While we are all fuming and disgruntled about taxes on April 15, there’s a group in Vermont who see things - well… different.
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — Protesters nationwide demanded lower taxes on Wednesday. A group in Vermont can’t get enough of them.
Calling itself S.O.S., or Save Our State, the group held a small pro-tax protest in Montpelier, the national income tax-filing deadline, to drive home that taxes pay for needed programs and state employees perform necessary duties.
About two dozen people crowded around the state Tax Department’s help window while organizers turned in single-signature petitions, designed to look like a tax form, that organizers called SOS-EZ forms.
They list 17 state programs that could be kept whole with what organizers say would be a modest tax increase (I’ve never heard of a tax increase described as modest - ed.).
“It’s not just a day to worry about taxes; we value our institutions and the programs the state offers,” said S.O.S. organizer Chris Curtis, an attorney with Vermont Legal Aid. “We can’t pave our own roads. We can’t keep our own courthouse doors open. It’s frustrating that some days of the week the courts are closed.”
The protest came as thousands of demonstrators gathered nationwide for anti-tax rallies modeled on the original Boston Tea Party.
Dennise Casey, a spokeswoman for Republican Gov. Jim Douglas, said he remained steadfast in his opposition to new taxes, but that taxpayers have the option to give the state more than legally required.
“I am assuming that all of these individuals who are advocating for paying more taxes have led by example by paying more taxes today,” Casey said. “As for struggling Vermont families, the governor is opposed to higher taxes.”
Well, luckily they have a Republican governor and will likely remain solvent. But just as I say that, look what happens:
Montpelier, Vermont - April 15, 2009
“I think it’s time the common person stands up to the government taking everything from us,” said Bob Martin of Worcester.
But just one building over at the tax department– a much smaller group asked for just the opposite.
They want to pay more for taxes to save cuts to social service programs and state employee jobs.
“We’re not suggesting that we willy-nilly raise taxes but to do it in smart way that spreads out the burden,” said Lindsey Hescock of Middlebury.
“We need to have taxes to have the services and the infrastructure important to all of us,” said Shelia Reed, of Voices for Vt. Children.
Democratic lawmakers agree, and on Tax Day they supported a $24 million income tax hike.
“I don’t think anybody likes to pay taxes, I’m not wild about paying taxes, but I understand it’s an obligation of citizenship and I get a lot for the taxes I pay,” said Rep. Janet Ancel, D-Calais.
Wow. “I get a lot for the taxes I pay.”
You can’t make this stuff up.
A hat tip to jamiewearingfool for the post.
April 17th, 2009
Posted by
bit |
Moonbats |
post comments
We’ve all heard of the desire of “The One” to reallocate money. Not his money, ours. It’s caused quite a stir if you haven’t been paying attention. But today in The Washington Times, an editorial points out that obambi’s reallocation exercises have gone over a cliff. Now he has transferred $2 million from the program that trained pilots to carry firearms on flights. This has effectively stalled out the program.
Where has he transeferred the money to? Why “…to hire more supervisory staff, who will engage in field inspections of pilots.” What? What are we “field inspecting” pilots for? As the Times points out, the trained Airline Pilots (called Federal Flight Deck Officers)… “are reported to have the best behavior of any federal law enforcement agency. There are no cases where any of them has improperly brandished or used a gun.”
But lets kill a program where the end results are:
- No air flights have been hijacked since it started
- No Federal Flight Deck Officer has ever transgressed any rule of this agency.
- Other than the training, there is no cost to the federal government. The pilots are not paid to carry weapons. They do it free of charge.
- About 70% of major airline carrier pilots have a military background (exactly what federal law enforcement agencies look for)
- Armed marshals only cover about 3% of flights out of Washington DC airports. Sky marshals are costly and quit more often than other law-enforcement officers.
And somehow all this is considered unworthy by The One. So he decides to can it.
I remember the last time dumocrats got this involved with US security. It was when Clinton put up all those walls between the CIA/FBI/NSA. He was afraid of “losing our rights” and got 9/11 instead.
This administration is taking a more proactive approach. Clinton was a dumb redneck but now we have an intelligent idiot.
