The Republican Thread

[Y2HH]

FYI.............UPS and Fed EX drop off 35% of there total volume packages at post office for final delivery every day and number is climbing higher every year under the last mile program. The dirty little secret is you pay the extra money at UPS and FED EX but there is a 1 in 3 chance they do not even deliver it the USPS does. 95% of customers have no idea this is happening, so finding a vendor that ships UPS or FED EX through a online vendor guarantees you nothing on final delivery.

 

I've never had this happen in my area...my packages are always delivered by UPS/FedEX themselves.

[EvilMonkey]

I've never had this happen in my area...my packages are always delivered by UPS/FedEX themselves.

It happens a lot in very rural areas where FedEx and UPS don't want to spend the time to deliver to. Since USPS is going there anyway...

[Jenksismyhero]

Six more people had their e-mails lost.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/38057...-eliana-johnson

 

Convenient.

[cabiness42]

Six more people had their e-mails lost.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/38057...-eliana-johnson

 

Convenient.

 

I've lost documentation on the thousands of dollars worth of deductions I'm claiming, but they'll take my word for it, right?

[southsider2k5]

I've lost documentation on the thousands of dollars worth of deductions I'm claiming, but they'll take my word for it, right?

 

Even better is when THEY lose my W2 and I get a letter stating that they won't recognize the taxes paid from it, and a I owe a fat fine because of it.

[Jake]

It happens a lot in very rural areas where FedEx and UPS don't want to spend the time to deliver to. Since USPS is going there anyway...

 

When I lived in Memphis, FedEx didn't deliver to my place as they gave it to USPS. Makes me chuckle as it was their world headquarters.

[Jenksismyhero]

I'm shocked!

 

http://gawker.com/the-clintons-support-est...axes-1591941000

 

America has treated the Clinton family pretty well. They've become millionaires many times over. But a new report says that even as they support policies to tax the estates of the extreme wealthy, they try to avoid those taxes on their own wealth.

 

There is a thriving industry of tax avoidance strategies for the very rich. These are technically legal, but let's call them what they are: attempts to avoid paying taxes, by the very rich, and to keep more money for themselves, rather than allowing that money go to the public good. It's bad enough when rich heirs and industrialists use these tactics, though of course we expect it. But when a politician who has supported a certain tax structure actively tries to avoid that tax structure, it should make everyone question that politicians morality and honesty.

 

Bloomberg reports today that the Clinton family is actively using tax strategies designed to minimize their eventual estate taxes. Who cares? Everyone should, since Hillary Clinton, who is running for president, supports estate taxes—but when it comes to her own money, she is trying to keep as much of it as possible. (Bill Clinton also supported estate taxes as president.) It is hypocrisy. Bloomberg reports that the Clintons "split their ownership of the house into separate 50 percent shares, and then placed those shares into trusts," and made tax-exempt gifts, moves designed "to stuff as many assets as possible into the nontaxable portion of the estate."

 

"The goal is really be thoughtful and try to build up the nontaxable estate, and that's really what this is," [a tax expert] said. "You're creating things that are going to be on the nontaxable side of the balance sheet when they die."

The Clintons could save at least hundreds of thousands of dollars in estate taxes using these techniques.

 

Yes, they are legal. It hardly matters. It is the spirit of the law that we're talking about. Democrats support estate taxes because they do at least a little to level the playing field and prevent the accumulation of dynastic wealth through many generations. The Clintons are doing whatever they can to accumulate dynastic wealth through many generations. They are hypocrites. It's hard enough taxing the rich as it is. The last thing we need is the people leading the charge refusing to pay their share.

Edited June 17, 2014 by Jenksismybitch

[Soxfest]

It happens a lot in very rural areas where FedEx and UPS don't want to spend the time to deliver to. Since USPS is going there anyway...

It is not only in very rural areas it is everywhere as Jake package was delivered in Memphis by USPS. It is happening nationwide.

