PDA

View Full Version : What the Hoi Polloi think of dressage and Ann Romney



nhwr
May. 22, 2012, 11:28 AM
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ann-romney-dressage-20120522,0,5056646.story

MediaMD
May. 22, 2012, 11:47 AM
What a ridiculous article....the adjective "fussy" being used in conjunction with this discipline shows how incredibly naive and deliberately obtuse this reporter was. At least educate yourself a tiny bit so you don't make a complete twit of yourself writing such drivel.

Sigh...I know it's par for the course in the political attack climate but good grief, leave her hobby and method of dealing with her devastating and debilitating disease OUT of the political discourse. It has nothing to do with her husband, his policies or plans for the country. It's all about attacking wealthy people which passes for "journalism".

As a former major market news anchor and long time network news producer, I am ashamed at the lows my once respectable profession has sunk to. We were once proud to say we were there to expose the truth. Nothing more, nothing less. No matter which side pressured us, I was taught by some chain smoking newspaper guys that you remained "disinterested" because your opinion had no place in the story. My, how times have changed. And not for the better...

(OK, stepping down off the soapbox and backing slowly away now..)

TheHorseProblem
May. 22, 2012, 11:54 AM
It's a poorly written and researched article, relying mainly on the reporting of others.

But commenting on the journalistic quality is not horse-related, and a similar thread a few weeks ago led to nothing but political sniping.

P.S. Dressage is fussy.

Canaqua
May. 22, 2012, 12:02 PM
While I agree that the article is poorly written and likely has a political agenda, referring to those who don't know much about dressage or the horse industry in general as "Hoi Polloi" can only contribute to the elitist image ;).

paulaedwina
May. 22, 2012, 12:03 PM
I commented.

At least right after you insulted us as participating in a "fussy" sport also known as horse ballet, you acknowledge, "Because it requires tremendous muscle control, dressage also provided Romney unexpected therapeutic benefits." For the record there are alot of us solidly middle-class dressage riders pursuing this simultaneously fussy-but-demanding-tremendous-muscle-control "horse ballet". Frankly there are more of us than there are of the Romney money class. And by the way, we are ever grateful for the moneyed few who support all the adult ammies out there.

Paula

trafalgar
May. 22, 2012, 12:14 PM
How different from the days of Jacqueline Kennedy when her horse hobby on increased her glamour and appeal. They should leave Anne Romney alone, but as such things go, The article wasn't too obnoxious, just sort of. So the Romneys have megabucks...I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT BY NOW!

Blkarab
May. 22, 2012, 12:16 PM
Great reply, Paula!

oldernewbie
May. 22, 2012, 12:24 PM
I am a staunch Obama supporter. That being said, this article is ridiculous. I don't think the author did a lick of research about dressage. I am pleased to know, however, that my $300 dressage horse and my foray into dressage schooling shows establishes me firmly as a member of the elite. :lol:

Eh, and the comments to the article are insane.

quietann
May. 22, 2012, 12:25 PM
The comments disturb me far more than the article does.

Windsor1
May. 22, 2012, 12:34 PM
Really not seeing what is SO objectionable about this piece. I think that most people understand that different activities can be pursued at different levels, and that competing at the top in any sport is expensive. I don't have to be a gymnast to know that training with Bela Karolyi and traveling to international competitions is going to be a little more expensive than your average nine-year-old who takes lessons at the local gym once or twice a week.

The article is about ANN ROMNEY'S participation in dressage, and at her level of competition, it does cost a [poop]load of money, does it not?

Blkarab
May. 22, 2012, 12:46 PM
Maybe so...however, her family income was earned, and good for them! If she can afford to compete at that level, afford her nice $$ horses, then good! I don't see the problem with it...it's their money, and the plus side, is the health benefit she receives from riding.

I'm really sick and tired of the media and others for making those who have means that earned them into demons. It's AMERICA, and it used to be the American dream to strive for a better life. I'm quite happy for the Romneys. Glad that Ann Romney has found a way to work through her MS, and supports the Dressage community.

Ldbgcoleman
May. 22, 2012, 12:51 PM
Hey we need owners to support riders and our Olympic hopefuls in equestrian sports. I admire anyone who earns a gold metal with MS. Shes also given millions to various charities. Who wouldnt spend more on horses if they could?

paulaedwina
May. 22, 2012, 12:56 PM
Exactly. I resent this kind of "journalism". It's hasty, poorly researched, and highly biased.

Paula

staceyk
May. 22, 2012, 12:57 PM
If AR was an opera devotee or supported the ballet, or classical music, would anyone make such a fuss? I compiled some video news clips on AR and her horse interests last week...

http://www.behindthebitblog.com/2012/05/romney-and-dressage-in-press.html

I am not politically inclined but the "journalists" are behaving like children. Honestly. I know fourteen year olds that could have treated this subject with intelligence and thought.

I for one am delighted that there are people in the world who use their wealth to support beauty and the pursuit of something beautiful -- of course it creates jobs and lines the pockets of many others involved in dressage too.

My overall reaction to press coverage of dressage is to be sad.

Alpha Mare
May. 22, 2012, 01:09 PM
As well as other pointst made about this article, I do not think the therapeutic benefits were 'unexpected'.

Many riders start or continue with dressage for physical benefits that are the more achievable because of the enjoyment of the partnership with the horse.

suzy
May. 22, 2012, 01:10 PM
I commented.

And by the way, we are ever grateful for the moneyed few who support all the adult ammies out there.

Paula

Really? Who are these people to whom you are referring? I can't think of any moneyed few who are helping me or any of my friends or acquaintances. In fact, I think you have it backwards. I think it's the adult ammies, filling the ranks at the non-FEI levels that are supporting the moneyed few. Shows could not exist otherwise.

suzy
May. 22, 2012, 01:32 PM
I'm really sick and tired of the media and others for making those who have means that earned them into demons. It's AMERICA, and it used to be the American dream to strive for a better life. I'm quite happy for the Romneys. Glad that Ann Romney has found a way to work through her MS, and supports the Dressage community.

I hate to burst your bubble, but a lot of this earned money was earned at terrible expense to others and the environment. Yes, there is nothing wrong with striving for a better life--I do--but not if it's going to hurt others.

Also, the very wealthy make contributions because they NEED to. They have so much money that it will just go to the tax man otherwise. Sadly, most are not nearly as philanthropic as we'd like to think. They bask in the attention they get from giving $10M to a college or medical center that will have their name on it. Although this is a tremendous amount of money to the majority of us, it's chump change to those who are worth anywhere from $500M on up. Sorry to sound so jaded, but I work in an environment where we are dealing with top tier donors on a daily basis.

