Come on, now, don’t you feel silly? From MSBNC:
PHILADELPHIA - Democratic Sen. Barack Obama reported $4.2 million in income in 2007.
The presidential candidate released his tax returns on Wednesday. He said his adjusted gross income was around $4.2 million, with $4 million coming from the profits on his two books — “Dreams From My Father” and “The Audacity of Hope.” His Senate salary is $260,735.
Obama paid federal taxes of $1.4 million. Charitable contributions were $240,370.
My point being, all the people who recently denounced the Clintons as elitists by virtue of their net worth should be a little embarrassed. Personally, I don’t think money has anything to do with elitism - I know some dirt-poor hipsters who are some of the biggest snobs around. Elitism is the idea that the world is only valid when viewed through your filter.
Not at all.
I get it though. You can point to some blogs where some earnest young lefties are all gaga over Obama and thus claim them as the “typical” Obama supporter. The point that Sen. Clinton’s supporters simply refuse to accept is Obama has received almost 9 million votes and they obviously didn’t all come from youngsters.
I am 50 years old and figured our somewhere around the age of 8 that anyone running for president probably has more money than the average wage earner.
So what? Michelle Obama was at Sidley & Austin, making a couple hundred g’s a year. So what?
You’re adopting right-wing framing points. Remember that horrible hypocrite John Edwards and his millions and mansions? Did you see any disconnect, did you have any problem with Edward’s the millionaire showing concern for working people? Neither did I. And I don’t see one with Obama either, although you, NRO, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc do.
Please stop doing the right’s work for them.
pretty crystal clear where the money came from…books and senate job.
No enormous and mysterious “speaking fees” or “presidential library donations” for some to question if strings were attached in a spousal CinC administration…
his tax return passes the stink-test…hers? not so much.
I always thought elitism was a state of mind/being and not necessarily an aspect of income/wealth. I recognize that wealth seems to be an indicator of elitism but not necessarily a major and definitely not the sole determinant of my assessment.
I finally get it, we have all been punked as Instapundit hacked the site and has been posting under Susie’s name. I mean what other possibilities are there?
Susie: As one who never denounced the Clinton’s, or Edwards or Obama’s as elitists (I try to avoid using right wing talking points whenever possible) I agree. If you support Obama and bashed the Clinton’s as out of touch elitists when you heard how much they made you should be embarrassed. Now that we’ve dismissed those 12 people allow me to ask a question based on the earlier post you linked to. Do you honestly believe Obama is some sort of elitist who will kick the working class to the curb? I see nothing in any of his words or deeds which could lead to such a reading, but you apparently do. I am asking you sincerely, as someone I respect, am I missing something? And the answer can’t be tied up in voting patterns. That right now, in the primaries, Obama is doing better among the creative class whilst Clinton is doing better among the working class does not prove Obama is blind to the concerns of the working class.
hey susie,
thanks for pointing that out. i also couldn’t help but note how he gave a significantly smaller percentage to charity–not to mention millions less in actual dollars–than did the clintons.
it becomes clearer to me every day that he doesn’t give a damn about anybody but himself. a “democrat”? gimme a break. he needs to drop the charade and run as the covert INDEPENDENCE PARTY candidate he really is.
ross perot, michael bloomberg, colin powell, and joe lieberman–all rolled up into one nice, new, shiny trojan unity pony!