Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Is Wealth Inequity Defended Due To Faith That Great Wealth Was Legitimately Amassed

host · 02-19-2008, 10:34 PM

I'm taking the risk that putting these exchanges all in one post might influence another member, or two....to pause and take stock of what is going on....every day, in this forum....and it sure as shit isn't a discussion:

<h3>post #7</h3>

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

OK, they distribute beer. He ranks 7th in wealthy senators. I'm betting Kennedy is higher and how'd he get rich? Daddy-it's been long rumored Daddy Kennedy made a fortune as a rum "distributor" during Prohibition.
Now, did you vote for John Kerry in 2004? Ketchup money through the wife.

Your post reaks of Republican bashing, not of wanting to understand the disparities of the classes or how they came about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Where in those links does it mention that McCain's in-laws are running for office?
While Clinton was president, he pardoned 140 convicted felons, including.....his own brother.
Every bottle of Heinz you bought put a portion into John Kerry's campaign box.
I'm about as unemotional about this election as a person can get....yet you're on some sort of get'em because McCain's inlaws weren't stellar(well, gee whiz, Wally!) and then accuse me of being emotionally charged....
Relax, dude....
As a footnote, Hillary has both black and Jewish bloodlines.I find that about as interesting as McCain's inlaws being convicted of something decades ago.
In other words, ain't got nothin to do with anything now. Come back when MCain makes daddy-in-law a Cabinet member.

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

C'mon, loquitur, the fraud and corruption at the top is rampant.

Here is an example, you can verify it yourself. Bush and his partners purchased the baseball team in the 80's for about $86 million, and they sold it, 14 years later, for less than $300 million, those numbers are part of the public record, but so is this:

Shouldn't Bush's long term capital gain on the baseball team investment, considering that he never invested personally more than $1 million in the team, (and maybe even less than that...), if the team was sold for an amount that was less than 4 times the purchase price, been a capital gain of no more than $4 million?

How do you explain Bush paying taxes on at least $14 million in income in 1998, at the 20 percent long term capital gains tax rate, instead of at the higher, earned income rate of 39.2 percent?

Bush explained that his accountants took an "aggressive position" in deciding how to categorize Bush's actual capital gains. What do you call what Bush did, loquitur? It looks like he ducked paying an additional $3 million in taxes that he clearly owed.

If you disagree, don't you need to provide data that Bush invested more than I've posted, or that they team was purchased for less or sold for more than I've posted?

Isn't anything else, no matter how you slice or dice it, clear evidence of gross income tax fraud? What kind of example does it set, or influence perception that we live in a two tiered oligarchy of gross wealth inequity?

We're not even in the same discussion, ngdawg.....I gave you specifics, you ignored or distorted them, and now you've marched on Clinton, H
Huh???? ngdawg, I showed you that the money that McCain now possesses, had to knowingly come to him, and that it is proceeds from original investments made with organized crime proceeds invested into an opportunity provided by organized crime connections.

I asked at what point you think McCain's money was cleansed, and above is your response.

You've moved onto new things....how many criminals, in his own administration, and in Reagan's administration, did Bush Sr. pardon? Who had congressional hearings held about his pardons, Bush Sr. or Clinton? What was determind by those hearings?

Again, did McCain or did he not, immerse himself in the employment and the money of an Arizona organized crime figure?

It seems like a valid and a simple question, because he's running for president, and his past with Hensley either makes him stupid and incurious, or unethical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Re: previous, in no part of my post did I compare JFK to McCain. What I stated was that the wealth of the Kennedys (note the plural) has been stated/rumored to have been obtained through liquor sales during Prohibition.
I've marched on Clinton because it's just as (un)important. Hillary married the brother of a known drug addict/felon...so is her campaign fund box funded with drug money? Does it make her a druggie?
McCain married the daughter of a felon/fraud. So, like Hillary, is he now a felon by osmosis? I'm not the one missing the point here.
Put it another way: I have had at least 3 speeding tickets. Does that make me a wreckless driver now? Now, if you were to bring up a point known that the campaign funds of McCain were illegally obtained by the fraud committed by his father-in-law, you might have something. There's no evidence of that. You're making a case of osmosis only. Perhaps you're having some trouble understanding. I got what you're attempting to say, it just doesn't have any bearing on McCain and where his funds come from now. Besides, the old man did his time and the state of AZ forgave that and gave him license to distribute. If a state can see to do that, perhaps you need to get past it as well and base your choice for president on the current merit of the candidates, not the errors of their felonious relatives.
If that was done across the board, no one would live in the White House.

