Corruption: A Bush Family Affair
by KevinMarch 24th, 2006
This is disgusting:
Former first lady Barbara Bush donated an undisclosed amount of money to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund with specific instructions that the money be spent with an educational software company owned by her son Neil.
Since then, the Ignite Learning program has been given to eight area schools that took in substantial numbers of Hurricane Katrina evacuees.
How slimy can you get? How do you get to the point where you are so ammoral and unethical that you don’t realize this is wrong?
Categories: Politics |
Your judgment is so biased it is comical.
Had she flat out given her son the money, would that be disgusting, slimy, amoral, and unethical?
Had she spent the money on a diamond ring, would that have been disgusting, slimy, amoral, and unethical?
So what if her son’s company and the schools both benefited. It’s her money. She can give it away as she chooses.
I find your outrage laughable.
Amen.
[...] Lean Left has the latest on Barbara Bush’s “earmarking” her Katrina aid funds for a specific company. [...]
What is wrong with this? It is HER money. She should be able to use it anyway she wants.
I give my sons allowance every week too. Is that “unethical”. I direct MY charity giving to my son’s school. Is that “unethical”?
In fact, I applaud her that the money is used to help someone.
It is not unusual to have strings attached to donations. Buildings and hospital wings are named after donors, their children, or their pets. Certainly the government puts strings on its money. It tells communities that they have to hire minority companies in order to get funds for public works projects. No highway funds if you don’t do it the government’s way. Food stamps can only be used at certain places. Etc. etc. etc. etc. and etc.
A hate-filled person such as you makes some very strange statements.
The reason she’s giving the money through the Katrina charity rather than giving it directly is so she can get a huge tax break. In other words, you and I are being forced to give money to Neil’s company. As if we didn’t have enough of that with the S&L bail out. It’s naked exploitation of tax loopholes for personal gain.
Ted
Sigh. What she did here
was manipulate a tax break for subsidizing her son’s business. If you are okay with stealing from the government like that, I guess that’s you.
Apologize for it all you like, but thats what she did. It is wrong, plain and pure and simple.
Whose money is it?
Whose money is it? Governments make charitable donations tax-deductible because most people know the basic inefficiency of government. It would cost a lot more for government to do the charitable work that private organization do.
Nobody “steals” from the government what the government gives tax deductibility.
kevin, your naivety would be charming if it weren’t so transparently disingenuous.
Families worth 100’s of millions don’t use charitable donations of thousands or tens of thousands of dollars to transfer money between generations. Get real.
Do you know how much money was actually invovled? Do you know if Bush will claim as a deduction? Do you know if Bush has already maxed out charitable donations? Do you know if Bush has alrady sheltered all income so there is no tax liability to begin with? Do you know what percentage of total donation was earmarked? Do you know anything other that the fact you see red when you see the name Bush?
Paul,
You and I are being forced to give money? You have a different understanding of how taxes work than I do. The money came from Bush, not you and me. What will not happen (perhaps) is taxes will not be paid on the money.
Of course, if Bush’s company is profitable before this transaction, and since this is software (which has huge margins once fixed costs are met), the lion’s share of the dollars drop to the bottom line. Which means the company has to pay taxes on the dollars in question. Depending on Bush Sr’s tax situation this year, this donation could actually increase the amount of $$ that flow into the federal coffers…
This from the Houston Chronicle
“The school is among eight area campuses that received Ignite “Curriculum On Wheels” systems because of Bush’s donation of an undisclosed amount to the Bush-Clinton Houston Hurricane Relief Fund.
She gave specific instructions that part of the money be sent to the Scottish Space School Foundation. She asked that group, in turn, to use the money to buy eight Ignite systems — valued at $3,800 each — for Harris County schools with large numbers of Hurricane Katrina evacuees, according to Bush and fund officials.”
So we are talking about $30,000. Max tax break of about $15,000 for a family worth hundreds of millions. Just to put things in perspective.
Gee, Ted, I didn’t realize the amount was relevant. Apparently unethical acts are okay as long as they’re done in small doses?
If she had bought the software and taken it to the schools and handed them to the principal, she would have gotten the same tax break. You Bush haters need to grow up.
tgirsch, if the intent was not to beat the gov’t out of $12,000, but rather to benefit the students and give her son’s company a boost, then I don’t see the act as unethical. And of course the action is legal.
We don’t know the toal amount of the Bush donation. What if it were $1,000,000, and $30,000 was earmarked for Jr. Is this an unethical act? Is it disgusting, slimy, and amoral?
Do you pay every penny of taxes you should every year? Claim that $50 you won at the turkey shoot? Are you slimy because of it?
The IRS estimates the public will underpay (as in illegally underpay) taxes to the tune of $400,000,000,000 - as in $400 Billion - this year. Where’s the outrage over that?
Had this been a revelation about Kerry’s wife reducing her tax obligation by a couple million, would kevin have posted with great outrage?
Were this not Bush’s mother, would the post have occured at all?
Had the post been along the lines of here’s another example of B Bush’s lack of political astuteness, then I’m on board.
I stick by my original observation: kevin’s judgment is so biased it is comical.
