Um, in fact, since donations were not tax deductable, Edwards broke ZERO tax laws, and that fact has nothing to do with some invented "line".
Another POS hit they put in the piece.
Edwards gives the speech of a Lifetime...
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Um, in fact, since donations were not tax deductable, Edwards broke ZERO tax laws, and that fact has nothing to do with some invented "line".
Another POS hit they put in the piece.
They weren't talking about tax laws, they were talking about campaign finance laws.
I think you're right. The corporate media doesn't like this guy. Edwards has a bullseye on him. I think the corporate media likes status quo candidates. Edwards is a little to passionate and credible about taking on special interests, and representing working americans.
And the thing is, the media knows he might be a once-in-a-generation candidate. Someone who is both ideologically progressive, and electable electorally
Not per se, no. But neither is the international section, right? But, on some days there will be a story that is filed under the international section, that the editors make the judgement is front page news, so that's where it will appear. And this is where the Edwards piece appeared, front page, yes.
Ah, it was a headline link then? I see editorials like that all the time. I need to see the paper itself. This is clearly an opinion piece, IMO. That doesn't make the facts in the article any less disconcerting for me, but it is clearly opinion.
Yeah?
Funny, the guy she quoted, and his "credentials" sure make it sound like she is trying to imply tax problems.
Marcus S. Owens, a Washington lawyer who headed the Internal Revenue Service division that oversees nonprofit agencies.
Excellent!
The fact that Damo thought this read like an Editorial, and NOT news, makes Darla's point about piss-poor journalism all the more relevant.
Ok, wow, I am a subscriber, it was a front page story, I am sorry if I was unclear somehow.
Campaign finance laws walk hand-in-hand with non-profit tax law.
Right, so in an article filled with innuendo and unsubstantiated opinons of Edwards' internal motivations, she wasn't trying to imply tax laws flirted with when she wrote:
Marcus S. Owens, a Washington lawyer who headed the Internal Revenue Service division that oversees nonprofit agencies.
No, I don't think she was as the article wasn't about tax laws, it was about campaign finance laws being skirted using this organization.
Socrtease
Verified User
Electable? You really think that moderate independants and conservative dems will vote for the mouth piece of class warfare?
Yes. The "class warfare" is a bogus argument, used by rightwing talk radio.
Who likes NAFTA/CAFTA? Hardly anyone.
Who wants some form of universal healthcare? Almost everyone.
Who wants to end the iraq war? Almost everyone.
Do most americans these days, think wealthy special interests control our political system? You bet.
Socrtease
Verified User
All those are valid points. But Edwards wants to PUNISH the wealthy in this country for being to wealthy. He wants to tax the shit out of them. He wants a healthcare system that will bankrupt us without a HUGE tax increase. He paints with huge broad strokes about evil corporations as if all corps are killing the population with bad products and working us to death. The days of the 60's and 70's liberal are gone. The majority of working americans want to be rich. They want enough money to pay all their bills, go on vacation, buy new cars and tvs and all the other shit that goes with consumerism and they will not stand for someone trying to take that away from them by over taxing the ONLY people that are going to give them jobs to make that dream possible.