I think that kittenblue, in the very first response to your OP, identified a good reason for saying “zip up sweatshirt with a hood” rather than hoodie. In other words, there may not have been any attempt at avoiding an association with criminals.
You’re not making any sense here. Hoodies are not symbolic of racism. It is true that hoodies are associated with that shooting and that “hoodie” is a slang term that younger viewers would know and older ones might not. So between those two things and the fact that not all hoodies have zippers, there is some logic in calling it “a zip up sweatshirt with a hood.”
So you hate Bill Belichick that much, huh?
Eh… Tough shit, I guess.
Aren’t you the one, about a month ago, who was wondering when “wetback” became an offensive word?
Oh , yeah When did "wetback" become a slur? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Then remember the Buffett rule: Only sing along with the chorus!
It’s incorrect to say it has nothing to do with Buffett’s secretary - Buffett proposed the rule because he was paying a lower tax rate than his secretary. But his secretary was, in fact, making more than most administrative assistants do, by quite a bit.
Regards,
Shodan
Wow. Reach much?
Maybe not everyone knows what a “hoodie” is, and there’s no reason the media shouldn’t call The Buffett Rule The Buffett Rule. Just like they often use ObamaCare to describe the president’s Health Care Legislation, even though he didn’t name it that. Names stick, and The Buffet Rule has stuck.
Just to clarify, about the Buffett rule:
Today, if I have $20mil, put it all into munis, and am making 5% from them - that’s $1M/year, completely tax free. If Buffett rule is in effect, I will have to pay $300K in taxes in the same situation?
Then I wonder how Obama expects anyone to invest in munis after the Buffett rule is passed. I guess municipalities will have to buck up and offer higher interest rates on their bonds.
No, only on what you make above $1M.
Well, the same question applies. Just make it $40M :). It will still hit munis hard. I wonder if that’s an effect that the lawmakers are ignoring.
Anyway - I guess I will just have to limit my taxable income to maximum $1M/year from now on. For now, it’s not hard 
Scratch what I posted earlier. You might be right. I think it works more like AMT. It’s effectively a higher tax bracket for high earners.
I thought that “hoodie” was a relatively new word, just within the last 10 years or so. I may be wrong, but before that time, I (and everyone I knew) referred to them as “hooded sweatshirts.”
In the 90s, I remember that Adam Sandler performed a song on SNL called “Red Hooded Sweatshirt,” and it didn’t seem like an unusual term at the time. I think the first time I heard anyone call this a “hoodie” was in an Old Navy commercial around 2000. So maybe the newsman is just using a term that he’s more accustomed to.
IIRC she made around 70-80k per year. More than many admin assets, but not an incredible amount in my opinion. I am not sure what my exact tax rate is but I would not be surprised if my families tax bill is greater than 40%, I think it is lame that Buffett pays signifgantly less than me especially since he gets more out of the government than I do.
If you google “municpal bonds buffett rule”, a number of sites report that municipal bond interest is exempt. I looked at the text of the bill and could find anything that specifically exempts it. It does however say that the minimum tax rate applies to one’s adjusted gross income and as far as I know, municipal bond interest is not included in your AGI. In is included in the “modified AGI” but the bill does not specify that.
I say we just call them bunnyhugs everywhere! That will get rid of any negative connotations.
A customer came in and asked me for a book by “Warren Buffet” the other day. It made me smirk.
No exact figures are available AFAIK, but if she pays what Buffett claims -
Regards,
Shodan
That article is complete fiction, as the commenters sniffed out almost immediately. He makes faulty assumptions based on imagined data and weaves it into a story that has no basis in fact. The author himself offered this defense in the comments: “Deborah: I did not make any claim to accuracy.”
So, by his own admission he made it up.
Not becoming a symbol of racism… so then why was the Black Panther Congresman wearing one on the House floor?