Edited June 17, 2014 by Soxfest

[Cknolls]

We do realize that The Daily Mail is basically what you would get if you let Fox News and the National Enquirer have sex, right?

 

 

Was it true?

[Cknolls]

Six more people had their e-mails lost.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/38057...-eliana-johnson

 

Convenient.

 

Did you ask Jake if the citation is suitable for him?

 

[StrangeSox]

It's shaping up to be another huge non-scandal at the IRS, as there's a perfectly plausible explanation for how those emails went missing:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fi...ss-lois-lerner/

 

Also, lol, no National Review is not a reputable source.

[Jake]

National Review is a typically conservative publication, but I actually don't mind them. I rarely read it, but everything that I have I've really enjoyed

[EvilMonkey]

It's shaping up to be another huge non-scandal at the IRS, as there's a perfectly plausible explanation for how those emails went missing:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fi...ss-lois-lerner/

 

Also, lol, no National Review is not a reputable source.

And it was perfectly plausible that Nixon's secretary accidentally stepped on the record peddle while answering the phone as well. I know you bleed Democrat, but that fact that you can't at least see how this APPEARS to be criminal is just dumbfounding. Maybe you should change your screen name to Sgt Schultz.

[Balta1701]

And it was perfectly plausible that Nixon's secretary accidentally stepped on the record peddle while answering the phone as well. I know you bleed Democrat, but that fact that you can't at least see how this APPEARS to be criminal is just dumbfounding. Maybe you should change your screen name to Sgt Schultz.

I generally agree that mistakes that lead to violations of things like the Presidential Records Act come close to qualifying as criminal. Just as this one did. Can we get charges in both cases?

[StrangeSox]

And it was perfectly plausible that Nixon's secretary accidentally stepped on the record peddle while answering the phone as well. I know you bleed Democrat, but that fact that you can't at least see how this APPEARS to be criminal is just dumbfounding. Maybe you should change your screen name to Sgt Schultz.

 

There are two important pieces of evidence that the IRS can produce to verify their story. One would be contemporaneous documentation of their 6 month email retention policy. As far as I see, there's zero reason to doubt that that was their actual policy. I haven't seen anyone point out where that retention policy would have been illegal. The second would be contemporaneous documentation (e.g. IT trouble tickets or emails) from the period after LL's computer crashed in 2011 that document that her computer did, in fact, crash.

 

Nothing there appears to be criminal. And, as it turns out, Issa's committee has been notified of this issue previously and he's just acting all shocked and surprised because, like everything else with him, it's just dog and pony show. If he were truly interested in getting to the bottom of this, he would immunize LL and then compel her to testify. That wouldn't let anyone but her off the hook for any wrongdoings, but Issa won't do it.

 

It doesn't appear criminal because there has been charges of fake scandal after fake scandal coming from Republicans since January 2009 now. They've all fizzled out, including the main thrust of the IRS allegations.

 

eta: I have personally had my work computer crash and lose a few months worth of years-old archived emails because they had also been deleted off of the server. It's not like that scenario the IRS has presented is outlandish or really even all that atypical. What I'm not sure of is even assuming their explanation is 100% legitimate, did their previous email retention policy violate any federal records requirements?

Edited June 19, 2014 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

PC Police Unite!

 

http://defamer.gawker.com/gary-oldman-defe...-a-f-1595210613

 

I'm sure you'll have fun with that one.

 

I mostly agree with him. Everyone has said awful things before, and if you say you haven't you're just lying. The problem with Gibson and Baldwin though is that it's happened multiple times with them. More of a trend than a mistake.

 

I 100% believe the liberal/conservative stuff about who can get away with what. That absolutely happens.

[StrangeSox]

Everyone has said awful things. Not everyone says or even thinks internally that their wife should be "raped by a pack of n*****s." That's not about "political correctness" unless you're defining political correctness as not being a bigoted s***head. Not everyone actually thinks horribly racist, homophobic or sexist remarks in private.