Quote:

Originally Posted by loquitur

Roachboy, I think your argument is a much better one than host's. I disagree with it, primarily because I think any alternatives to capitalism are likely to be much worse, especially in terms of stifling human freedom and squelching innnovation and entrepreneurialism. But you're right that inequality is built into the structure of capitalism. Whether that's a feature or a bug is a different question.

Host's position as set forth in the OP makes me think, mainly, "I wish he could get over his bitterness, it's consuming him."

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

LOL.... I'll trade you your lack of concern/rationalizations for my alleged bitterness? Deal?

You post that you read a lot....have you ever heard of TNEC ? There was a heated political struggle to prevent it from getting started, ceaseless attempts to defund it, and they were successful in 1941, when TNEC was less than three years old.

Are you at all curious what is in TNEC's sealed records? 67 years seems like an excessive amount of time to conceal the abuses of the wealthiest and most powerful of the time, from the descendants of the oppressed, dontcha think?

After all, didn't the greatest generation fight a war, and take a large number of causalties, to contribute profits to the oligarchy of the time?

If I am bitter, was Smedley Butler bitter? How would you describe your own outlook, does it match the political and economic fundamentals and the history of the last 75 years, more rationally than my outlook?

Quote:

Originally Posted by loquitur

I would describe my own outlook as tolerant and forgiving about most things, and accepting that people are human and thus flawed. I also think people should be left alone to live their own lives as they see fit, and that we should be wary of trying to impose our preferences on others. To my mind that's realistic, but others might disagree. That's why I don't get outraged about many of the things you do, host. There are things that genuinely are outrageous, and I'll save my outrage for those. If I got my knickers in a knot over every twist and turn of politics I'd have unmanageable blood pressure and wouldn't be the laid-back, somewhat wonkish, humor-loving fellow I picture myself to be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Since we can count on one hand, the number of us who even are of the opinion that there is a problem, does it really matter what approach we take to describe it and attempt to attract interest enough to discuss it?

We have some excellent historical resources....The IRE.org "Arizona Project", and the study of the Phoenix 40, from the information in those two resources, and our knowledge of the development of Las Vegas, and of Arizona, it isn't a leap to have the opinion that two of our most recent states in the lower 48, were corrupted during their boom phases, openly and dramatically, with connections to organized crime that run so deep that they surface today in examples like the one I attempted....leading to the question of when, if it was profits from organized crime activity, and it can be directly traced to that....the millions of dollars now residing in US presidential frontrunner John McCain, became "clean" money....what was the date that the money was transformed from mob money to clean, respectable money?

This reporter had his legs and arm blown off, his life snuffed out, for reporting about the man, Kemper Marley, who was the employer, and source of McCain's in-law's money, business, and connections....and about the company the in-law and his brother contracted to manage the Hensley's NM horse racing track concession, and financed the sale of the track when they sold it:

I want to understand how others view this cleansing process, if it is a process?

I mentioned in the loquitur's "Inequality" thread, that the only investigation of power and wealth in the US, ended nearly 67 years ago, resulted in a collection of recorded data that is still partially sealed.....why?

More and more, participation here on this forum has opened my eyes to the nearly universal levels of deep denial, indoctrination, and objection to presentation of detailed information, in ....of all places, a political discussion forum....go figure?

I am left to sort out whether the aversion to progressive taxation as an obvious means to deal with the grwoing "problem" of wealth inequity, an aversion that has grown, since the '50s, in direct proportion to the amount spent to create and support conservative think tanks and the conservative owned media and funded advertising blitz, is more a result of the success in indoctrinating so many, especially the younger members of our population, or because of the intensity of the incuriousness and short attention span.

