Weekly Roundup – Vote Early and Often Edition

3 Responses to “Weekly Roundup – Vote Early and Often Edition”

1. 1
   Renee Says:
   November 1st, 2008 at 12:10 pm

   I am offended by your biased and sexist comment about the implications of Palin’s wardrobe,. You make no mention of how much was spent on Obama’s clothes(they are designer) nor his wife’s make up and hair nor her inaccurate statement that she gerts her closthes from a catalog when she clearly wears designer clothes. More troubling is how much Obama spent on his “visit” to Germany -over $700,000 when Germans woill not be voting for him and more than that amount on the :Grecian columns” in his address. Isn’t that a monumental waste of money from a candidate claiming fiscal responsibility and “redistributing the wealth? And those millions came from the election funds garnered from all the little people, not Obama’s pocket. What would you have done with the millions Obama has spent glorifying himself with the 16,000 in limousines in Germany alone-again Germans can’t vote for him?

   As for Palin, they spent a lot less on her than Obama’s custom made suits, Michlelle Obams’ clothes make up and Biden’s hair plugs let alone the millions spent on “columns” AND most of the clothes were returned, which you fail to mention. You also failed to mention that since Palin, a figure who breaks all viewership records everywhere she appears (because people actually want to see her unlike Obama’s 30 minute infomercial that also costs millions) wore those clothes in a history making moment, they will garner millions if they were sold so the GNP will make a huge profit on them. Funny how you don’t mention nor does the media seek the info on how much Hillary’s pantsuits and make-up and plastic surgery has cost and where that money came from.

   Your bias is showing and it is disturbing.

2. 2
   nickel Says:
   November 1st, 2008 at 6:38 pm

   Renee: You’re offended by my comments? Go back and read what I wrote:

   “Kay took an interesting look at the tax implications of Sarah Palin’s $150k shopping spree.”

   And then I linked to an article written by someone else that addresses an interesting tax-related issue… $150k was spent on clothing and accessories for a political candidate. It doesn’t matter who that candidate was. It’s a simple fact, and there are possibly interesting income tax implications that stem from this. Is that stuff treated (under IRS guidelines) as a uniform? Would it be considered taxable income to her (since it was paid for by the RNC and provided to her at no cost)? Etc.

   As for my supposed bias, the reason that I didn’t mention Hillary (or anyone else covered in your rant) is that this is a link roundup. As in, I link to interesting articles that I’ve run across elsewhere. And guess what? The article in question happened to be about Sarah Palin.

   If you had read just a bit further, you’d have seen that I linked to articles talking about both McCain’s and Obama’s financial platforms. Am I now biased because I linked to information on both candidates rather than to just the one that you happen to support?

   Oh, and you called me sexist… Not only did I not write the article in question, but guess what? It was penned by a woman! So now I’m sexist for highlighting interesting tax-related information that was written by a woman? Yikes.

3. 3
   The Digerati Life Says:
   November 2nd, 2008 at 1:30 am

   On the topic of the economy not being as bad as we think… I guess it’s all relative. The economy is bad relative to recent times, but not so when you think of the worst downtrends in history. Hmmmm…. this is the glass half full approach…