Posted on 11/08/2014 1:29:33 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Tuesday night ruled out running for majority leader after Republicans captured the upper chamber.
Asked on CBS if he would consider challenging GOP Senate Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Cruz replied, "under no circumstances."
The Texas senator and Tea Party favorite, though has declined to say whether he would vote for McConnell for majority leader.
Asked if there would be a challenger to McConnell, Cruz said, "I don’t think anyone has declared their intention to run, and that will be a decision for the conference next week, and we’ll see."
"My practice has been not to second guess leadership decisions," Cruz said when asked why he is reluctant to express support for McConnell as leader.
"I recognize folks like to focus on interpersonal jockeying between politicians in Washington. Look, I think most Americans couldn’t care less about politicians in Washington,” he added....
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Thompson would have made a great President. Not a Reagan, but nevertheless a top tier leader. We would have few problems overseas with him at the helm, and the economy would be a whole lot better.
Certainly better than McStain or Romney, let alone the Communist Moslem and his freak show of a cabinet
If you fully understand it, it’s the deal you’ve made.
However, the “stay in your home” clause is dependent on your finances. Yours are in order, so you are withdrawing the equity in your home—and since the lenders can’t kick you out if you go to zero equity, you’re OK.
However, your finances have to be in good enough shape for you to support home maintenance (I think some minimum level is part of the deal) and to pay real estate taxes on an ongoing basis.
I’ve talked to a couple of people who focus only on the gross amount of money they are getting, assuming that it’s a perpetual stream with no obligations. Some of those people were a bit foggy on the maintenance and ongoing tax requirements.
As to your tax savings, I’m not sure I understand them. The 1500/month you get on the reverse mortgage is really a withdrawal from your equity—which is your savings. Of course it’s tax free, because it isn’t new income to you.
I understand that you are substituting that income for a withdrawal from your 401K, but I don’t understand your tax savings figure. I think you are saying that you take $1500 less from your 401k because of the reverse mortgage. Yes, that puts off the tax day, but doesn’t eliminate your eventual tax obligation. I think you’re saying that to have $1500 in your hand from your 401k after taxes, you’d have to withdraw more—maybe $3000 if you’re in a combined Fed/State bracket of 50%. But that’s a saving of $1500, and it’s not a savings, its a deferral. Deferrals are good, but aren’t the same thing.
Fair point, I just got disillusioned when he faded like a man not willing to face some untold public embarrassment. He crumbled in my eyes, right or wrong.
No, and yes. I have pretty extensive finance experience.
The people I’ve met considering these are usually house-rich and cash poor. They would be better off pulling the equity out of the house by selling it and downsizing, which would reduce their ongoing maintenance and tax expenses, and leave them financially better off, on average. NOw, you could say that they might be better off staying and taking the reverse mortgage, but they are going to have higher expenses. Now, there is the longevity gamble—if they are likely to outlive their normalized life expectancy (good genes, good habits, say) then they would be better off. But that’s a gamble.
It's $3,000 per year, and you're correct, it is only a deferral, but as I withdraw lower amounts from 401K the annual tax burden stays lower.
Over time, the feds will get my tax money, but maybe they'll have to take it out of my coffin:) The pricks will get it, one way or another.
Heck, I consider him the defacro president given the absence of one.
I think Fred is due for a well earned retirement and I will leave him to his young family in peace with good thoughts.
I wish the same for John McCain. Tomorrow.
Someone has to be the gatekeeper. The Senate Majority leader has to schedule things for committees and to bring finished items to the floor. This is their job, and they can block stuff they don’t want to address.
Don’t forget, the Republicans do it in the House too. They both can do it.
I believe there is a way to over-rule the Speaker or the Majority Leader, perhaps by a two thirds vote or something.
They can always be voted out of leadership too.
Sessions would be huge improvement over Kentucky Turtle.
/johnny
Please add me to the Cruz ping list
Tanks
But does any senator have the nerve to oppose McConnell and run for ML? My guess is no.
” If he thinks people out here don’t care who the leaders are, I think he’s missed the message. We sure as hell do care, and McConnell has got to go.
He will sell us out across the board.”
Take a look at who is financing McConnell. The Chamber of Commerce, and Wall Street.Both want Obamacare, and amnesty. Same with Cornyn. McConnell, Boehner, and Cornyn each got over 1 million from Wall Street this year. The WSJ stated this last week. We are up against the big money, and Cruz, and 4 other senators are our only hope to stop this.
I agree with that.
Before this were you having to take more than the IRS mandated minimum distribution amount from your 401k?
if fred got on tv with his young wife and pitched viagra i might buy some. Reverse mortgages? ....not a chance
if fred got on tv with his young wife and pitched viagra i might buy some. Reverse mortgages? ....not a chance
Haha... i posted to wrong thread
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.