For years, the Democrats have been engaging in the most hypocritical kind class warfare that would do Karl Marx proud.

Democrats call the Republican Party "the party of the rich" when in fact Democrats have had that honor for decades.

Take John Edwards, please.

He lives in a 28 room mansion, and gets $400 haircuts, paid for by campaign fund donations from Joe Sixpack.

Then there's Al Gore, with a 20 room mansion that uses more energy than 20 houses.

George Soros is a billionaire. Oh and a socialist.

Democrats have had more spots on the ten richest congressmen in America for decades.

The hypocrisy of the left is sickening.

Everybody running for President is a rich person.

When was the last time a "regular Joe" was considered a viable candidate? It's a rich man's game, that politix...

And, from my POV, the Dems and Repubs are interchangeable; other than a whole bunch of lying, bullshit rhetoric there ain't a lick of difference between 'em.
They all lie, they all serve a Master other than the American People, and none of them are trustworthy enough to leave alone in a room with a five dollar bill.

Guess your complaining about "Dems" is just more disengenious whining; the noise of someone that would put Party before Country.

How's that working for you?
Not very well, from what I can see...

the only way to parse the question of wealth in politics is to ask ALL candidates the same question(S):

list all the corporations you own/control, all the stocks and bonds, all the mansions and "farmland", your fleet of automobiles and trucks, any yatchs and planes . .. and be sure to include stuff you've titled in your spouse's or kids' names to evade discovery.

i'm for a different kind of campaign reform. i want to remove the limit on personal contributions one can make to a candidate (the current $2,300 limit simply encourages one to run for office himself, rather than contribute to a more rational player), but i want full and immediate disclosure of who gave thousands or millions to who.

the 2nd part of my campaign reform is to totally prohibit contributions NOT made by individuals, that is no corporate money, no union money collected from dues, no PAC money . .. and no PAC ads. anything published politically has to be controlled and approved and authored by a specific candidate, not a political action committee who is answerable to no one, with no transparency on where the money came from.

politicians will never go for this though - too much honesty involved.

[the 2nd part of my campaign reform is to totally prohibit contributions NOT made by individuals, that is no corporate money, no union money collected from dues, no PAC money . .. and no PAC ads. anything published politically has to be controlled and approved and authored by a specific candidate, not a political action committee who is answerable to no one, with no transparency on where the money came from.]

But what about my freedom of speech? Since when are politicians the only ones who should have a right to speak their minds about politics?

Chumming FrayCons. So Democratic candidates/elected officials/supporters who advocate for the poor should take a vow of poverty and divest themselves of all worldly possessions huh? Okay. Repub candidates/elected officials/supporters who claim to support the troops should join up. Fair is fair. Right chummer?

BFD, Sen. McCain served with great distinction in the US Military. Fair is fair.

That's right melonhead. He walks the walk. I got no problem with John McCain. If I was a Repub,he'd get my vote.

I knew if I kept reading some out of touch right winger would bring up the haircut thing. Yeah. Let's talk about the haircut. While America burns and the Constitution is shredded by the morons in the white house.

melonhead:

BFD, Sen. McCain served with great distinction in the US Military. Fair is fair.

And ALL of the other GOP candidates? Or does one out of a thousand count for all of them?

True conservative,

It is already illegal for unions to use dues money for federal elections without written permission of its individual members. In fact Unions have far more restrictions on how they may invest and spend their own money than any other group in these United States. The NLRB is currently lead by the most anti worker administration since the 1800s but I guess thats not anti worker enough for you.

Perhaps we should just all go back to 16 hour days and the 40 year life span. That way we won't be such a bother to people like you, eh? Sorry that it upsets you that we like having ten fingers and ten toes at the end of the workday and that our living long enough to see our own grandchildren and maybe even watch them grow up is such a huge hardship for you.

NickD:

True conservative,

It is already illegal for unions to use dues money for federal elections without written permission of its individual members. In fact Unions have far more restrictions on how they may invest and spend their own money than any other group in these United States. The NLRB is currently lead by the most anti worker administration since the 1800s but I guess thats not anti worker enough for you.

Perhaps we should just all go back to 16 hour days and the 40 year life span. That way we won't be such a bother to people like you, eh? Sorry that it upsets you that we like having ten fingers and ten toes at the end of the workday and that our living long enough to see our own grandchildren and maybe even watch them grow up is such a huge hardship for you.

What?

First of all, I do work for a living. I'm in construction, and my pants are muddy right now, thank you very much.

More to the point, what in the world does any of this have to do with what we were discussing?

For years, the Democrats have been engaging in the most hypocritical kind class warfare that would do Karl Marx proud.

Democrats call the Republican Party "the party of the rich" when in fact Democrats have had that honor for decades.

Democrats have had more spots on the ten richest congressmen in America for decades.

The hypocrisy of the left is sickening.

CaliforniaDreamin,

You write as if the only Democrats are politicians. Just a note to say that I'm a Democrat as well, and I'm not one of the ten richest people in the country. Don't conflate the parties themselves with the people who support them.

I call the Republican Party "the party of the rich" because many of the policies of that party are designed to benefit rich people, most of whom are Republicans.

Thank goodness there are some rich Democratic politicians who can afford to run against rich Republican politicians.

As for class warfare, I think the Republican Party has been engaged in that for decades, with its tax codes, its regulations on heath benefits, its decisions on equitable schooling and housing, etc., etc., ad nauseum.

Mary Ann

[As for class warfare, I think the Republican Party has been engaged in that for decades, with its tax codes, its regulations on heath benefits, its decisions on equitable schooling and housing, etc., etc., ad ]

Explain please.

Hi True Conservative,

As tax codes are now structured, the poor pay a greater percentage of their income into taxes than do the rich.

The Republican insistence on retaining the status quo with regard to heath insurance results in the rich getting much better care than the poor, not just somewhat better care as in countries with state-sponsored health coverage.

Selecting True Conservatives for the Supreme Court has resulted in a recent court decision that will result in fewer opportunities for poor black students in urban areas to receive educations comparable to middle class white students in suburban areas.

Republican emphasis on capitalistic laissez faire has resulted in very few instances of developers building mixed housing (free market and subsidized) in suburban areas.

(I've always felt that a desirable domestic policy would be an attainable middle-ground between the two extremes of Democratic and Republican ideals. What I deplore over the last generation or so has been the willingness on both sides of the Aisle to "win" at all costs, rather than compromise. Both sides seem more interested in standing firm than in working out something beneficial for those of us who live in this country. See, e.g. immigration, the upcoming children's health benefit bill which Bush says he'll veto, etc.)

Mary Ann

True conservative.

You have a part of a campaign that says Union dues should not be allowed to go to elections. It was in your post above. I pointed out that Unions cannot use dues for donations to federal candidates and in many states they cannot give to State candidates either. Unions must have written permission from their members to even even spend money on political ISSUES that directly affect a Unions ability to work for their members.

The GOP has worked very hard to tie the hands of working folks. If you are in construction and supporting the GOP you are cutting of one of your own feet to spite your sore legs.

By the way, most people take the time to have a shower when they get home from work before they dally on the computer. Muddy clothes in your den? your wife must be proud.