to the source. In this case Alaska, most of the oil is sold to Japan for cash, with the remainder shipped to Anacortes WA. for refining for use in the Seattle area and surrounding vales.

    What has occurred in Alaska is a committment from State representatives to acquire some measure of the oil benefit for their citizens. Like Norway, a remarkable socialist country.

    Do you imagine Becky that the Norwegians sell their oil to anyone for less money than anyone else? They do though do Alaska does, and directs a share of that money flow to local residents that are the human resources of where the welath comes from and vested so, by the State of Alaska…and more recently very successfully so by a certain…Sarah Palin.

  18. #18 by Anonymous on October 28, 2008 - 3:19 pm

    It isn’t just corporations Becky. Individuals make the bulk of the illicit deposits, which are gleaned from the corporations as bonus and salary.

  19. #19 by Anonymous on October 28, 2008 - 3:31 pm

    Becky, your comment displays all the misunderstandings about oil, and how unique in the US the Alaska state dividend check really is.

    Oil being what it is, expensive, risky, and time consumingto transport is generally sold to buyers in the closest vicinity to the source as possible. In the case of Alaska that buyer is Japan. The remainder of the oil is transported to Anacortes Washington, where it it is refined, and then used domestically.

    The “Dividend” is about the only instance of commodity extraction in the US where state residents receive monies from the windfall, so to speak. The cost to the consumer remains what it is. Do you Becky, imagine that Norway for example, does not sell its oil to the highest bidder like anyone else, though its generated wealth goes to support a socialist, egalitarian system?

    What is happening in Alaska is the ONLY example of this kind of revenue sharing happening in North America, other than what is done buy Native or Tribal corporations.

    The fact that Alaska residents have seen a greater share of this windfall, which by any estimation is deserved by the human capital from whence it comes, Alaska lands, has just seen an upwards of 50% increase under the directed efforts of a one…

    Sarah Palin.

    Right on.

  20. #20 by Anonymous on October 28, 2008 - 3:33 pm

    Webmaster….the replies are locked up in this shite of a system you have running.

  21. #21 by Anonymous on October 28, 2008 - 3:47 pm

    Becky, your comment displays all the misunderstandings about oil, and how unique in the US the Alaska state dividend check really is.

    Oil being what it is, expensive, risky, and time consumingto transport is generally sold to buyers in the closest vicinity to the source as possible. In the case of Alaska that buyer is Japan. The remainder of the oil is transported to Anacortes Washington, where it it is refined, and then used domestically.

    The “Dividend” is about the only instance of commodity extraction in the US where state residents receive monies from the windfall, so to speak. The cost to the consumer remains what it is. Do you Becky, imagine that Norway for example, does not sell its oil to the highest bidder like anyone else, though its generated wealth goes to support a socialist, egalitarian system?

    What is happening in Alaska is the ONLY example of this kind of revenue sharing happening in North America, other than what is done buy Native or Tribal corporations.

    The fact that Alaska residents have seen a greater share of this windfall, which by any estimation is deserved by the human capital from whence it comes, Alaska lands, has just seen an upwards of 50% increase under the directed efforts of a one…

    Sarah Palin.

    Right on!

  22. #22 by Cliff Lyon on October 28, 2008 - 4:04 pm

    Anonymous,

    The system attempts to trap spam.

    You might try to use a name when you post so the system doesn’t think you are a lazy robot. :)

  23. #23 by Becky Stauffer on October 28, 2008 - 4:47 pm

    Well, Anon, you’ve been busy while I was away. The comparison of the “dividends” to changes in tax structure to bring about more fairness is apples to oranges. Cliff has an excellent post a couple of clicks above this one to explain why we already have socialism of a Republican brand. Let’s face it, we’ve socialized Wall Street, the de facto symbol of capitalism.

    But since you like this model, what if we extended this dividend idea to Utah business? Maybe EnergySolutions can give us a nice bonus for all the radioactive waste we have to take whether we like it (or know it) or not. Let’s think of some others–maybe we could all get a share of those Jazz player salaries. Now we’re really talking redistribution of wealth. Kind of ridiculous, isn’t it?

  24. #24 by Becky Stauffer on October 28, 2008 - 5:20 pm

    Back to the original point of this post, a high advisor in the McCain camp has called Palin a “whack job”. Doesn’t sound like a mutual admiration society to me.

  25. #25 by Glenn Hoefer on October 29, 2008 - 7:09 am

    As many times as I tried to get it through this inadeqaute system, can hardly be described as lazy.

    What with the porn posts I see here regularly Cliff, I would say whoever runs this site has their work cut out for them. How do they pass constantly through this system?

    Becky, great idea for Energy Solutions, perhaps you should meet with the unqualified Palin and figure out he she managed to coerce the oil majors in Alaska into increasing the state royalty tax. There is little doubt that Utah is being considered not only for domestic nuclear waste, but international waste as well.

    Might as well profit from it, as whine.

    Becky, the Alaska State dividend has been part of the Alaska landscape since the first tanker left the Chukchi Sea. If you think it ridiculous, vote for McCain. You see the “dividend” was arranged BEFORE the oil production commenced. I figure lazy inept, and rather stupid Utahns are attempting to see some benefit from ES, AFTER the cows have left the barn. Good luck, sharing in windfall wealth takes planning and public commitment. Seems as though Palin lives in a State that knows that, and she has adopted the idea, in her transplanted home of Alaska.

    Let the educationally deficient once again be reminded, that the bail out of Wall Street can only be accomplished by Congress, the president only proposed it. Last time I checked Congress was held in majority by the democrats, so the socialization is to be perhaps expected. It has become clear that the people who reject the bailout are fiscal conservatives, whatever their party affiliation.

    Needless to say, there is very little difference these days between democrats or republicans Becky. The socialist bailout was effected by the democrat Congress. Bush could not make it happen by executive order. Basic US government protocol.

    Obama will surprise those that have a notion that he will be the person he campaigned as.

  26. #26 by Glenn Hoefer on October 29, 2008 - 7:12 am

    By the way Cliff, what you said about spam is not true. The system told me that I was “posting too quickly”. As progressive as this site is, is it possible that you are using a deficient program to run it, under the fairness doctrine?

  27. #27 by C av on October 29, 2008 - 1:06 pm

    FREE GLENN H’s ANONIMITY NOW, OR THE PUMPKIN GETS IT!

  28. #28 by James Farmer on October 29, 2008 - 1:47 pm

    The system told me that I was “posting too quickly”.

    A sure sign that you are not thinking long enough before you post; as is evidenced, of course, by what you post!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: