Reply
Fri 24 Mar, 2006 09:29 am
Texas' Wicked Witch of the West has found a clever way to money launder financial support to her son's business. Dear sweet Barbara Bush's true colors shown again. Did she learn this trick from Tom Delay?
---BBB
This is a good thing, why the sour tone to your comment?
So I guess you would have preferred her not to donate anything at all?
"Nationally, some other donors also specified how they wanted their donations spent, Becker said.
For example, one man wanted his money to go to Habitat for Humanity but via the former presidents' fund. Nearly $1 million has been raised for the local fund and more than $120 million for the national. "
So this is not unusual.
BBB
Mrs. Bush used the same device Tom DeLay used to launder money through charities to his personal and campaign organizations. She gets a tax deduction. Her son gets a family cash infusion into his business.
Neil Bush has a long history of shady and illegal business practices. The following is just one of them:
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/bush_family_and_the_s.htm
BBB
Re: BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:Mrs. Bush used the same device Tom DeLay used to launder money through charities to his personal and campaign organizations. She gets a tax deduction. Her son gets a family cash infusion into his business.
Neil Bush has a long history of shady and illegal business practices. The following is just one of them:
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/bush_family_and_the_s.htm
BBB
How, in your warped little mind, can you come to the conclusion that she is laundering money through a charitible contribution?
Where in the article is there any reference to this ?
Yes, Mrs. Bush gets a tax deduction, but NB's software company pays taxes on its earnings and the children get free software. Exactly where is the harm again? Yes, an unrestricted gift would have been "more charitable", but who's keeping score? If Mrs. Bush had bought the software directly and donated it to the school, would you still have a problem? She would get the same tax deduction doing it that way.
Re: BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:Mrs. Bush used the same device Tom DeLay used to launder money through charities to his personal and campaign organizations. She gets a tax deduction. Her son gets a family cash infusion into his business.
Neil Bush has a long history of shady and illegal business practices. The following is just one of them:
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/bush_family_and_the_s.htm
BBB
BBB, nice try but they are incapable of comprehension.
If you donate money, shouldn't you have a right to donate to who you want? I thought it was a free country? When I used to donate to United Way, I earmarked it for Meals on Wheels because I think that is one of the best programs around.
This is hilarious. Look at the little lapdogs rushing to explain how nepotism and corruption in the guise of charity are really GOOD things. How droll!
blacksmithn wrote:This is hilarious. Look at the little lapdogs rushing to explain how nepotism and corruption in the guise of charity are really GOOD things. How droll!
Shes donating her own money. Doesn't she have a right to donate it how she wants? But now you want to be able to tell her who to donate her own money to? If she was donating money for an organization that used other peoples money, you would be correct maybe, but if its her own money then she has a perfect right to do whatever she wants. If she buys a car from her son, is it nepotism? Obviously not. Do you ever buy anything from a relative with your own money? Can I tell you who to give your next contribution to?
Neil is not a poltical figure. If all she wanted to do was give him money, she could have just written a check.
Just keep in mind who the originator of the thread is and what bias she has. after that, the thread becomes comical.
There's just a tad bit of difference between donating money freely (or even donating money and specifying which non-profit charity it goes to)and donating money with the specification that it goes to benefit your own son.
Seems like it benefitted children.
Well, it did benefit a child-- it benefited her son. And herself, of course.
As for the children of Katrina, I think they have slightly more pressing needs than educational software.
Why don't you call your congressman to introduce a bill to make it illegal to donate money to any charity run by a relative or friend or somebody you just happen to like better than another person running the next charity. And then let everybody laugh real hard at the joke of the day.
It wasn't a donation to a charity run by her son, Jethro. Her son benefitted from the "donation" because she specified that it had to be used to purchase the product his company produces. Get it now?
Never mind. It was a rhetorical (look up the word)question. Clearly any amount of corruption is just fine with you, as long as it has the Bush name on it.
What Jethro is not grasping is that the nasty old bitch avoided taxes for her criminal son by laundering the money by means of a donation.
The Bush family garbage just never seems to end. There is nothing about this family that is respectful. How can so many Americans be so badly duped...it's downright embarrassing.
Rich
RichNDanaPoint wrote:The Bush family garbage just never seems to end. There is nothing about this family that is respectful. How can so many Americans be so badly duped...it's downright embarrassing.
You would be surprised to know how few people know the corrupt history of the Bush-Walker families.
BBB
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace