GOP (Teabagger WI) Sean Duffy struggles on $174,000

  • grnranger99

    Posts: 225

    Mar 31, 2011 4:32 PM GMT
    <object width=">
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2011 5:23 AM GMT
    The guy was a douchebag when he was on the Real World. And he's a douchebag now. I mean jeez, if you can't get by on $174K a year in Wisconsin, maybe he shouldn't have had 6 kids. He's got a hot wife. Maybe she should use her looks to get a job or something.

    Also there's this..

    Wisconsin Republicans claim that no one else can republish a video of United States Representative Sean Duffy (R-WI) complaining about how he is 'struggling' to get by on his $174,000 salary without their permission, even though they originally released the video on YouTube for the whole world to see. Now the GOP is trying to take legal action to stop anyone else from republishing the video.
    Link 1, Link 2.

    And this..
    f9HvF.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2011 1:33 PM GMT
    The hypocrisy of these GOPers will and IS destroying them. From the inside out!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2011 1:38 PM GMT
    To be perfectly honest, I have no clue how I would actually spend $174,000 per year [less taxes, of course]!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2011 1:40 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidTo be perfectly honest, I have no clue how I would actually spend $174,000 per year [less taxes, of course]!
    I do!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2011 1:41 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    TigerTim saidTo be perfectly honest, I have no clue how I would actually spend $174,000 per year [less taxes, of course]!
    I do!


    Well? How would you?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2011 1:58 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    TropicalMark said
    TigerTim saidTo be perfectly honest, I have no clue how I would actually spend $174,000 per year [less taxes, of course]!
    I do!


    Well? How would you?
    well lets see... several trips overseas to play, Might buy me a new place in KW, definitely finish the mustang restoration.spend a couple months with friends around the country and then bank the rest.

    (for starters)
  • mke_bt

    Posts: 707

    Apr 01, 2011 7:19 PM GMT

    I spent the first 18 years of my life in the 7th congressional district and can guarantee the fallout from this video is going to be stellar. It is a very rural district, heavy on family farms. I think only one county in this district went Republican in the 2008 election. Obama carried the district with 56% of the vote (the pop. is 96% White). The median income is $39,000. I'm just going to sit back and watch Sean Duffy self destruct.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2011 10:30 PM GMT
    WHAT..
    NO RIGHTIES TO SUPPORT THIS D-BAG?


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 01, 2011 11:03 PM GMT
    LeanathleticDC saidWHAT..
    NO RIGHTIES TO SUPPORT THIS D-BAG?

    Not likely support, but we'll hear attacks against the wealthy Kennedys, and any other Democrats with their own money. Not that it would have any relevance, since Dems support US workers and the middle class, unlike Republicans, no matter what their comparable personal incomes.

    But it will create the usual confusing diversion, to hopefully start a different debate, as they try to avoid the actual question and get the spotlight off Duffy. But this sure is funny & embarrassing for them! icon_lol.gif

    If only right-wingers COULD be embarrassed in their own minds. But being holy & righteous, they are too pompous to be embarrassed. You can't be embarrassed when God Himself is directing you.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Apr 01, 2011 11:13 PM GMT
    Sympathetic democrats have gotten together are trying to help rep Duffy and his beleaguered brethren icon_cool.gif

    Donate your monocles to the "Real World" senator

    They're calling for a Food and Clothes Drive for "poor Sean Duffy," asking Polk County residents to contribute "top hats and monocles, riding crops, Italian automobiles, and disposable iPads,"
    http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/feature/2011/03/31/real_world_senator_struggles
    What a douche ........

    But it's indicative of the disconnect between the republicans and the economic reality they are hawking

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 12:18 AM GMT
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/the-saccharine-republican_b_843420.htmlSo what, really, does the Right have to complain about? Like spoiled children they've always gotten their way but it's never good enough. Give into one demand and they have ten more; give in to those ten demands (as it seems is Obama's "strategy" for dealing with the opposition) and they have a hundred more; give into those hundred demands, and they have a thousand more, ad infinitum.

    The list of things they wanted and got is quite long, so I put it in small font.