 

edit: holy s*** the auto-filter blocks "s***" but not "n*****s"

Edited June 25, 2014 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

Everyone has said awful things. Not everyone says or even thinks internally that their wife should be "raped by a pack of n*****s." That's not about "political correctness" unless you're defining political correctness as not being a bigoted s***head. Not everyone actually thinks horribly racist, homophobic or sexist remarks in private.

 

edit: holy s*** the auto-filter blocks "s***" but not "n*****s"

 

No, they certainly don't, but people say terrible things in the heat of the moment. That doesn't mean they're an awful person or a racist or a bigot, etc. Jonah Hill just said some awful things, and despite his apology, he still said it. He's not a terrible person, he just said something stupid. Again, I think Gibson and Baldwin have proven themselves over time with multiple incidents to be not very good people, but to the extent that we all overreact to this things and pretend like we're all saints, I think he's absolutely right.

[StrangeSox]

Oldman chose to champion Mel Gibson. Oldman said this:

 

"I don't know about Mel. He got drunk and said a few things, but we've all said those things,"

 

No, we all haven't. Maybe Oldman is just as much of a racist, bigoted f*** as Gibson is and is just projecting what he says or thinks in private on to everyone else. Not everyone slips into disgusting racism or antisemitism when they're drunk, just racists and antisemites.

[Jenksismyhero]

Oldman chose to champion Mel Gibson. Oldman said this:

 

 

 

No, we all haven't. Maybe Oldman is just as much of a racist, bigoted f*** as Gibson is and is just projecting what he says or thinks in private on to everyone else. Not everyone slips into disgusting racism or antisemitism when they're drunk, just racists and antisemites.

 

Just to be clear then, using Jonah Hill as an example, he called someone a f**, so he's forever labeled as a bigoted f***, right?

 

 

[StrangeSox]

No, I don't think so. Oldman didn't choose to defend Jonah Hill, though. He picked Gibson and Baldwin.

 

He also used Bill Maher as an example of someone who doesn't get criticized, but he catches plenty of s*** for generally being a misogynist and an asshole.

[Jenksismyhero]

So is there a threshold then of when you use that kind of language that you become the racist/bigoted f***? I'm a little confused. Jonah Hill - 1, not enough. Gibson/Baldwin, 2-3+, definitely racist/bigoted f***s. So everyone gets one free pass?

 

And yeah, Bill Mahr is criticized, I guess. But he's still got his soap box. Mel was run out of town (rightly or wrongly, i'm not defending him).

[StrangeSox]

Yes, the world is not binary. Saying a racist or bigoted thing or even believing in that ideology for a while but eventually realizing why it's wrong and changing is a good thing. Being a pretty much unrepentant asshole or someone who's completely oblivious that what they're saying is racist or bigoted is different. When you have a pattern of s***ty behavior and show no signs of recognizing it and working to correct it, you're going to be called out for being a s***head. It's not that complicated.

 

edit: a weird contradiction on part of Oldman's argument is that Baldwin is generally a pretty outspoken liberal but caught a lot of flack for his anti-gay slurs. That sort of undermines the whole "liberals get a free pass" claim.

Edited June 25, 2014 by StrangeSox

[Jake]

Jonah Hill also went through with what seemed like a genuine act of contrition

[Jenksismyhero]

Yes, the world is not binary. Saying a racist or bigoted thing or even believing in that ideology for a while but eventually realizing why it's wrong and changing is a good thing. Being a pretty much unrepentant asshole or someone who's completely oblivious that what they're saying is racist or bigoted is different. When you have a pattern of s***ty behavior and show no signs of recognizing it and working to correct it, you're going to be called out for being a s***head. It's not that complicated.

 

edit: a weird contradiction on part of Oldman's argument is that Baldwin is generally a pretty outspoken liberal but caught a lot of flack for his anti-gay slurs. That sort of undermines the whole "liberals get a free pass" claim.

 

I think it was a general point, most of Hollywood is liberal. Most of Hollywood gets a pass. Even Jonah Hill did, despite his PR blitz apologizing for it.