SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: lorne who wrote (3803)2/24/2004 9:39:44 AM
From: JakeStrawRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 81568
 
Kerry's Campaign Mortgage Questioned

WRKO Boston talk radio host Howie Carr is questioning whether Democratic presidential front-runner John Kerry was given special treatment when he obtained a $6.4 million mortgage last December on the Beacon Hill townhouse he owns jointly with his wife to rescue his then-financially strapped campaign.

"I don't think that the bank should have given Kerry that big of a mortgage under the usual regulations," Carr told WABC Radio's Steve Malzberg on Sunday.

"When you figure up the payments and the interest rate on the note, it's going to cost him $350,000 a year to pay off the note," the Boston talker explained, noting that Kerry's annual salary as a senator was less that half that amount.

"How can any bank vice president sign off on that," said Carr, "unless they do it with a wink and a nod and say, 'Well, the one who's really going to take care of it is Teresa" - Kerry's ketchup-heiress wife, who is reportedly worth $550 million.

Federal Election Commission regulations make it illegal for Mrs. Heinz Kerry to contribute more than $2,000 to her husband's presidential campaign.

Carr said also that Kerry's share of the Beacon Hill townhouse was likely inflated in order to boost the amount of cash he could borrow.

"City Hall records show that the mansion is actually only assessed at $6 million," he told Malzberg. "And yet the bank gave Kerry a mortgage of $6 million [the full amount], even though he only owns a half share under communal property rights."



To: lorne who wrote (3803)2/24/2004 9:55:31 AM
From: ChinuSFORead Replies (1) | Respond to of 81568
 
This time the Democrats do not have the luxury of thinking along many different avenues as they did in 2000 because of the Clinton prosperity then. This time the Democrats know better to unite because they have experienced "the devil" in Bush. And Nader not getting the support of the Green Party is a proof of that.

Besides, Nader is always anti-establishment. In 2000 the Democrats were the establishment, now it is the Republicans.