    They wanted tax cuts for the rich and corporations, and they got tax cuts for the rich and corporations.
    They wanted to privatize government services (including the military), and they got the privatization of government services (including the military).
    They wanted to roll back anti-trust enforcement, and they got a rollback of anti-trust enforcement.
    They wanted NAFTA, "free trade," and the WTO, and they got NAFTA, "free trade," and the WTO.
    They wanted SUVs to be listed as "light trucks," and they got SUVs listed as "light trucks."
    They wanted to deregulate the telecommunications industry and establish their own "conservative" news outlet, and they got the deregulation of the telecommunications industry and their own "news" outlet.
    They wanted to deregulate the financial services industry and gut Glass-Steagall, and they got the deregulation of the financial services industry and the gutting of Glass-Steagall.
    They wanted zero government regulation over the trading of derivatives, and they got zero government oversight over derivatives.
    They wanted a strong Chief Executive vis-à-vis Congress, and they got a strong Chief Executive vis-à-vis Congress.
    They wanted the Medicare Part D $400 billion give-away to Big Pharma, and they got the Medicare Part D $400 billion give-away to Big Pharma.
    They wanted the Iraq war, and they got the Iraq war.
    They wanted no limits on corporate campaign contributions, and they got no limits on corporate campaign contributions.
    They wanted an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, and they got an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.
    They wanted easier access to deepwater offshore oil drilling and an anemic federal regulatory agency overseeing offshore drilling, and they got easier access to deepwater offshore drilling and an anemic federal agency overseeing offshore drilling.
    They wanted a Supreme Court that would serve capital over labor, corporations over people, industry over concerns for the environment, and one that would hand over to their candidate a contested presidential election, and they got a Supreme Court that serves capital over labor, corporations over people, industry over concerns for the environment that handed to their candidate the presidency in a contested election.
    They wanted to block the Employee Free Choice Act, and they blocked the Employee Free Choice Act.
    They wanted to weaken the Dodd-Frank financial re-regulation bill, and they weakened the Dodd-Frank re-regulation bill.
    They wanted subsidies for Big Oil, Nuclear, and Big Coal, and they got subsidies for Big Oil, Nuclear, and Big Coal.
    And right now they want draconian budget cuts in programs that benefit middle and low-income people, and they're getting draconian budget cuts in programs that benefit middle and low-income people.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Apr 02, 2011 7:03 PM GMT
    TropicalMark saidThe hypocrisy of these GOPers will and IS destroying them. From the inside out!





    Exactly !
    They've been in office only 3 months, and the general public is completely disgusted with most of them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 7:20 PM GMT
    Wow - the people who commented on this story, universally with some level of revulsion are disingenuous.

    If you bothered to actually listen to the whole response instead of cherry picking it you might have recognized a few things - as both summarized mocked by the Weekly Standard - but why let facts get in the way?

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/sean-duffy-poor-enough-qualify-obamacare-subsidies_556073.html

    "Struggling" on a congressman's salary of $174,000? The Wisconsin Democratic party pounced and produced a flyer advertising an April Fools' Day "food and clothes drive for poor Sean Duffy." The flyer requested items such as "top hats and monocles," "french-cuffed shirts," "oyster spoons," and "last year's Bulgari, Givenchy and Versace."

    Democrats were, of course, ignoring Duffy's explanation for his struggles--that there are eight mouths to feed in his family and that he took no pay during the second half of 2010. While he was running for office Duffy stepped down from his job as district attorney and, according to a spokesman, had to take out a loan. He made just over $50,000 in 2010 and had only received one pay check as a member of Congress by the time of the February townhall event.


    It is also useful also to remember the Sean Duffy's run ended up unseating David Obey, who had benefited tremendously from the generosity he extracted from earmarks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 7:51 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidWow - the people who commented on this story, universally with some level of revulsion are disingenuous.

    If you bothered to actually listen to the whole response instead of cherry picking it you might have recognized a few things - as both summarized mocked by the Weekly Standard - but why let facts get in the way?

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/sean-duffy-poor-enough-qualify-obamacare-subsidies_556073.html

    "Struggling" on a congressman's salary of $174,000? The Wisconsin Democratic party pounced and produced a flyer advertising an April Fools' Day "food and clothes drive for poor Sean Duffy." The flyer requested items such as "top hats and monocles," "french-cuffed shirts," "oyster spoons," and "last year's Bulgari, Givenchy and Versace."

    Democrats were, of course, ignoring Duffy's explanation for his struggles--that there are eight mouths to feed in his family and that he took no pay during the second half of 2010. While he was running for office Duffy stepped down from his job as district attorney and, according to a spokesman, had to take out a loan. He made just over $50,000 in 2010 and had only received one pay check as a member of Congress by the time of the February townhall event.


    It is also useful also to remember the Sean Duffy's run ended up unseating David Obey, who had benefited tremendously from the generosity he extracted from earmarks.


    OH POOR BABY!! GO CRY ME A RIVER!!!

    Stop living beyond your means. Stop having kids you can't afford. And get off your lazy ass and get a second job like the rest of us! Stop expecting the taxpayers to bail you out for your own mistakes. GOP hypocrite!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 7:56 PM GMT
    catfish5 saidOH POOR BABY!! GO CRY ME A RIVER!!!