TheHorseProblem
May. 22, 2012, 01:42 PM
The comments disturb me far more than the article does.

:yes:


It's hasty, poorly researched, and highly biased.


Her research was she googled "Ann Romney horses." The only thing noteworthy to me was that AR and the Ebelings company (which does business in CA where all of them live) is registered in Delaware. Research that, why don't they?


Really? Who are these people to whom you are referring? I can't think of any moneyed few who are helping me or any of my friends or acquaintances. In fact, I think you have it backwards. I think it's the adult ammies, filling the ranks at the non-FEI levels that are supporting the moneyed few. Shows could not exist otherwise.

That is true.

meupatdoes
May. 22, 2012, 01:49 PM
Her research was she googled "Ann Romney horses." The only thing noteworthy to me was that AR and the Ebelings company (which does business in CA where all of them live) is registered in Delaware. Research that, why don't they?


Because that's completely normal???
Delaware has very corporate-friendly laws.

A very great many organizations incorporate in Delaware even though they do all of their business elsewhere.

suzy
May. 22, 2012, 02:18 PM
Because that's completely normal???
Delaware has very corporate-friendly laws.

A very great many organizations incorporate in Delaware even though they do all of their business elsewhere.

That's true, Meup, but it IS noteworthy. ;)

TheHorseProblem
May. 22, 2012, 02:35 PM
Because that's completely normal???
Delaware has very corporate-friendly laws.

A very great many organizations incorporate in Delaware even though they do all of their business elsewhere.

As a public school teacher in California, I resent hearing about people who could perfectly afford paying taxes in CA incorporating elsewhere to save money, when so much of their money is earned in this state.

We are losing half our teachers next year when class sizes go up. We will no longer have a librarian or a nurse.

You love living here? Pay your taxes.

SwampYankee
May. 22, 2012, 02:40 PM
Populist journalism over the last 30 years has resulted in a climate of tremendous resentment directed at anyone viewed as a member of an "elite;" not only equestrian sports devotees, but the upper class in general. Not that we officially HAVE an upper class, you understand. Or so goes the myth!

Jackie Kennedy lived during the last days of High Society, when the aspiring middle classes looked to those of her ilk as arbiters of taste and breeding. Now, due in part to the influence of the entertainment industry, our "elites" are more than likely to have messy lives, repulsive "style," and a notable lack of manners.

C'est dommage.

SLW
May. 22, 2012, 02:45 PM
As a public school teacher in California, I resent hearing about people who could perfectly afford paying taxes in CA incorporating elsewhere to save money, when so much of their money is earned in this state.

We are losing half our teachers next year when class sizes go up. We will no longer have a librarian or a nurse.

You love living here? Pay your taxes.

One daughter lives next to San Jose, one of the 30 plus sanctuary cities in California. The things she observes first hand frustrate her and her husband beyond words.

As for the article, that was a typical political shot. That is Ann's $$ to spend as she wants.

InsideLeg2OutsideRein
May. 22, 2012, 02:51 PM
OK, so firstly, Ms. Romney can spend her money however she likes. Good for her to love dressage. (I do not support any of her husband's views, but that's totally beside the point.)
Calling dressage fussy, well, it might be to the uninitiated. Still not good journalism.

"Dressage is not for the faint of wallet; it requires healthy outlays of cash for upkeep, training, transportation and veterinary care."

That, sadly, is true, and for those of us who are making it work without being part of the billionaire crowd...

" It attracts some of the world's richest people — the daughter of billionaire New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg competes. Yahoo co-founder Jerry Yang and his wife own dressage horses."

... makes it a bit tougher to get to the Olympics. As a rider or sponsor of an Olympic horse and rider. But at least my horse didn't get tipped over in the flight container. How horrible.

chancellor2
May. 22, 2012, 02:54 PM
actually, I think a lot of the comments are spot on. If the Obama girls were riding dressage, the reporter would likely be touting all the health benefits.
The media today are nothing but whores to ratings. They will do whatever they can to get more readers, more watchers whatever. It's not about the news anymore and reporting the truth. It's really pretty sad.

carolprudm
May. 22, 2012, 03:01 PM
Has Bloomberg's daughter switched to dressage after her accident or is the article less than accurate?

nhwr
May. 22, 2012, 03:05 PM
As a job creating business owner in California who tries any legal means to avoid paying California's business punishing taxes, I can tell you there is no tax benefit to being incorporated in Delaware.

NOMIOMI1
May. 22, 2012, 03:07 PM
The dressage economy needs ALL of the supporters, however the "moneyed" do and have kept this sport alive at the top level. Just a fact.

Regardless of politics I support the supporters of this sport unless they give me a reason not to.

Liberty is the gift of independence to pursue such things as dressage, or other dreams and passions.

suzy
May. 22, 2012, 03:11 PM
As a job creating business owner in California who tries any legal means to avoid paying California's business punishing taxes, I can tell you there is no tax benefit to being incorporated in Delaware.

http://www.florida-corporations-online.com/delaware-corporations.html

danceronice
May. 22, 2012, 03:31 PM
Has Bloomberg's daughter switched to dressage after her accident or is the article less than accurate?

Don't you know all horse sports are the same thing? (How many of us have been asked if we have racehorses/going to ride in the Kentucky Derby?) It involves a horse, right? Ergo it's the same.

And of course it's just out to show how EEEEEEVIL the Romneys are and how RICH they are. Same old bitter, stewing envious people. If Michelle Obama (who made more in a year at her non-job, where they never replaced her once she quit to be First Lady, than I have in ten years) were riding, it would be about how healthy and wholesome a sport it is. They basically looked up that horses cost a lot and Ann Romney does it, therefore it's something evil rich people do.

Velvet
May. 22, 2012, 03:40 PM
*yawn* What a silly topic, and an even more ridiculous article. Keep feeding the machine. The tail is definitely wagging the dog in this country if this is news, and can cause people to take sides.

Boring.

nhwr
May. 22, 2012, 03:41 PM
suzy, good info but it applies to Delaware, not California.

If you own a home in California (as the Romney's do) and spend more than 14 days in California, you are considered a resident of California. "Residency" is a key issue. If you are a non-resident, then you can work in California for limited periods. You become a non-resident when your domicile is moved. There is a Safe Harbor provision that says that once that domicile is established outside California for 546 days, you are a non-resident. Inside that period, you have to be able to demonstrate that your domicile has changed -- if challenged.

If you receive W2 wages from a CA company for work conducted in CA, you risk being considered a full or part-time resident.

If you receive W2 wages from a CA company for work conducted outside CA, then these wages would be taxable in the state in which you reside.

