In reality, the top 5 wealthiest senators are all Democrats and 8 of the top 10 are Demo's. Hillary would make the top 10 list with her $8 million book deal, but she reported a net worth less that $3.8MM because of substantial debts due, presumably, to legal fees incurred during the large amount of criminal investigation of the Clintons during his presidency.
2006-06-15 04:24:13 · 4 answers · asked by obviously_you'renotagolfer 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It has "so what" factor because these are the people that are supposed to be representing your liberal ideology. Are they? Can they? See, the logic is that it's OK for a Repub to be wealthy because they're "big oil" and such, but the others are supposed to be for the working stiff. Clearly, they aren't.
2006-06-15 04:36:48 · update #1
CNN actually Jim W
2006-06-15 04:49:37 · update #2
Clarification: CNN for senator information
WSJ/NBC news poll for your stuff
Jeez you're a bitter person
2006-06-15 04:54:50 · update #3
because republicans realize that for this country to be successful and lead the world and move humanity ahead, that business has to be good and not taxed to death like our socialist democrat brothers would have you believe...
how did society ever make it without leaders who were pro-business...???
2006-06-15 04:43:45 · answer #1 · answered by badjanssen 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i think the problem is that you frame this with regards to senators.
Within the context of society as a whole you example would have no bearing, meaning the majority of Republicans are wealthy or rather fat cats.
With regards to the premiss based on Senators.
I will concede that both sides sell there souls for campain money, the money goes to both sides but never equally... but by and large the Reblicans seem more concerned with pay backs to the corps. The best example is big oil.
Your example in the end only applies to 100 people not the millions that live in our great country. And the point has a very "so what" factor....that said....so what.
thanks.
###############################################
yeah so what.....Democrats arent against capitlaism.....ALLOW me to repeat that........Democrats Aare not against Capitalism.....Repugs just say sh## during a debate.
Your "problem" is you lack the "either" the imagination or intelligence to conclude that being rich does not preclude you from representing the intrest of the working class....based on "your" logic then George Bush is incapable of caring for anyone who is not a millionaire.
Thats your arguement...........so....like I said rich senators...so what.
2006-06-15 11:31:36 · answer #2 · answered by nefariousx 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And don't forget... John Kerry is the richest person in America to hold a government job ($billions of ketchup dollars). I guess it's ok to be sickeningly wealthy if you're a democrat, because only then will you be smart enough to use your money wisely?
p.s. Bush paid more in taxes than Kerry, since Kerry stashed his money in a "charitable foundation". Go figure.....
2006-06-15 11:30:33 · answer #3 · answered by Self-Sufficient 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jealous of success are we? How patriotic!
Hey sissy pants no sex life reactionary:you told me I "got my facts wrong"? Why did you LIE and say Bush is "up a couple of ticks?" Where DO you get your news.?
Oh I forgot.You don't get news.You watch Fox,which has no political news.
Apparently American nationalists are as wrong as Islamic nationalists
2006-06-15 11:48:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