Originally Posted By FaMulan The Senate rejected the bill: <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14176214/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14 176214/</a> "Republicans were dealt a blow when two Democrats, Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, both of Washington, announced they planned to oppose the GOP’s bill. “This is a cynical ploy on the part of the Republican leadership in an election year,†Cantwell said in a statement. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., had tried repeatedly this year to repeal or reduce the estate tax, derided as the “death tax†by its opponents. “This death tax punishes everyday Americans by forcing them to give up their business, to give up their farms,†he said."
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> “This is a cynical ploy on the part of the Republican leadership in an election year,†Cantwell said in a statement. << She's right. But look at the GOP track record recently - EVERYTHING has been a cynical election year ploy - gay marriage amendment (that they already knew was going to fail, but did it anyway), flag-burning (same thing), pledge of allegience. They even managed to have an insulting debate over renewing the voting rights act, of all things. I mean - who's opposed to voting rights? Now they're going into august recess and absolutely nothing will get done. All that time wasted. If I were a republican, I would be so ashamed of my party.
Originally Posted By gadzuux You mean the party of 'containment' over war? The party of building a solid middle class over shifting wealth and jobs away? The party of providing equality and justice for all over inscribing discrimination into our founding document? The party of fiscal responsibility over the multi-billion dollar tax cuts for the wealthiest during a time of war? The party that wants to reform health care and increase access over restricting treatments and research based on a 'pro-life' agenda? The party that seeks accountability from the executive branch over the party that rubber stamps failed policies out of deference for not causing embarrassment to the president? The party that seeks to ease the tax burden on average citizens over providing tax breaks on oil companies that are currently gouging those same americans? That's the party you would be ashamed of? Then there's a political party that's perfect for you - it's called the republicans. You'll fit right in.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <That's the party you would be ashamed of?> No, I'm ashamed of the Democrats, the party of failed idea and opposition and obstruction for the sake of opposition and obstruction.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer >>The party of providing equality and justice for all over inscribing discrimination into our founding document? << From today's WSJ Political Diaries.... >>Bigoted While Sober Ugly racial tactics can work both ways. Some of the most repugnant campaign tactics this year have occurred in districts held by minority officeholders who are retiring but where a single white candidate has tried to run. In New York City, city councilman David Yassky has been the victim of a concerted effort to force him out of the race for a vacant Congressional seat because local black leaders say black representation of the area must be preserved. Mr. Yassky is the only white candidate in a multi-candidate field. Retiring Rep. Major Owens has labeled Mr. Yassky a "colonizer." Al Sharpton has called the candidate, who is Jewish, "greedy." To top it off, Albert Vann, a city councilman who opposes Mr. Yassky's candidacy, sent an email to black elected officials nationwide announcing: "We are in peril of losing a 'Voting Rights' district . . . as a result of the well financed candidacy of Council Member David Yassky, a white individual." No one expects the rhetoric to get better before next month's Democratic primary. In part that's because the New York race-baiters are nervously looking at the results of yesterday's primary in Tennessee. In a contest to succeed Rep. Harold Ford, who's running for the Senate, voters in his 60% black Memphis district selected six-term state Senator Steve Cohen to be the Democratic candidate. Mr. Cohen won just over a third of the vote in the primary, much of it from white voters but a great deal from African-Americans who admired his constituent service and state legislative experience. But the campaign was often ugly. One opponent questioned whether Mr. Cohen, who is Jewish, could focus on local issues during the current crisis involving Israel and Lebanon. The Memphis Commercial Appeal reported that a pollster working for candidate Edward Stanton had asked voters whether they wanted their congressman to be a "born-again Christian or a Jew." A subterranean campaign was conducted emphasizing that Mr. Cohen's selection would roll back the civil-rights progress blacks had made in Memphis. In reality, it's those kind of race-based appeals that set back racial progress. When minority voters are lumped together in gerrymandered Congressional districts, the result is often only to encourage candidates who seek support on purely racial grounds. Those kinds of candidates -- Mr. Ford is a clear exception -- are usually too polarizing and extreme to appeal to enough voters to win statewide office. Happily, the black community in Memphis largely ignored attempts to balkanize this week's primary. Here's hoping voters in Mr. Yassky's Brooklyn district react in a similar fashion. -- John Fund<<
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Also then if a local municipality raises the min wage too far and many business go under...they should come whining to the feds so the rest of the country can bail them out with adi for decisions they made. > Has this ever actually happened? That a state has raised the minimum wage "too high" and then asked for bailout money from the feds??? I don't recall ever hearing about anything like that. There are bailouts for natural disasters and even sometimes an industry (Chrysler), but I don't remember anything like this.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <If I were a republican, I would be so ashamed of my party. < <If I were a Democrat, I would be more ashamed of my party.< put this on a bumper sticker and you have the credo for LP World Events. as for me, there is plenty to be ashamed of in both parties right now if everyone was being honest - and I am hoping for a change to the better sometime soon from either one of them
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <Has this ever actually happened? That a state has raised the minimum wage "too high" and then asked for bailout money from the feds??? I don't recall ever hearing about anything like that. < that's why the word IF is in there...it was hypothetical as most municipalites also do not raise a minimum wage to be 3 times that of the fed min ..so there is little or no historical precedence.. the hypothetical is because if we were to say the states can do whatever they want regardless of federal direction, then ownership of that decision and consequences should belong to the state..I have little problem with it unless the state overrides and then cries for help from everyone else for a decision they had total control over. A natural disaster a completely different issue, regardless of what some may believe, there is no way to stop a hurricane for instance....then federal help is absolutely the right thing...
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Okay, I thought it was a hypothetical. And it's one I don't think we need worry about too much; I know some states have higher minimum wages than the federal, but it's not THAT much more - they'd have their own reasons for not wanting it too high.