If you receive K-1 income from a CA company, the rules are complex, but generally if you are a non-resident, this income is taxable in the state in which you reside.

So basically, there are four possibilities:

1. Full-time CA resident
2. Full-time non-resident
3. Part-time CA resident
4. Split residency (one spouse is non-resident)

Part-time residents and split residency are apportioned tax obligations based on the amount of time spent in the state.

TheHorseProblem
May. 22, 2012, 03:50 PM
Has Bloomberg's daughter switched to dressage after her accident or is the article less than accurate?

It's the same sloppy reporting done in the ABC piece recently, except that Robin Abcarian spelled the Jerry Yang's name right (except it's not him, but his wife Akiko who owns Ravel among others.

nhwr, thanks for the correction. But why incorporate in Delaware?

Blkarab
May. 22, 2012, 03:53 PM
I hate to burst your bubble, but a lot of this earned money was earned at terrible expense to others and the environment. Yes, there is nothing wrong with striving for a better life--I do--but not if it's going to hurt others.

Also, the very wealthy make contributions because they NEED to. They have so much money that it will just go to the tax man otherwise. Sadly, most are not nearly as philanthropic as we'd like to think. They bask in the attention they get from giving $10M to a college or medical center that will have their name on it. Although this is a tremendous amount of money to the majority of us, it's chump change to those who are worth anywhere from $500M on up. Sorry to sound so jaded, but I work in an environment where we are dealing with top tier donors on a daily basis.

No bubble is burst here. I know first-hand how corporate taxation works. I'm an executive in a family oil and gas company.

Here is how taxation and so called "environmental expense" works.

We are taxed at over 50% of profit for state and federal taxes. If we have one signature out of place on an EPA document with no EPA violation, it's a $5000 fine. We have regulations from the BLM, MMS, and numerous other government agencies that want their cut, their fee, etc, etc. or some other small "tax" to add to their pot. Our company produces jobs for 17 field employees and 7 office staff...I process over 700 invoices a month...which all equate to jobs for mostly Mom and Pop companies that wouldn't be able to survive if we didn't provide them work. Those individuals pay taxes to their school districts, counties, etc. They spend their money in local restaurants, shops and grocery stores...it all trickles down into the economy.

Yes, the wealthy need to make contributions...because the taxes for most businesses would be outrageous. Industries are hit constantly with new regulations that while not considered taxes, still go into the government pot. If MOST corporations didn't have a way to have a tax break...they would have to either close up shop or lay off workers.

If you want to blame someone...blame the government for their excessive waste.

I'm sorry, but I'm tired of watching people work hard to earn their money at all levels, only to have the government take more of it away to give to those "less fortunate". When a lot of those "less fortunate" people could go out and get a job, but won't because they make more money off of welfare or unemployment...so there is no incentive. I'm tired of hearing about corporations who are supplying real jobs be demonized and called evil because they are striving to make a profit.

How about this...since we are all so priviledged to have horses and ride dressage...why don't we give away our animals to someone else who desires them...that's what it is coming down to. Before long, it's not just the mega-wealthy that are going to be penalized.

nhwr
May. 22, 2012, 04:05 PM
nhwr, thanks for the correction. But why incorporate in Delaware?

My guess would be #7 on suzy's link;

"Incorporating in Delaware also has legal advantages, for Delaware corporations receive the benefit of having Delaware's renowned Court of Chancery, a business court system solely specializing in corporate law. Consequently, Delaware corporations can rely upon a well-established body of law, providing predictable legal decisions."

Isabeau Z Solace
May. 22, 2012, 04:57 PM
Really? Who are these people to whom you are referring? I can't think of any moneyed few who are helping me or any of my friends or acquaintances. In fact, I think you have it backwards. I think it's the adult ammies, filling the ranks at the non-FEI levels that are supporting the moneyed few. Shows could not exist otherwise.

Yeah... I'm kinda thinking that might be more accurate.

The wide base of the pyramid holds up the top. Not the other way around.:winkgrin:

meupatdoes
May. 22, 2012, 04:59 PM
Yes, Delaware has a great deal of well established case law etc etc so the question, "What happens if we do x?" is much more predictable in Delaware. They are also easier than a lot of states to deal with in terms of filing and so on.

They are MORE EXPENSIVE than many other states (NY being one of them, if you can believe that NY managed to be less expensive than somewhere else) because they have a franchise tax and require a registered agent but people choose to incorporate there because of the above. They pay extra for convenience and predictability.

I would assume Delaware corporations still have to register in CA as foreign corps and pay the associated taxes/fees if they want to do business in CA.

AZ Native
May. 22, 2012, 05:00 PM
No bubble is burst here. I know first-hand how corporate taxation works. I'm an executive in a family oil and gas company.

Here is how taxation and so called "environmental expense" works.

We are taxed at over 50% of profit for state and federal taxes. If we have one signature out of place on an EPA document with no EPA violation, it's a $5000 fine. We have regulations from the BLM, MMS, and numerous other government agencies that want their cut, their fee, etc, etc. or some other small "tax" to add to their pot. Our company produces jobs for 17 field employees and 7 office staff...I process over 700 invoices a month...which all equate to jobs for mostly Mom and Pop companies that wouldn't be able to survive if we didn't provide them work. Those individuals pay taxes to their school districts, counties, etc. They spend their money in local restaurants, shops and grocery stores...it all trickles down into the economy.

Yes, the wealthy need to make contributions...because the taxes for most businesses would be outrageous. Industries are hit constantly with new regulations that while not considered taxes, still go into the government pot. If MOST corporations didn't have a way to have a tax break...they would have to either close up shop or lay off workers.

If you want to blame someone...blame the government for their excessive waste.

I'm sorry, but I'm tired of watching people work hard to earn their money at all levels, only to have the government take more of it away to give to those "less fortunate". When a lot of those "less fortunate" people could go out and get a job, but won't because they make more money off of welfare or unemployment...so there is no incentive. I'm tired of hearing about corporations who are supplying real jobs be demonized and called evil because they are striving to make a profit.

How about this...since we are all so priviledged to have horses and ride dressage...why don't we give away our animals to someone else who desires them...that's what it is coming down to. Before long, it's not just the mega-wealthy that are going to be penalized.
Thanks for the reality check. Here is a good analysis of the article:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/05/22/LA-Times-Vets-Ann-Romney-Horses

LauraKY
May. 22, 2012, 07:19 PM
Bikarb, I'm afraid I don't understand. You say you are taxed 50% on your profits. Profit would be, simplistically, what is left over after all of your expenses. How does that affect whether your company is able to stay in business or cause it to lay off workers? I assume you and your family manage to pay yourselves a decent salary. We're talking PROFITS, not income.