Ted:
“Disgusting” and “slimy” may be a bit over the top, but I find it hard to fathom that donating money on the condition that it be spent in a way that benefits my family doesn’t strike you as morally questionable. That it was a high-profile charity only makes it more so.
I don’t know about you, but when I give money to charities, I don’t attach strings to the donation.
““Disgusting” and “slimy” may be a bit over the top”
No, they are not. She used a program to give her son money — and then got the government to pay her for doing so. Sorry, but that is unacceptable in boht ethical and moral terms. She ran took advantage of a system designed to encourage people to donate to charity to profit herself and her son. I find that reprehensible.
tg: when I give money to charities, I don’t attach strings to the donation.
Fred: Sure you do. You expect the money to be used to meet the goals you have. You don’t give to a charity just because it is a charity. You wouldn’t give to a pro-life charity which is trying to save babies’ lives. You wouldn’t give to a traditional family group promoting marriage as one man, one woman. Charitable gifts always have strings attached.
tg: I find it hard to fathom that donating money on the condition that it be spent in a way that benefits my family
Fred: You wouldn’t give to the Cancer Society if a family member had cancer? You wouldn’t give to a charity that fights AIDS if your family member had AIDS? You are one cold-hearted person.
Make sure you don’t buy those Girl Scout cookies from your daughter.
Kevin: “She ran took advantage of a system designed to encourage people to donate to charity to profit herself and her son”
You do not know that to be true. You want it to be true, but that does not make it so. For one thing, if she does not claim the donation as a deduction, your entire argument is moot.
Also, please tell me, how did she profit from this?
If the Bushes are as astute as Ms Kerry, and only pay Federal taxes at the 12% level, then, as I pointed out before, Jr’s company will end up paying more taxes than Sr would on the money. Does that matter?
You just plain don’t know the facts (none of us do). Why not focus on real slimy, amoral, unethical things done by political figures (like going to war under false pretenses) and quit trumping up charges against their mothers.
It is sad that the Bush haters have sunk to the level of attacking his mother. Poor, poor immature little boys.
tgirsch, I agree with you that the act is questionable. I, for one, would not do it. And for someone in the public eye to do it seems nuts.
But, again, the benefit to the family is so small (in relative terms), and it was done in such a public way (B Bush held news conferences and talked about it - that’s how the whole thing was picked up), I find it very hard to believe that the intent was to manufacture at most a $15,000 tax break (realistically, probably more like $9,000).
Fred:
Nice try, but there’s a difference between giving to a charity you support, and giving money to a charity with explicit conditions telling them precisely how it must be spent. It’s not like giving to the American Cancer Society (ACS) on the condition that they use the money to fight cancer; it’s like giving to the ACS on the condition that they in turn use the money to buy Pfizer products. That you can’t see that difference says more than enough about you.
I was in the non-profit sector for 25 years. I challenge you to find anyone in the non-profit sector who believes it is unethical to designate what you want your money used for as long as it helps to meet the goals of the organization. The gift Mrs. Bush gave helped to meet the goals of the education system. That you are opposed to her gift and accuse her of a lack of morals says more than enough about your character or lack thereof.
It may not be unusual to have “strings” attached to donations, but the essence of this debate of right or wrong is being missed by much of the commentary here. The point is, Mrs. Bush gave money in a fulile manner under the guise of helping people in need.
Fred:
But even in that case, in my experience the money is virtually always earmarked for general types of expenses (e.g. legal funds; fundraising; supplies; advertising; etc.). I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone demand that the money be used in this specific way to buy this specific product (that, oh, by the way, helps my son profit).
It would be one thing (and no ethical foul) if her son’s software company had simply donated the software directly, or even if (as someone pointed out above) she had bought the software and donated it. But that’s not what happened here.
Ted:
I find it very hard to believe that the intent was to manufacture at most a $15,000 tax break
The cynic in me was that the intent was probably to make herself look good (”Look, I’m giving money to my husband’s fund”) while actually scratching her son’s back. A good question is, did her donation pay for the software in full, or did it just cover part of the cost?
Barbara Bush earmarked hurricane donation for son’s company
Former first lady Barbara Bush gave relief money to a hurricane relief fund on the condition that it
J: “under the guise of helping people in need.”
Fred: She did help people in need. What have you done lately?
Don’t forget the other side of the story. Bill Clinton is a low-down skunk for accepting such a tainted donation. If he had any character he would have rejected the donation and slapped Mrs. Bush for being such a low life cretin. Let’s hear the condemnation now from the Clitonistas.
Oops. Fruedian slip. I mean the “Clintonistas.”
Ted and Fred are probablt Karl Rove or other Bush Boot lickers
It’s not about the money!!!! It’s about the ability to disperse BUSH propaganda. God save us from this corrupt family!!!
Tramadol ojline shop….
Tramadol ojline shop….
Ybu ambien online….
Ybu ambien online….
Online drugs ambien….
Ambien online….
Buy fanax online….
Buy fanax online….
Phentermine knline shop….
Phentermine knline shop….
Buy tramadol onlije….
Buy tramadol onlije….
“zolpidem tartrate” buy “no prescription”….
“zolpidem tartrate” buy “no prescription”….
Buy amben online….
Buy amben online….
Buy xsnax online….
Buy xsnax online….