Cheese for votes...

[ylexot]

A Cheesy Way To Lure Voters

In Philadelphia they're calling it "The Cheese Caper." A Deputy City Commissioner asked the District Attorney's office to investigate who passed out flyers on primary election day -- May 17 -- promising free cheese to voters for particular candidates. The flyers are topped by a handwritten scrawl, "Come Out + Vote," adding below, "For Who Ever." In type, they say "Free Cheese." The flyers list two candidates, both Democrats, running in an area dominated by the 300-plus-unit Hill Creek housing project. "This guy comes to the polls, votes, and asks us for his free cheese," says Eileen Kleindienst, a Republican judge of elections. Geraldine Hacker, the Republican official who sent Kleindienst's complaint to the DA, thought the food might be from a government nutrition program.

Where's my gubment cheese?

 

[jazz lady]

That's one way to get out the vote.

 

[SamSpade]

I like how the comment is made that you can't get the folks in that area to do nuthin' unless you're giving something away.

That's EXACTLY the kind of civic-minded people I want casting their educated, well informed votes!

 

[Lenny]

I like how the comment is made that you can't get the folks in that area to do nuthin' unless you're giving something away.

That's EXACTLY the kind of civic-minded people I want casting their educated, well informed votes!

It's called entitlements. That is translated as "Democrat programs to spend taxpayer money to buy votes by lower stratum voters through giveaway programs." It's how they maintain their base. That and always voting for anything the unions want.

 

[rraley]

It's called entitlements. That is translated as "Democrat programs to spend taxpayer money to buy votes by lower stratum voters through giveaway programs." It's how they maintain their base. That and always voting for anything the unions want.

For the Republicans...it's called corporate welfare and tax cuts. That is translated as "Republican programs to spend taxpayer money (or withhold it) to buy votes from upper class voters." It's how they maintain their base. That and doing whatever Pat Robertson wants.

Come on, is either of these cases entirely true? Hell no.

 

[hvp05]

I like how the comment is made that you can't get the folks in that area to do nuthin' unless you're giving something away.

That's EXACTLY the kind of civic-minded people I want casting their educated, well informed votes!

Right on, brotha! Something about this thread has a terrible stench... but, oddly enough, it's not the cheese.

 

[Bruzilla]

For the Republicans...it's called corporate welfare and tax cuts. That is translated as "Republican programs to spend taxpayer money (or withhold it) to buy votes from upper class voters." It's how they maintain their base. That and doing whatever Pat Robertson wants.

Come on, is either of these cases entirely true? Hell no.

That's true, but as the recent drops in unemployment, increases in revenue, and increases in new businesses opening attest to - we're much better off giving corporate welfare and tax cuts to those disgustingly rich fat cats than to spend money giving cheese to someone who's just sucking up entitlement dollars and producing nothing in Pliladelphia.

 

[Tonio]

A Cheesy Way To Lure Voters QUOTE]

That's an old trick. Nixon's campaign people did something similar. When Democrat John Lindsay was running for mayor of New York, the Nixon people would find out when Lindsay was holding rallies in Harlem. So they would print bogus flyers for the rallies that promised free beer. So the Harlem residents would come to the rally, get angry because there was no free beer and end up hating Lindsay.

 

[rraley]

A Cheesy Way To Lure Voters QUOTE]

That's an old trick. Nixon's campaign people did something similar. When Democrat John Lindsay was running for mayor of New York, the Nixon people would find out when Lindsay was holding rallies in Harlem. So they would print bogus flyers for the rallies that promised free beer. So the Harlem residents would come to the rally, get angry because there was no free beer and end up hating Lindsay.

Nixon did a whole lotta effed up things while he was in things.

 

[ylexot]

A Cheesy Way To Lure Voters

That's an old trick. Nixon's campaign people did something similar. When Democrat John Lindsay was running for mayor of New York, the Nixon people would find out when Lindsay was holding rallies in Harlem. So they would print bogus flyers for the rallies that promised free beer. So the Harlem residents would come to the rally, get angry because there was no free beer and end up hating Lindsay.

I guess you didn't read the rest...

The woman who wrote the flyers, Hill Creek tenant council President Gerri Robinson, doesn't think she did anything wrong. "The people around here, you can't get them to come out and do nothing unless you're giving them something," she says. Besides, she adds, the flyers worked: The two cases of cottage cheese were gone by day's end.

 

[John Z]

Well, for a half pound of Saint-Paulin, I might consider it. Heck, give me a pack of kraft string cheese or a bag of shredded cheddar! I looove cheese. Who's with me?

edit: Hey, cottage cheese ain't bad either!

 

[Tonio]

"The people around here, you can't get them to come out and do nothing unless you're giving them something,"

That's sad. As a society, we ought to have higher standards than that.

 

[SamSpade]

For the Republicans...it's called corporate welfare and tax cuts. That is translated as "Republican programs to spend taxpayer money (or withhold it) to buy votes from upper class voters." It's how they maintain their base. That and doing whatever Pat Robertson wants.

Come on, is either of these cases entirely true? Hell no.

I'm disinclined to believe that it is, because a) corporate welfare affects too few people to ever buy enough votes and b) tax cuts make sense in a weak economy.