As far as the article...thanks to the internet and cutbacks at print media operations...that's what we get. Poor reporting, poor research, and opinion pieces parading as reporting. It's the dumbing down of America. Most people don't bother to fact check, rumors are repeated as fact. Politicians lie. So much for U.S. exceptionalism.

NOMIOMI1
May. 22, 2012, 07:22 PM
Yes, coth, your right what was I thinking :lol: It couldn't be the people dumping 100's of 1000's of dollars into the sport that are keeping the dressage economy afloat here in America.

What do you think of when I say dressage economy?

I think of trainers, grooms, breeders, not to mention the fair market on dressage horses...

It couldn't possibly be the wealthy that invest the most into our sports economy :rolleyes:

The average joe middle class has become such a lame excuse for martydom.

NOMIOMI1
May. 22, 2012, 07:24 PM
Bikarb, I'm afraid I don't understand. You say you are taxed 50% on your profits. Profit would be, simplistically, what is left over after all of your expenses. How does that affect whether your company is able to stay in business or cause it to lay off workers? I assume you and your family manage to pay yourselves a decent salary. We're talking PROFITS, not income.

As far as the article...thanks to the internet and cutbacks at print media operations...that's what we get. Poor reporting, poor research, and opinion pieces parading as reporting. It's the dumbing down of America. Most people don't bother to fact check, rumors are repeated as fact. Politicians lie. So much for U.S. exceptionalism.

Yes anyone who makes a profit should give 1/2 of it to the government because THEY sure know where to spend it these days :lol:

Bringing up what a company pays themselves shows your hand IMO. They provide jobs, and a service, the rest is really none of your business if it is legal.

fooler
May. 22, 2012, 07:54 PM
Let me see, folks are mad because the Romneys are wealthy, have more than one child and oh yeah, Anne is able to own, ride, compete and support others in dressage. Do you look at Bruce and Patty Springstein with the same distain?

Kudos for AR for being able to live her life in spite of her illness. And let's get real, we would all love to have her options less the illness.

suzy
May. 22, 2012, 08:16 PM
No bubble is burst here. I know first-hand how corporate taxation works. I'm an executive in a family oil and gas company.

Here is how taxation and so called "environmental expense" works.

We are taxed at over 50% of profit for state and federal taxes. If we have one signature out of place on an EPA document with no EPA violation, it's a $5000 fine. We have regulations from the BLM, MMS, and numerous other government agencies that want their cut, their fee, etc, etc. or some other small "tax" to add to their pot. Our company produces jobs for 17 field employees and 7 office staff...I process over 700 invoices a month...which all equate to jobs for mostly Mom and Pop companies that wouldn't be able to survive if we didn't provide them work. Those individuals pay taxes to their school districts, counties, etc. They spend their money in local restaurants, shops and grocery stores...it all trickles down into the economy.

Yes, the wealthy need to make contributions...because the taxes for most businesses would be outrageous. Industries are hit constantly with new regulations that while not considered taxes, still go into the government pot. If MOST corporations didn't have a way to have a tax break...they would have to either close up shop or lay off workers.

If you want to blame someone...blame the government for their excessive waste.

I'm sorry, but I'm tired of watching people work hard to earn their money at all levels, only to have the government take more of it away to give to those "less fortunate". When a lot of those "less fortunate" people could go out and get a job, but won't because they make more money off of welfare or unemployment...so there is no incentive. I'm tired of hearing about corporations who are supplying real jobs be demonized and called evil because they are striving to make a profit.

How about this...since we are all so priviledged to have horses and ride dressage...why don't we give away our animals to someone else who desires them...that's what it is coming down to. Before long, it's not just the mega-wealthy that are going to be penalized.

See, the trouble with you Blkarab is that you are playing by the rules and behaving in an ethical fashion. How unAmerican of you!!! ;) When I was talking about the harm to humans and the environment I was referring to the mega corporations like Exxon (remember those guys who still have NOT paid up on the Valdez disaster!) and BP (employees killed, massive pollution of water and shoreline, yet still having record breaking profits). I absolutely do not begrudge people making lots of money if they have come by it honestly and have not harmed others in the process. But, that's a rarity.

Regarding the megawealthy being penalized, I don't know where you get that idea. Our tax laws protect the exceedingly rich quite nicely.

LauraKY
May. 22, 2012, 08:34 PM
Yes anyone who makes a profit should give 1/2 of it to the government because THEY sure know where to spend it these days :lol:

Bringing up what a company pays themselves shows your hand IMO. They provide jobs, and a service, the rest is really none of your business if it is legal.

Having owned a business and having made sure I and the other owners were paid quite an adequate salary and pension benefits along with a very nice key man insurance/conversion to pension plan, I think I'm qualified to say that I would assume you and your family receive adequate compensation. My point was only that your taxes are based on the profit, not your gross income. Face it, the 99% are the job creators. They buy what you (and I) sell/sold. Without them, we have nothing.

LauraKY
May. 22, 2012, 08:38 PM
Personally, I think political wives should be off the table for controversy and ridicule. But, unfortunately, both the left and the right seem to think it's open season on spouse and families.

Mardi
May. 22, 2012, 09:02 PM
Let me see, folks are mad because the Romneys are wealthy, have more than one child and oh yeah, Anne is able to own, ride, compete and support others in dressage. Do you look at Bruce and Patty Springstein with the same distain?



Or the Sellecks, or the Bloombergs, or the Spielbergs, or Lyle Lovett, etc.
The list is endless.

One of the best comments following the article asked if the LA Times was going to publish the story on the Spielberg's lawsuit about their dressage horse from a few years ago. That lawsuit story is far more entertaining than AR's (and I'm a fan of AR).

Beentheredonethat
May. 22, 2012, 10:42 PM
The article is a bit obnoxious in it's choice of words. I am particularly annoyed by fussy. It implies manicured hands and clean breeches. Pshaw.

It has some good aspects, which could have been better explored, about how technically difficult dressage is and good as physical therapy.

I'm a bit annoyed with all that help she was able to jump to her gold medal because of her money, when I had to scrimp, save, and do it the hard way over many, many years, but good for her. Good advertisement for MS therapy.

