Good points Terry but it also makes you wonder what kind of return does he expect for the actual 50 million they are saying he spent. Additionally....w/o that exorbitant expenditure he would not have won.
Let me see MCG, without the family wealth the Kennedy's would have never won. And you can say the same for a lot of other politicians. You pick out one, and unbelievable but true, he's a Republican. Imagine that.
I don't know, but it seems that for the most part all politicians get richer the longer they are in office, no matter what amount of money they started out with...just seems like the rich guy has less reason to sell his soul than the poor guy. For the record I like it when ordinary guys run, if they are honest and stay honest maybe they are more in tune with the everyday life and needs of the avg joe out there. Rich guys may have a better grasp of some things though regarding complex finances etc which the country needs as well.
Two things.... 1). Not sure if the Kennedy wealth was gained legally or illegally....I have never read if they made their fortune running a company indicted for massive fraud like Scott's was. 2). I don't remember the election of Kennedy with regard to who spent what kind of money to win and all I have heard is that JFK was young and sharp whereas Nixon had that 5 o'clock shadow thingy.
You are throwing a lot of accusations and doing a lot of name-calling. I don't know if Scott is a crook or not, but I do know that most of these things have two sides. http://www2.tbo.com/content/2010/may/28/281228/gop-candidate-scott-criticized-heading-company-com/news-politics/
Terry, I don't think its bad if you have personal wealth and finance your own campaign. It does seem worthy and says something when he or she has that ability. My thought process is not to rip apart a certain candidate because of their financial well being. We see too much of that every day in the political scene where the political party's point back and forth at each other. It is not a crime to be wealthy but jealousy will always permeate when people are. My question is an effort to stand out side the lines of politics and wonder why in the world a person would spend millions of dollars to get a job that pays nothing compared to what is being spent....? - Is it ego?? - Is it a power agenda?? - Is it the knowledge that he or she will make dividends on the money spent?? - Is it a just and noble deed from a person that has the time and money to look beyond their needs that are taken care of and look to the needs of the State and its people...?? I was never a cynical person but experience in life and business has taught me to be just that. Alarm bells go off all around me when you hear of a situation where a candidate spends excessivley for a job that pays nothing... It would also be nice to actually get an answer to the question I raised...Or at the very least have it asked to the candidates. RC
Stu....I hear ya. Scott is either very factual in those quotes or very slick. In his TV ads he comes across to many as .....slick. I don't think he can keep dancing around debates now. His opponent will nail him to the wall if he does. One other thought on JFK.....his opponent Dick Melhouse N. had a few bucks too didn't he?
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/08/25/1792670/political-insiders-fear-scott.html I am extremely conservative in my ideology but loathe "Party Politics" and what it has become. Because of the the attitude of "What's good for the party" over What's good for the Country behavior, sour does not come close to my feeling for politics in the land of the free. This quote by the long term Ag commissioner of Florida best describes my reason for having anarchistic thoughts....
MCG, I think it is pretty common knowledge that the Kennedy money most likely came dealing in illegal alcohol during probation.
I can only say that if Scott was unaware of what was going on at the company he was CEO of when the activity going on resulted in such a massive fine then how in the hell is this inept CEO kind of guy going to "get Florida to work." Believe what you will I guess. :roll: " but loathe "Party Politics" and what it has become. Because of the the attitude of "What's good for the party" over What's good for the Country behavior, sour does not come close to my feeling for politics in the land of the free." Damn Ralph...I so agree with this statement. And the problem is now that the media bombardment in America has the voting public blindly voting this way. Good for the party is # 1....#2....and #3......everything else doesn't mean ****. Just watch Ralph...those GOP voters who have loathed Scott before two days ago will somehow love him within 6 weeks and ignore any of his obvious shortcomings.
Ever have any concerns over the Secretary of the Treasury who didn't know how to properly file his taxes?
Gipper, since the Sec of the Treasury is a Democrat I think it's obvious that Dave won't have any concern.
:idea: JFK's father bought the White House for his son in 1960. He bought the Democratic Party primaries in several states, most notably West Virginia where he bought off the entire state to defeat Minnesota's Hubert H. Humphrey. In the general election against Republican Richard M. Nixon, he stole the election after midnight. More specifically, the election was stolen in two states: Texas and Illinois. LBJ was JFK's running mate and he had been stealing elections in Texas since 1948. The Texas results were challenged in the courts, but a Democratic Party federal judge tossed the lawsuits out...claiming that he didn't have jurisdiction. In Illinois, the Daley Machine (which is still there stealing elections for the Democrats) took three days to count the votes... Now think about that one. It took less time to count the votes in Alaska that year, and a lot of those votes came in via dogsled teams. In the end, it was declared that Kennedy had won Illinois by 9,000...with an incredible margin of 450,000 in Cook County alone... Only the election of 1876 was more obviously stolen than this one. .........IMHO...JO'Co
OK...I am getting the general consensus here that Scott...no matter what he was before Tuesday....is the GOP nominee for governor of Florida so now he is the THE man. God help us.
Leave it to MCG to not get the connection. By the way JO'Co, I was hoping you would step in with your knowledge of history about the Kennedy's. Thanks
Hey....I don't doubt this at all. Maybe it set a precedent for events that happened years later. :wink:
Some days it seems like you are such a one-trick pony... Damn...I'm not supporting this guy at all...just pointing out that you threw out a bunch of name-calling nastiness at him without posting the entire story... Then you rant and rave against people blindly supporting their party...when this guy ran as a complete party outsider. Carry on.