    Stop having kids you can't afford. And get off your lazy ass and get a second job like the rest of us!


    Who is saying he was? It's disingenuous and untrue however that he "is struggling on $174,000" because that is not what he made. I'm just curious if you had a problem understanding the point or if the misunderstanding is deliberate?

    [Addendum] Where is he being a hypocrite? Where is he asking for a bailout? Again, do you have a natural inability with understanding words or a deliberate one?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 8:05 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    catfish5 saidOH POOR BABY!! GO CRY ME A RIVER!!!

    Stop having kids you can't afford. And get off your lazy ass and get a second job like the rest of us!


    Who is saying he was? It's disingenuous and untrue however that he "is struggling on $174,000" because that is not what he made. I'm just curious if you had a problem understanding the point or if the misunderstanding is deliberate?

    [Addendum] Where is he being a hypocrite? Where is he asking for a bailout? Again, do you have a natural inability with understanding words or a deliberate one?


    You really are totally brain dead. If the government shuts down he shouldn't get paid. He'd rather see seniors and veterans take the hit than his own pocketbook. Hypocrite!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 8:07 PM GMT
    Webster666 said
    TropicalMark saidThe hypocrisy of these GOPers will and IS destroying them. From the inside out!





    Exactly !
    They've been in office only 3 months, and the general public is completely disgusted with most of them.



    YUP.
    The Teabaggers are losing the support with the American people - and FAST.

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/30/cnn-poll-unfavorable-view-of-tea-party-on-the-rise/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 02, 2011 8:17 PM GMT
    catfish5 said
    riddler78 said
    catfish5 saidOH POOR BABY!! GO CRY ME A RIVER!!!

    Stop having kids you can't afford. And get off your lazy ass and get a second job like the rest of us!


    Who is saying he was? It's disingenuous and untrue however that he "is struggling on $174,000" because that is not what he made. I'm just curious if you had a problem understanding the point or if the misunderstanding is deliberate?

    [Addendum] Where is he being a hypocrite? Where is he asking for a bailout? Again, do you have a natural inability with understanding words or a deliberate one?


    You really are totally brain dead. If the government shuts down he shouldn't get paid. He'd rather see seniors and veterans take the hit than his own pocketbook. Hypocrite!!


    How is it being a hypocrite if he will also suffer during a shutdown? So are you acknowledging then that the claim he is having problems getting by on $174,000 is simply untrue and disingenuous (there are some dictionaries online should you need to look up that word)? Being of outstanding brilliance of course, perhaps you can explain how this was "asking for a bailout"?
  • mke_bt

    Posts: 707

    Apr 03, 2011 5:57 AM GMT
    riddler78 saidWow - the people who commented on this story, universally with some level of revulsion are disingenuous.

    If you bothered to actually listen to the whole response instead of cherry picking it you might have recognized a few things - as both summarized mocked by the Weekly Standard - but why let facts get in the way?

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/sean-duffy-poor-enough-qualify-obamacare-subsidies_556073.html

    "Struggling" on a congressman's salary of $174,000? The Wisconsin Democratic party pounced and produced a flyer advertising an April Fools' Day "food and clothes drive for poor Sean Duffy." The flyer requested items such as "top hats and monocles," "french-cuffed shirts," "oyster spoons," and "last year's Bulgari, Givenchy and Versace."

    Democrats were, of course, ignoring Duffy's explanation for his struggles--that there are eight mouths to feed in his family and that he took no pay during the second half of 2010. While he was running for office Duffy stepped down from his job as district attorney and, according to a spokesman, had to take out a loan. He made just over $50,000 in 2010 and had only received one pay check as a member of Congress by the time of the February townhall event.


    It is also useful also to remember the Sean Duffy's run ended up unseating David Obey, who had benefited tremendously from the generosity he extracted from earmarks.


    He did not unseat Dave Obey. Dave Obey chose not to run. If you're going to stick you nose into Wisconsin politics, get your facts right. Also, how about backing up your claim that Dave Obey benefited tremendously from the generosity he extracted from earmarks. What the hell kind of statement is that?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 03, 2011 6:20 AM GMT
    mke_bt saidHe did not unseat Dave Obey. Dave Obey chose not to run. If you're going to stick you nose into Wisconsin politics, get your facts right. Also, how about backing up your claim that Dave Obey benefited tremendously from the generosity he extracted from earmarks. What the hell kind of statement is that?