Pretty annoyed that the money of the rich is said to support the sport. As others said, the support is from the BOTTOM of the pyramid, not the top. As part of the bottom of the pyramid, I'm pretty annoyed I'm not getting credit. It's kind of like the 1% drive the economy as "job creators." FABULOUS speech on this--applies to horses and the economy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBx2Y5HhplI

Interesting people brought up Jackie Kennedy as an elite horse person. I don't think Anne Romney is being picked on here, but just remember that back when Jackie was alive, the top tax bracket the Kennedy's were paying was, what? I don't think 90%, but at least 70%, so the Kennedys were paying 70% of their profit in taxes, not the 12% the Romneys are.

paulaedwina
May. 22, 2012, 10:45 PM
It would have been a brilliant article on MS and how Mrs Romney benefited from dressage. I'd have read it. When I said we are grateful for the wealthy types its because they have the farms and facilities that host our shows (at least where I am), they own the schoolmasters at these facilities where people like me actually get lessons on dressage horses from BNTs, they can sponsor riders, prizes, and events, etc. I meant no offense to the bread and butter riders.

Paula

mayhew
May. 22, 2012, 10:51 PM
They basically looked up that horses cost a lot and Ann Romney does it, therefore it's something evil rich people do.

Well, to be fair, it IS something evil rich people do.

LarkspurCO
May. 22, 2012, 11:09 PM
...

What a load of hooey.

:rolleyes:

mvp
May. 22, 2012, 11:31 PM
Yes anyone who makes a profit should give 1/2 of it to the government because THEY sure know where to spend it these days :lol:

Bringing up what a company pays themselves shows your hand IMO. They provide jobs, and a service, the rest is really none of your business if it is legal.

... And that's what all the hubbub is about. Romney made his own money. A hell of a lot of it. No one would care about his DQ wife except that he was running on a "we can relate to you post-2008 Crash working stiffs" platform. And by the same token, no one has to care if Bruce Springsteen or Michael Bloomberg are or are not like the rest of us. They didn't claim to be aren't ask you to believe that they are.

So what corporations get to do with their money "so long as it is legal" is a big, big issue one ought to consider in a presidential election.

And to those of you working for a family-owned firm that pays you all well, and who also think that welfare folks have it easy and therefore don't work, I'll ask you if you have ever lived on welfare. It doesn't look like a good time to me. Anyone who would lose their benefits in order to get a comparably-paying job has rationality on their side, I'm afraid. But then you financial wizards would know this as all decisions a company makes are costed out as well.

kittykeno
May. 22, 2012, 11:47 PM
It's tough to believe this article appeared on the front page of the LA Times. Does the world not have enough important things going on to write about?

suzy
May. 23, 2012, 07:55 AM
BTW, "hoi polloi" is Greek and literally means "the many" (and implies the unwashed masses), so you should never put "the" in front of it. ;)

nhwr
May. 23, 2012, 08:44 AM
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/183475.html


"There are two linguistic points of interest concerning hoi polloi. The first is whether or not to precede it with 'the'. Some argue that, since 'hoi' means 'the' in Greek, then 'the hoi polloi' translates as 'the the many', so we should omit the article and just say 'hoi polloi'. Others argue that this is merely pedantic, not to say inconsistent with other uses of articles inherited from others languages; for example, alchemist, which comes from the Arabic, where al means the - and yet no one complains that the alchemist is incorrect. Whatever your views on that, it's a fact that 'the hoi polloi' is so widely used (not least by Dryden, as we see above) that whatever grammarians say about it won't alter its general usage." (continues...)


My usage is consistent with the terms's application in English (see John Dryden's "Essay of Dramatic Poesy", Lord Byron's personal writings, James Fennimore Cooper's "Gleanings in Europe", and W.S. Gilbert's "Iolanthe" as well as Merriam-Webster's definition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hoi%20polloi)

But if I am ever asked to speak at a public funeral for ancient Greek war dead in the Pelopennese, you are right suzy, I should probably clean up my usage and say "οἱ πολλοί" (pronounced "ee po-LEE" in modern Greek) ;)

TheHorseProblem
May. 23, 2012, 09:51 AM
My usage is consistent with the terms's application in English (see John Dryden's "Essay of Dramatic Poesy", Lord Byron's personal writings, James Fennimore Cooper's "Gleanings in Europe", and W.S. Gilbert's "Iolanthe" as well as Merriam-Webster's definition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hoi%20polloi)


O, Magua!

;)

fooler
May. 23, 2012, 10:51 AM
... And that's what all the hubbub is about. Romney made his own money. A hell of a lot of it. No one would care about his DQ wife except that he was running on a "we can relate to you post-2008 Crash working stiffs" platform. And by the same token, no one has to care if Bruce Springsteen or Michael Bloomberg are or are not like the rest of us. They didn't claim to be aren't ask you to believe that they are.

So what corporations get to do with their money "so long as it is legal" is a big, big issue one ought to consider in a presidential election.

And to those of you working for a family-owned firm that pays you all well, and who also think that welfare folks have it easy and therefore don't work, I'll ask you if you have ever lived on welfare. It doesn't look like a good time to me. Anyone who would lose their benefits in order to get a comparably-paying job has rationality on their side, I'm afraid. But then you financial wizards would know this as all decisions a company makes are costed out as well.

But Bruce Springsteen does present himself as a blue-collar working stiff who "we can relate to you pre- and post-2008 Crash working stiffs". So for some reason people are ok with his wealth but are offended by Romney's.

I worked in my parents restaurants for years, doing every job that anyone else didn't want to do, for years and was paid very poorly - because I was family.;) I know others in family owned businesses who limit their own salary in order to pour profits back into the business. Not all business owners are wonderful nor pure evil.

Finally - the history of anyone running for President should be open for review and discussion.

suzy
May. 23, 2012, 12:23 PM
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/183475.html

But if I am ever asked to speak at a public funeral for ancient Greek war dead in the Pelopennese, you are right suzy, I should probably clean up my usage and say "ïἱ ðïëëïß" (pronounced "ee po-LEE" in modern Greek) ;)

Yes, you should definintely "clean up" your act as I am sure you will have so many occasions to speak at those public funerals. :lol:

mvp
May. 23, 2012, 12:57 PM
But Bruce Springsteen does present himself as a blue-collar working stiff who "we can relate to you pre- and post-2008 Crash working stiffs". So for some reason people are ok with his wealth but are offended by Romney's.

I worked in my parents restaurants for years, doing every job that anyone else didn't want to do, for years and was paid very poorly - because I was family.;) I know others in family owned businesses who limit their own salary in order to pour profits back into the business. Not all business owners are wonderful nor pure evil.

Finally - the history of anyone running for President should be open for review and discussion.

Springsteen certainly did present himself as representing working people-- notably Labor. And he made a lot of money doing it. But the man isn't running for President now. I don't know whether Springsteen would now describe himself as "average." IMO, it would be dishonest of him to do so. But the point is that even if he does present himself that way, the stakes are really, really low. I care far less that a musician is fooling himself and the public than someone who wants to run the country.

