Dan Sebring: no fan of taxes!
By Zach W On June 30, 2009 · 9 Comments · In Election 2010, News, Those Kooky Conservatives!, Wisconsin Politics
One look at Congressional candidate Dan Sebring’s website and it becomes plainly obvious he’s no fan of taxes. Then again, considering the problems Sebring’s had with the tax man, it should be no surprise Dan Sebring’s not a fan of taxes.
Then again, I can’t think of anyone who is a fan of taxes, but at least most folks actually pay theirs when they’re supposed to.
Tagged with: Dan Sebring
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
opinions powered by SendLove.to
9 Responses to Dan Sebring: no fan of taxes!
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Our Blogroll
- AFSCME Council 24 SEPAC
- Badger Blue, Times Two
- Badger Democracy
- BattiestGrrl Recalls: Putting the 'All' in 'Recall'
- blue cheddar blog
- Blue Collar Blogger
- Brett Cottrell
- Brew City Brawler
- Caffeinated Politics
- City of Contempt – The Scroll of Reason
- Cognitive Dissidence
- Constructive Debate
- Democracy Interactive
- Down With Tyranny!
- Eschaton
- Eye on Wisconsin
- FDLFVR
- Firedoglake
- First Draft
- folkbum’s rambles and rants
- Forward our Motto
- ForwardSeeking
- FoxPolitics.net
- Freak Out Nation
- freshthoughtz
- Grassroots Tosa
- Haas414
- Happy Circumstance
- illusory tenant
- Jake's Economic TA Funhouse
- Labor Chicks
- Left on the Lake
- Left Take
- Letter From Here
- Mildly Relevant
- MisLeading Wisconsin
- Moneyed Politicians
- Monologues of Dissent
- One Wisconsin Now
- Plaisted Writes
- Playground Politics
- Political Heat
- Ramona's Voices
- Red State Progressive
- Sly in the Morning
- South Milwaukee's 4th District
- The Bearded Crank
- The Blue States
- The Chief
- The Lost Albatross
- The Masses
- The Motley Cow
- The Other Side of My Mouth
- The Paul Ryan Watch
- The Plum Line
- The Political Carnival
- The Political Environment
- The Sara Schulz Show
- The World According to Nick
- Turning Over the Rocks
- Uppity Wisconsin
- Urban Milwaukee
- Waukesha Wonk
- Wisconsin Gazette
- WisPolitics.com
Watch the GAB sort through recall petitions LIVE!
Join the Discussion…
- Jeff Simpson on About Kathleen Falk’s Union Endorsements
- super Id. on About Kathleen Falk’s Union Endorsements
- Dan on Why I’d vote for Jan Pierce if I lived in the 14th Aldermanic District
- AK on Why I’d vote for Jan Pierce if I lived in the 14th Aldermanic District
- Dan on Why I’d vote for Jan Pierce if I lived in the 14th Aldermanic District
- AK on Why I’d vote for Jan Pierce if I lived in the 14th Aldermanic District
- Zuma Bound on Verify The Recall – It’s Working
- Jane on About Kathleen Falk’s Union Endorsements
- Zuma Bound on You want vote fraud? Rep. Joel Kleefisch has your vote fraud right here!
- John Foust on You want vote fraud? Rep. Joel Kleefisch has your vote fraud right here!
- Dan on Why I’d vote for Jan Pierce if I lived in the 14th Aldermanic District
- Zach W on You want vote fraud? Rep. Joel Kleefisch has your vote fraud right here!
- Jeff Simpson on You want vote fraud? Rep. Joel Kleefisch has your vote fraud right here!
- tweetster on You want vote fraud? Rep. Joel Kleefisch has your vote fraud right here!
- Jeff Simpson on You want vote fraud? Rep. Joel Kleefisch has your vote fraud right here!
Site Login
Well, Gwen Moore is no fan of paying her bills. Look through the circuit court system and you will see she has been foreclosed on and has defaulted on credit cards. And this from a woman that sits on the House Banking Committee. Look at both sides of the aisle before pointing a finger.
Mike, the issue here – at least for me – is that your candidate is holding himself up as the candidate of fiscal responsibility. What I’m wondering is how he thinks he’ll be able to get the federal government’s house in order if he can’t keep his own finances in order.
Answer that question, and I’ll lay off.
At least Gwen Moore has paid her taxes.
But look at your links to make sure they work before pointing fingers. (The CCAP link didn’t go anywhere informative.)
Mike, the issue here – at least for Zach (and apparently Jason) – is to discredit Dan Sebring. If timely tax payment was an issue that Zach cared deeply about, you would see him lambasting Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle and others on their tax issues. As for Jason, despite what he posted here, Sebring has paid his taxes too.
To his credit, Zach did mention Tim and Tom back in February, but the blog post was a much softer “geez, come on guys” kind of criticism. He fell well short of questioning Geithner’s ability to do his job. While he said he was “never a fan” of Daschle, he also didn’t hinge Daschle’s qualifications on his tax issues.
Unlike Geithner, who was unpacking boxes in his new Treasury Dept. office before his tax issues were resolved, Sebring’s tax issues were satisfied nine years ago. Sebring’s cases (one in 1997 and two in 2000) were all resolved with full payment including penalties and interest within 3 months of the cases being docketed in court. Meanwhile, Geithner was absolved from having to pay any penalties…interest yes, but no penalties.
In fairness (an increasingly rare condition these days), of the three cases that appear in a search for Gwendolynne Moore on the Wisconsin Circuit Court Access (CCAP) website, only one appears to contain a ruling against Moore. Said case was a small claims action filed against Moore by M&I Bank way back in 1996. The court ruled Moore owed $1400…which she took about five years to pay. Does this case mean Moore is incapable of doing her job? IMHO, no.
Roland, I don’t need to discredit Dan Sebring; he’s doing a good job of that all by himself!
Thanks for dashing any hope of a substantive debate/conversation. You can almost fit that reply on a bumpersticker.
Roland, I didn’t lambaste Tim Geithner and Tom Daschle as much as Dan Sebring because neither are vying to become my Congressman. The issue of when and how Dan Sebring did or didn’t pay his business sales taxes is just one of a bunch of issues that concern me regarding his candidacy.
Unless you’re trying to claim you don’t care who holds the positions of Secretary of Treasury or HHS, that’s a disingenuous distinction you’re making. Are you saying the Treasury or HHS jobs are not important ones?
My point is that your “concerns” over nine year old tax cases, which as I previously said were paid in full plus interest and penalties, seems to be a selective criticism born from a desire to “discredit” an opponent.
Roland, I’m not saying I don’t care at all about who holds those positions, nor am I saying those positions aren’t important. What I’m saying is that I care less about who holds those positions than I do about who holds the position as my elected Representative in Congress.