    David Obey chose not to run - and this was attributed to the polling and momentum with respect to Sean Duffy - so effectively he did unseat Obey (which at the time was remarkable given that he was the Chair of the Appropriations committee and the length of time he had been in Congress). As for Obey and earmarks - he was one of the largest supporters of earmarks and even made it a family affair.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 03, 2011 7:34 AM GMT
    Although I understand that his personal finance issues suck, I have issues sympathizing with Sean here. My parents were fiscally frugal with their money because we didn't know what would be around the corner. My dad worked contract to contract, so he worked for x amount of months or years at $y per hour. Sometimes we'd rival the Duffys in salary, and others... not quite so much. My family saved for a rainy day and didn't buy a luxurious McMansion, go on luxury trips or anything like that. This is also in Hennepin County in Minnesota, which is not only taxed higher than Wisconsin, but also more expensive to live in, so the point is that it's harder for us to make ends meet than the Duffy family does in Northern Wisconsin.

    Which brings me to my second point- since Wisconsin is cheaper to live in than in Minnesota overall, and this guy is failing to make ends meet, it's going to look like he can't exactly practice what he preaches, which is fiscal responsibility or conservation. For example, children- kids are expensive. Let's face it. I'm sure the Duffy kids are awesome, so I feel bad for saying this, but six is pretty excessive- especially if you're trying to feed them by working a job (cushy or not) where there's less security due to freezes, cuts and because the people can- if you're not successful or popular enough- basically tell you:

    trump-youre-fired.jpg

    Just my two cents here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 03, 2011 4:35 PM GMT
    Bullwinklemoos saidAlthough I understand that his personal finance issues suck, I have issues sympathizing with Sean here. My parents were fiscally frugal with their money because we didn't know what would be around the corner. My dad worked contract to contract, so he worked for x amount of months or years at $y per hour. Sometimes we'd rival the Duffys in salary, and others... not quite so much. My family saved for a rainy day and didn't buy a luxurious McMansion, go on luxury trips or anything like that. This is also in Hennepin County in Minnesota, which is not only taxed higher than Wisconsin, but also more expensive to live in, so the point is that it's harder for us to make ends meet than the Duffy family does in Northern Wisconsin.

    Which brings me to my second point- since Wisconsin is cheaper to live in than in Minnesota overall, and this guy is failing to make ends meet, it's going to look like he can't exactly practice what he preaches, which is fiscal responsibility or conservation. For example, children- kids are expensive. Let's face it. I'm sure the Duffy kids are awesome, so I feel bad for saying this, but six is pretty excessive- especially if you're trying to feed them by working a job (cushy or not) where there's less security due to freezes, cuts and because the people can- if you're not successful or popular enough- basically tell you:

    trump-youre-fired.jpg

    Just my two cents here.


    You summed up my thoughts exactly. Republicans, the party of fiscal conservatism, constantly advocate this. How many times have I heard from Republicans on other blogs talking about how people shouldn't have children they can't afford?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 03, 2011 4:39 PM GMT
    Balljunkie saidYou summed up my thoughts exactly. Republicans, the party of fiscal conservatism, constantly advocate this. How many times have I heard from Republicans on other blogs talking about how people shouldn't have children they can't afford?


    The difference here though is that Sean Duffy isn't asking for a bailout. He made the comments in response to a question. And that answer is being reframed by demagogues who want you to believe that he

    (a) was making 174,000 at the time - he had only made $50k total last year given that he quit his job to run for his current position

    (b) that he is looking for some bail out - which he isn't. He was only describing his current situation - even to say that he was asking for sympathy for an issue someone else brought up is a bit disingenuous I think.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 03, 2011 4:50 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Balljunkie saidYou summed up my thoughts exactly. Republicans, the party of fiscal conservatism, constantly advocate this. How many times have I heard from Republicans on other blogs talking about how people shouldn't have children they can't afford?


    The difference here though is that Sean Duffy isn't asking for a bailout. He made the comments in response to a question. And that answer is being reframed by demagogues who want you to believe that he

    (a) was making 174,000 at the time - he had only made $50k total last year given that he quit his job to run for his current position

    (b) that he is looking for some bail out - which he isn't. He was only describing his current situation.


    Wrong again.

    a) Yes. He quit his political job but worked part time in his father's law practice, and there are many daily expenses (travel, food, etc.) that he could have paid through campaign contributions.

    b) No one is saying he was looking for a bailout. Rather, we are saying it is profoundly hypocritical to want to cut the wages and benefits of those who make 1/4 or 1/3 what he does while complaining that he can barely get by on what he does earn. Similarly, tax dollars are paying for the birth and healthcare of 6 children, but if a woman on welfare had a child, Sean Duffy would no doubt call her irresponsible. icon_rolleyes.gif