And while I appreciate your having been paid poorly while working in a family restaurant, that's very, very different than being on your own and on welfare. See you had connection to capital, albeit wealth you didn't control and might have to wait for. That's not true for people who are poor and perhaps have been poor for generations. It feels different. It's materially different when you, say, have a health crisis or want to send your kid to college.

Truly, if people would stop trying to present themselves as average (1) and gain some empathy for those who have it worse (2) this whole conversation would change. There is nothing average about the history of a man (or woman) who got to the point that he's running for Prez. That much seems patently obvious. So take the hard-to-defend claim off the table, eh?

dragonharte8
May. 23, 2012, 01:06 PM
FYI
Romney has an estimated $8 million dollars in the Caymans being untaxed by the U.S.

nhwr
May. 23, 2012, 01:21 PM
mvp

You spend too much time reading the Huffington Post. They and the media in general have made several serious attempts to show that Romney and his family is out of touch with the working class, much like the LA Times does with this article.

I don't think Romney has ever tried to pretend that he comes from ordinary circumstances, though.

fish
May. 23, 2012, 01:49 PM
Gotta admit that this thread does have me wondering how Anne Romney's horse activities are treated on the Romneys' tax return-- I mean, is she a woman for whom motherhood was a "career" choice, and dressage is a hobby, or is she a full, active partner in a for-profit horse business which allows her to deduct her horse activities against the Romney's enormous (and already minimally taxed) income.

Especially interesting topic for me, as I'm presently undergoing an IRS audit, being accused of using my horse business as a write off against alimony, which was my only other source of income, and amounted to a fraction of a sum Mitt is on record as thinking "not much money."

Indeed, we've had horsey presidents and presidential families before. I just don't recall any of those making remarks like "I don't worry about the poor," or "not much money-- only $350K."

mvp
May. 23, 2012, 01:55 PM
mvp

You spend too much time reading the Huffington Post. They and the media in general have made several serious attempts to show that Romney and his family is out of touch with the working class, much like the LA Times does with this article.

I don't think Romney has ever tried to pretend that he comes from ordinary circumstances, though.

I'll have you know that I have never read the Huffington Post. This all comes from upside my own head. I speak from ignorance of the Huffington Post and whatever their brand of propaganda is.

And to be sure: I know, they know, and everyone knows that no POTUS-wannabe is your Average Joe. Now members of the public desire or want a candidate to have done anything like walk a mile in their shoes?

The problem is that we now deeply distrust something like "the ruling class." So those who did get to those echelons have to disguise it. Good luck with that. And then the public is pissed later because the truth-- that these people are by and large wealthy, privileged (as well as hardworking and smart (usually))-- is found out? You mean they thought that their elected president really "got" what it was like to be a person who would never do anything as enormous convince a lot of powerful people to invest in the project of getting them and their agenda installed in the White House?

Mrs. Romney's relationship with high-end dressage is just the latest round of this same problem. We could have been talking about her collection of French antiques or enthusiasm for sailboat racing and the same logic would have applied.

It makes me sad and embarrassed, and my life as a horsewoman harder that my expensive sport is being labeled elitist. My involvement with horses looks very different than Romney's, of course. To be frank, it did come from some degree of privilege. Had I grown up poor in South Central LA or The Bronx, I doubt I would have gained access to horses. But I "own" that truth.

Aggie4Bar
May. 23, 2012, 02:21 PM
It would have been a brilliant article on MS and how Mrs Romney benefited from dressage.
This was my thought, too. Hippotherapy is a really wonderful tool regardless of whether it is assisted therapy for the severely disabled or independently pursued for less restrictive conditions like MS. The author missed an opportunity to highlight the benefits.

nhwr
May. 23, 2012, 02:26 PM
Hey mvp,

So when you said that Romney was running on a "we can relate to you post-2008 Crash working stiffs" platform, that was from your own head? Makes sense I guess because that isn't his platform.

If Romney has made any attempts to disguise his wealth, that is news to me.

And PS our expensive sport is elitest :lol:

chancellor2
May. 23, 2012, 02:30 PM
FYI
Romney has an estimated $8 million dollars in the Caymans being untaxed by the U.S.


So does Obama. I read it on the interwebz. It must be true. Statements such as these without any sort of backup are really just fluff (much like this "news" piece).

dragonharte8
May. 23, 2012, 02:43 PM
So does Obama. I read it on the interwebz. It must be true. Statements such as these without any sort of backup are really just fluff (much like this "news" piece).

It was covered by the news media in depth. They even had the bank spokesperson stating on camera that they could not disclose any information regarding the Romney accounts; and he said accounts not account.

Offshore accounts are stricktly used to place capital in order to avoid any form of taxation by the U.S. Government. So would that not say something negative about 'any' individual running for 'any' public office?

mvp
May. 23, 2012, 03:23 PM
Hey mvp,

So when you said that Romney was running on a "we can relate to you post-2008 Crash working stiffs" platform, that was from your own head? Makes sense I guess because that isn't his platform.

If Romney has made any attempts to disguise his wealth, that is news to me.

And PS our expensive sport is elitest :lol:

'K, then I'll thank you kindly for not "taking my inventory" as someone who got her ideas from the Huffington Post.... or taking my inventory at all just because you don't agree with what I say. You can't claim that I got it wrong because I borrowed from the Huffington Post and then claim I got it wrong because I consulted only the even more ignorant inside of my own head.... without me think that you're just about making me wrong. Whatevs, then. I get it.

On the fact that our sport is elitist because it's expensive. I didn't make that equation, but I see how one would. I do agree that it does take some privilege-- that we don't earn-- in order to get our foot in the door with horses. You'll see that much in my post.

Equibrit
May. 23, 2012, 03:46 PM
Gene Weingarten (Washington Post) on journalism.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/gene-weingarten-modern-journalism-and-cat-pictures/2011/10/10/gIQAfgbUMM_story.html

fooler
May. 23, 2012, 05:34 PM
Springsteen certainly did present himself as representing working people-- notably Labor. And he made a lot of money doing it. But the man isn't running for President now. I don't know whether Springsteen would now describe himself as "average." IMO, it would be dishonest of him to do so. But the point is that even if he does present himself that way, the stakes are really, really low. I care far less that a musician is fooling himself and the public than someone who wants to run the country.

And while I appreciate your having been paid poorly while working in a family restaurant, that's very, very different than being on your own and on welfare. See you had connection to capital, albeit wealth you didn't control and might have to wait for. That's not true for people who are poor and perhaps have been poor for generations. It feels different. It's materially different when you, say, have a health crisis or want to send your kid to college.