So, roachboy, I drive them away, the way I try to present the problem, but I think that on some level, some understand what I am trying to convey....I am not so sure that your way of trying to communicate, even reaches the pathetically poor level of connection I've achieved.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

You article re: the Bolles bombing and your subsequent conclusions are equal to the Kennedy/rum running I mentioned. It is barely circumstantial at best. Bolles was in investigative reporter for much of the fraud and mafia goings on in AZ and while the fingers can point to Marley they cannot PINpoint him.

I agree with loquitur: "I wish he could get over his bitterness, it's consuming him."

You are at the point now that you aren't even discussing your own OP's query.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I once had my lunch bought for me by Tony Accardo.

I knew his daughter and hung out with his grand daughter.

I was even once at a mafia pig roast (didn't know it at the time, was just a pool party to me).

Good thing she and I didn't hit it off, otherwise I'd be disqualified from ever being a public figure, after all my wifes grandfather would have been the big Tuna, and I'd be guilty by association.

Consider that all of the above was predicated on an OP that provided strong support....as much as we ever usually get to inluence and eventually fix our political opinions....and, for that matter, most or all of our opinions about the outside world...a series of newspaper news reports from the Albuquerque Journal, (circa 1977), the NY Times, (circa 1996), and the Arizona Republic, (circa late 90s through 2007)...for the notion that all of John McCain's current wealth, ($50 to $100 million) and almost all of the financing of his first campaign, and his first employment in Arizona, and a significant portion of the contributions for his later political campaigns, came from one source.

The source was James W. Hensley, and his businesses, the most prominent being Hensley and company. Hensley was convicted on multiple federal liquor fraud counts, in 1948, and re-arrested for further incidences related to liquor related tax fraud, in 1953. I documented that Hensley and his brother were employed by, and or business partners with, Kemper Marley, for at least 8 years, and that a NM State police investigation found:

Quote:

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...48#post2398348
....The 1953 State Police report in connection with it's Arizona investigation of the Hensleys and Baldwin noted Marley "owned a wire service formerly operated in connection with bookmaking of the Al Capone gang."

The same report listed Baldiwn as a "bookmaker for leading tracks" and said that Marley "is reputed to be the financial backer for bookies..."

I asked...more than once, when McCain's wealth and political financial support could be consider, "cleansed", since it evidently came principally from business activity originally funded by organized crime activity and connections.

Read the reactions, and responses, if they even can be called responses. They run the gambit from "well, the Kennedy family....", "Hillary married the brother of...." and "lunch brought by Tony Accardo.....after all my wifes grandfather would have been the big Tuna, and I'd be guilty by association..". ....and, oh yeah....speculation about my own emotional/mental state.....

If anybody can explain to me how we can actually discuss the facts....the details of any news reporting related to politics, My eyes will be glued to the screen, reading the explanation(s). What is the problem, are my sources not specific or detailed enough, do they have poor overall reputations, was James Hensley convicted of federal felonies related to liquor distribution fraud, and were he and Kemper Marley, from the record of reports I've presented, reasonably believed to be involved in organzied crime, for a number of years leading up to when Hensley began the business operations that John McCain has so handsomely benefited from?

Do John McCain's decisions, first to accept a high salary, low demand job from Hensley, and over time, campaign financing, employment for his son, and multiple millions of dollars of wealth, deserve discussion? Are they relevant, if we can put aside, Kennedys, Clintons and Tony Accardo, and my mental and emotional state....to whether he is ethically fit to be president of the United States?

....And if you believe that all it takes for corruption to dominate society, is for good men to stand by and do nothing in response to signs of it, how do we, as a democratic republic, and a society based on the rule of law, react to Hensley's and Marley's fortunes and power, and if you have no coherent argument that a result of it is something other than McCain's emergence as a wealthy and influential, top US political figure, how do we react to McCain's emergence?