(Frankly, I'm sick to death of ever hearing anyone use the phrase "tax cuts for the rich", and categorically tune out everything else they have to say. Because tax cuts can only go to those who actually PAY TAXES, and that immediately excludes the poor. And secondly, because people who say that kind of thing have an idiotic view of money, the economy and budgets - that somehow, "giving tax cuts to the rich" is some kind of zero-sum game, where "giving money to the rich" [translation: *RETURNING* some of their OWN money] necessarily means lowering the amount given to entitlements - even though that NEVER HAPPENS. That providing money to businesses large and small only helps RICH folks. Name me someone who works for a poor guy).

 

[ylexot]

I'm disinclined to believe that it is, because a) corporate welfare affects too few people to ever buy enough votes and b) tax cuts make sense in a weak economy.

(Frankly, I'm sick to death of ever hearing anyone use the phrase "tax cuts for the rich", and categorically tune out everything else they have to say. Because tax cuts can only go to those who actually PAY TAXES, and that immediately excludes the poor. And secondly, because people who say that kind of thing have an idiotic view of money, the economy and budgets - that somehow, "giving tax cuts to the rich" is some kind of zero-sum game, where "giving money to the rich" [translation: *RETURNING* some of their OWN money] necessarily means lowering the amount given to entitlements - even though that NEVER HAPPENS. That providing money to businesses large and small only helps RICH folks. Name me someone who works for a poor guy).

Well said.

 

[SamSpade]

That's sad. As a society, we ought to have higher standards than that.

It also OUGHT to prick the consciences of those doing it.

I mean, if you could only get someone to date your daughter because you PAID them; well, it means you don't really have a lot of faith in her, right?

So how much stock can these morons actually have in the value of their political views, if the only way to get people to embrace them is to *bribe* them?

 

[Bruzilla]

(Frankly, I'm sick to death of ever hearing anyone use the phrase "tax cuts for the rich", and categorically tune out everything else they have to say. Because tax cuts can only go to those who actually PAY TAXES, and that immediately excludes the poor. And secondly, because people who say that kind of thing have an idiotic view of money, the economy and budgets - that somehow, "giving tax cuts to the rich" is some kind of zero-sum game, where "giving money to the rich" [translation: *RETURNING* some of their OWN money] necessarily means lowering the amount given to entitlements - even though that NEVER HAPPENS. That providing money to businesses large and small only helps RICH folks. Name me someone who works for a poor guy).

 

[aps45819]

For the Republicans...it's called corporate welfare and tax cuts. That is translated as "Republican programs to spend taxpayer money (or withhold it) to buy votes from upper class voters." It's how they maintain their base.

So it's corporate welfare if the gubbermint doesn't extort money from the people that earned it?

 

[Tonio]

It also OUGHT to prick the consciences of those doing it.

I mean, if you could only get someone to date your daughter because you PAID them; well, it means you don't really have a lot of faith in her, right?

So how much stock can these morons actually have in the value of their political views, if the only way to get people to embrace them is to *bribe* them?

Well said.

 

[rraley]

I'm disinclined to believe that it is, because a) corporate welfare affects too few people to ever buy enough votes and b) tax cuts make sense in a weak economy.

Think about it this way...corporate welfare means that we give unneeded subsidies to big businesses. The US government subsidizes Haliburton, which means that not only will that organization's leaders provide substantial funds to Republican coffers, but most of its large workforce will also support Republicans (plus money is almost, if not more, powerful than votes in today's political landscape). We subsidize farmers, Bectel, etc. etc. Think about all your defense contractors. All of these combined create quite a large electoral base, in my estimation. Also, the rate of welfare receipients who vote is much lower than the overall population.

Perhaps Democrats merely find entitelments to be good public policy that enables the federal government to create the safety net necessary to provide opportunity to ALL Americans. Maybe Republicans merely find that tax cuts and corporate subsidies are good public policies to stimulate the economy. These are more plausible than the whole conspiracy of "let's buy some votes," as Lenny referred to in his earlier post.

 

[SamSpade]

Think about it this way...corporate welfare means that we give unneeded subsidies to big businesses.

I can't speak for every instance of "corporate welfare" - but I AM familiar with a few that have affected me, personally. When I lived in Massachussetts, I lived in a town that used to be a blue-collar town that had lost most of its industrial vigor - were it not for "corporate welfare", high-tech businesses would NEVER have come in at all. Same thing for other places I've lived that have been somewhat rural - businesses needed incentives to locate and STAY in areas needing their employment.

I have no doubt that none of these businesses would ever have chosen to move into these areas if the government hadn't made it profitable to do so. Far too many liberals have a state-run, non-profit concept when it comes to business - it IS about profit and making money - not providing jobs and benefits for its employees.

I don't believe for a minute that government assistance for these companies ever trickles down to the employees - I don't think they give it much thought. When I lived in Massachusetts those folks would never vote for a Republican - even though they worked for high tech firms (you may not realize that Boston is a high tech region). They just don't necessarily have a lot to do with one another. On the other hand, Republicans have been successfully demonized by unions and the Dems for being opposed to giving out entitlements willy-nilly - and people who depend on them are keenly aware of how close this hits to home. I do believe Dems exploit this - and are effectively BUYING votes - because that's what they campaign with. They get on their soapbox and TELL people they're going to lose their checks if the Republicans get in. Doesn't really happen the other way.