Truly, if people would stop trying to present themselves as average (1) and gain some empathy for those who have it worse (2) this whole conversation would change. There is nothing average about the history of a man (or woman) who got to the point that he's running for Prez. That much seems patently obvious. So take the hard-to-defend claim off the table, eh?

Don't make assumptions, the family restaurant was closed decades ago due to what was my father's fatal illness. Any so called wealth quickly disappeared due to medical bills and closing the business.
I have been laid-off and had to take unemployment so I KNOW what it is like to have to depend on government and it isn't good.
I know people who are ok taking unemployment because work interferes with their drug and alcohol use.

Finally there are celebrities who "say they know, understand and love, the common man". They then promote certain political candidates. And yeah at a concert some 6-7 years ago the singer broke political about mid-way through. The problem isn't who was promoted, rather the celebrity used the venue to promote a political viewpoint. That was one of the last concerts we attended.

To keep this HR, wealthy individuals have always been a part of the horse world and we all benefit from their participation. Often because they purchase, donate or make available land for our respective competitions.

Blkarab
May. 24, 2012, 11:14 AM
Just catching up on the discussion.

Yes, we are taxed 50% of PROFIT. The amount made after all the expenses are taken into account, including regulatory taxes and fees...then we are taxed as individuals for income tax. So yes, by the time it is all figured up...we are taxed at over 50%. And no, we are not paid handsomly for having a family business...we are the first to take paycuts and sacrifice when things go bad. Our field hands and employees make much more of a salary than we do, our field foreman's salary is nearly double my husband's...who is VP of the company. I live modesty, my horses are kept modestly. I take on barn duty to help with board and expenses. Both of my horses are either arab or arab-crosses and not fancy warmbloods.

Also..to further add...I grew up extremely poor. Horses were just a dream. My father didn't have a job, and my mother cleaned hotel rooms for barely minimum wage so we would have food on the table. My clothes were purchased from the thrift store, and I watched classmates of mine, who were on welfare, drive new cars, have new clothes, the latest electronics, etc. My best friend's mother, was bragging about being on unemployment and staying on unemployment until it ran out, because while she could find a job, it didn't pay her as much as her unemployment benefit. That is just one of the many reasons why I feel that the system is messed up and needs changed. Not that there are people who don't truly need the help...I'm all for that...but there are a lot of people out there that are milking the system and taking advantage of it, while my company, myself, my family and friends are all paying for it...then to hear the same people cry foul, when I have things I have worked hard for and they don't...well, it just doesn't sit well with me any longer.


Yes, we play by the rules when it comes to business...a lot of companies do. Most people don't understand how much we are taxed...it may not be straight income tax, but we are taxed in many ways, and it does add up. Each time we are taxed...it takes money away from reinvesting into our company. It's not that we are greedy...we truly want to be able to grow as a company and be able to hire more staff. It would be nice if we didn't have to cut costs because we were worried about what our tax bill will be for the next quarter.

Florida Fan
May. 24, 2012, 02:14 PM
Let me see, folks are mad because the Romneys are wealthy, have more than one child and oh yeah, Anne is able to own, ride, compete and support others in dressage. Do you look at Bruce and Patty Springstein with the same distain?

Kudos for AR for being able to live her life in spite of her illness. And let's get real, we would all love to have her options less the illness.

Not to mention Mayor Bloomberg and the high dollar jumpers his daughter has..plus many more competitors who just happen to have means.
Just wanted to add...the dressage trainer I work for is originally from Mass...where she said she had been stabled next to AR at one of the shows, and Ann was doing her own stalls. Ann was a gracious lady as well.

Sandy M
May. 24, 2012, 05:16 PM
Or the Sellecks, or the Bloombergs, or the Spielbergs, or Lyle Lovett, etc.
The list is endless.



Well, they won't critcize Lovett 'cause he rides western, like a good 'murrican should! It's them prissy folk in their "English" saddles that are snooty elitists!

Obviously the so-called journalist doesn't grasp the difference between actual participation in dressage - which can be at a low level and a (relatively)minimally expensive endeavor available to the shrinking middle class, and supporting Olympic hopefuls with one's money, a la Akiko Yamazaki and AR.

Of course, for those truly struggling economically, the very fact that we own a horse puts us in the elite, no matter what sacrifices it may take on our part to keep a horse.

NOMIOMI1
May. 24, 2012, 07:24 PM
Well, they won't critcize Lovett 'cause he rides western, like a good 'murrican should! It's them prissy folk in their "English" saddles that are snooty elitists!

Obviously the so-called journalist doesn't grasp the difference between actual participation in dressage - which can be at a low level and a (relatively)minimally expensive endeavor available to the shrinking middle class, and supporting Olympic hopefuls with one's money, a la Akiko Yamazaki and AR.

Of course, for those truly struggling economically, the very fact that we own a horse puts us in the elite, no matter what sacrifices it may take on our part to keep a horse.

Thank you, Sandy :)

We are all rich here compared to most of the planet, and with the hobby we all seemingly support we are uber rich.

Blkarab
May. 25, 2012, 01:50 PM
So true, NOMIOMI1. :)

Mardi
May. 26, 2012, 02:20 PM
Offshore accounts are stricktly used to place capital in order to avoid any form of taxation by the U.S. Government. So would that not say something negative about 'any' individual running for 'any' public office?

Ummmm... I used to have an offshore account in a bank in the Caribbean for a number of years. It had nothing to do with taxes. The intent of the account was to assist in repairing a large church damaged by a hurricanes and years of neglect.

shall
May. 26, 2012, 08:42 PM
I think Ann Romney is irrelevant to any modern, thinking woman. She's the 50's perfect wife and it is 2012.

paulaedwina
May. 26, 2012, 09:00 PM
I can assure you that many modern, thinking, educated women choose to stay home and raise their children. Feminism gave us choice. We can choose to follow careers, choose to stay at home, choose to be mothers, choose to be childless, etc. So she is very much a modern woman.

Paula

NOMIOMI1
May. 26, 2012, 09:19 PM
Yuck...

Women who think lower of women who choose to be mothers make me want to puke.

I have a career and it slowed down a bit with motherhood... So what's it to ya?

It's woman on woman hate that holds us back these days folks.

When I am at the "building" I play shark quite well with the boys... When I have a mom hat on I can cue on the apple pie sweetness and pop the best can of friggin spaghettios you ever did see.

The modern woman IS about flexibility. She has to be a veritable SUPER WOMAN these days.

Neither the anti-career-education barefoot and pregnant NOR the 60's liberated ice queens need apply... Um, thanks.

nhwr
May. 26, 2012, 10:48 PM
Stay at home mom here.
I have a degree in biochemistry and left a 6 figure salary behind in 1989 to become a mom.

Here is what I did as a stay at home mom;
room mom for every class my kids were in (carried the load for all the kids whose mothers were "too busy" to help because they had a job), organized and managed a first responder team for a volunteer fire department, obtained certification in ABA and RDA (autism therapies), ran 3 successful political campaigns, fundraising for therapeutic riding center, published a regional horse magazine for 4 years, organized and managed triple rated dressage shows for 5 years, editor of a monthly newsletter, on the board of sports league for the developmentally disabled, founded at high school for students with high functioning autism and currently pursuing a graduate degree in math.
I ride dressage and breed horses in my "spare time", lol.
I have several friends who are also stay at home moms and they make me look like a slacker. There are many women like Ann Romney in this regard and we all vote.

Bigotry like shall's only helps Romney.

Carol O
May. 27, 2012, 12:22 AM
I would like to see The Daily Show do a segment about dressage; not about the 1% elite owners/sponsors/riders, but rather the 99%ers, who ride for the love of it, and do not have unlimited budgets to support their habit.

grayarabpony
May. 27, 2012, 12:49 AM
I can assure you that many modern, thinking, educated women choose to stay home and raise their children. Feminism gave us choice. We can choose to follow careers, choose to stay at home, choose to be mothers, choose to be childless, etc. So she is very much a modern woman.

Paula

With no doubt far more paid help than the typical modern woman.

shall
May. 27, 2012, 06:48 AM
Hardly 'bigotry' at play here, which is a bad word choice. I was a stay at home mom for 8 years when my kids were little. And I served in my community including school board president, den mother, LWV VP, Co-op nursery school board and more. Then I went back to work for a variety of reasons, which included breadwinner for my crew. Life experience is what makes people interesting.

Yes, you certainly were active and diversified in your life and work. And you're obviously no AR. Does AR have a community? Or does she just follow MR? That is my point.

I'd rather someone like you were running for president and/or first lady.


Stay at home mom here.
I have a degree in biochemistry and left a 6 figure salary behind in 1989 to become a mom.

Here is what I did as a stay at home mom;
room mom for every class my kids were in (carried the load for all the kids whose mothers were "too busy" to help because they had a job), organized and managed a first responder team for a volunteer fire department, obtained certification in ABA and RDA (autism therapies), ran 3 successful political campaigns, fundraising for therapeutic riding center, published a regional horse magazine for 4 years, organized and managed triple rated dressage shows for 5 years, editor of a monthly newsletter, on the board of sports league for the developmentally disabled, founded at high school for students with high functioning autism and currently pursuing a graduate degree in math.
I ride dressage and breed horses in my "spare time", lol.
I have several friends who are also stay at home moms and they make me look like a slacker. There are many women like Ann Romney in this regard and we all vote.

Bigotry like shall's only helps Romney.

carolprudm
May. 27, 2012, 11:05 AM
With no doubt far more paid help than the typical modern woman.

This. I too was a SAHM to 3, also caring for a disabled mom. Except maybe for the disabled mom it was my choice and by no means was it easy. I suspect AR had a bit more help and the flexibility that help gave her. Does anyone know if she had a live in nanny?

paulaedwina
May. 27, 2012, 03:27 PM
You all talk like you know the woman. How many years have you been friends with Ann Romney?

Paula

CookiePony
May. 27, 2012, 04:36 PM
NYT story from today
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/us/politics/ann-romneys-hobby-spotlights-world-of-dressage.html?smid=pl-share

shall
May. 27, 2012, 07:08 PM
The same could be said to you. ? What gives?

You run for office, then you will be examined. AR has put some time in faith based initiatives, but did not return/start work once her kids matured. Her biography is thin at this point.

Time magazine just did an article on Lenore Romney, and there's a person more to my liking - an independent thinker and active in her approach to life.

This is a forum where people express their points of view and that is why I come here.



You all talk like you know the woman. How many years have you been friends with Ann Romney?

Paula

NOMIOMI1
May. 27, 2012, 07:26 PM
Wait... Why are you NOT an independent thinker because you chose not to return to work when you did not have to?


How can you support your view of her "thin" biography to equal that she is not independent? Because of religious beliefs?

What kind of independent mind thinks like this about others without any cause?

Florida Fan
May. 27, 2012, 07:51 PM
Why would anyone penalize Ann for having means? She has invested and has competed like the rest of us. A dressage trainer I work for said she was stabled next to Ann at a show in Mass..and she was mucking her own stalls, like some of us do.
As for the high dollar dressage people..there is a lot of means/money here at Global (WEF) or other places with the same upper level competition.....why would anyone judge her? She invests, puts up her money, and goes into the ring. I personally think she is quite good for the sport....as are the likes of Bill Gates, Steven Spielberg, Bruce Springstein, Mayor Bloomberg, among others.....who have daughters showing and have certainly paid to do so, among famous/wealthy people who have horses and compete.

shall
May. 27, 2012, 08:10 PM
Your double negative leads to an inconclusive statement. I am an independent and returned to work in order to support my kids, not the contortion you just wrote.

A thin biography = no passion for causes beyond her own family's well being. That is a fact and I'm waiting to see more. Will she be just there standing beside MR with coif and gown? Yuck. She has an opportunity to do more, have an impact, and should.


I worked for Bain and Company. I may know less or more than some.


Wait... Why are you NOT an independent thinker because you chose not to return to work when you did not have to?


How can you support your view of her "thin" biography to equal that she is not independent? Because of religious beliefs?

What kind of independent mind thinks like this about others without any cause?

NOMIOMI1
May. 27, 2012, 09:14 PM
Your double negative leads to an inconclusive statement. I am an independent and returned to work in order to support my kids, not the contortion you just wrote.

A thin biography = no passion for causes beyond her own family's well being. That is a fact and I'm waiting to see more. Will she be just there standing beside MR with coif and gown? Yuck. She has an opportunity to do more, have an impact, and should.


I worked for Bain and Company. I may know less or more than some.

You frown on supporting your husband and family? You see this as something only a less "independent" thinking person does?

Have an impact? Pretty speeches, and serving soup at the kitchen does not a good person make.

I would rather see a woman put her family first because that shows who a person REALLY is. Sacrifice for the people you love and care about is NOTHING less than working to support them with cash.

I don't have an opinion as of yet one way or the other, as I don't really know much about her... But an independent thinker (your words) would reserve judgement until the proof was there never the less.