This failure will be much more “classical”.
March 18th, 2009
Posted by
bit |
Deranged politics, Moonbats, morons |
post comments
Victor Davis Hanson writes of what has happened in California - a state now financially bankrupt and needing a bailout worse than AIG. After discussing what has gone wrong, Hansen notes:
But less discussed is the common culprit: a weird sort of utopian mind-set. Perhaps because have-it-all Californians live in such a rich natural landscape and inherited so much from their ancestors, they have convinced themselves that perpetual bounty is their birthright — not something that can be lost in a generation of complacency.
I can see why they would be like that - the state of mind driving the liberalism in California has a common denominator with past European attitudes - such as “Liberal Fascism”. Kind of like that other “fascism” that a lot of Americans had to die for.
In short, after Californians sue, restrict, mandate, obstruct and lecture, they also get angry that there is suddenly not enough food, fuel, water and money to act like the gods that they think they have become.
If anyone knows about that insane California attitude, it is Victor Davis Hanson. He grew up on a vineyard farm in central California. He speaks from real experience.
One interesting tidbit of the article listing much of California’s problem? Prisons account for 10% of the state budget - almost as much as Higher Education.
Prison costs increased about 50% in less than a decade and now claim almost 10% of state spending — almost as much as higher education.
That information is parsed just before -
More than half a million aliens are caught each year trying to enter California’s southern border illegally. Some estimates put illegal alien state residents at 3 million, a population that might cost the state’s taxpayers $13 billion per year for services.
The link between prison costs and illegal immigration is not lost on Hanson. In his book Mexifornia, he leaves no doubt what the immigrant problems stem from and what the costs are. It is definitely worth a read.
When I was younger, people mostly dreamed about California - they wanted to visit, they wanted to move there, they wanted some part of California to touch them for almost any reason. Now it seems to be irrelevant whether you see it or not.
March 8th, 2009
Posted by
bit |
Moonbats, Getting it Right |
post comments
Bill Roggio at “The Long War Journal” carries a comment linked from a Reuters article on how well the presumptuos Taliban love the soothing words from obambi regarding the closure of Guantanamo Bay:
The Taliban told U.S. President
Barack Obama on Tuesday that his plan to close Guantanamo Bay prison camp was a “positive step” but peace was only possible if he withdraws U.S. forces from Afghanistan and Iraq.
The Taliban, toppled in the 2001 U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, also told the new president that sending more troops to Afghanistan “and the use of force against the independent peoples of the world, has lost its effectiveness.”
The Reuters article goes on quoting the Taliban spokesman:
“If Obama is right and, according to his words, wants to open a new page based on peaceful interaction built on mutual respect with the Islamic world, the first thing he has to do is to stop and annul all these procedures, which were created according to Bush’s criminal policy,” it said.
“He must completely withdraw all his forces from the two occupied Islamic countries (Afghanistan and Iraq), and to stop defending Israel against Islamic interests in the Middle East and the entire world,” the Taliban message said.
I just love it when the enemy (the Taliban has vowed to eliminate the West) agree with the ruling class of the most powerful nation of the West on who is the bad guy. And according to the Taliban - and the left - that would be us.Now obambi’s has given his very first interview - to Al Arabiya, one of the most anti-semetic, jihad supporting, militant Islam satellite networks where he said (among other idiocies):
“I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state — I’m not going to put a time frame on it — that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.”
Right. Is he really that naive? This interview said absolutely one thing to the Arab world and, more importantly, to the Islamic terrorists - the United States will henceforth deal with Muslims from an apologetic point of view. And we will now bargain and negotiate from a position of weakness.
That’s all the radical Islamic world saw.
Besides,the only thing Hamas and the Palestinians have “created” in 30 years is an efficient tunnel system for importing Iranian arms. Of course, we have helped with that by donating (in 2005 dollars alone) 348 trillion. I would think they could afford a rocket. Or two.
Time to sing some more “kumbaya”.
January 28th, 2009
Posted by
bit |
Jihadists, Moonbats |
post comments
From Michael Fumento’s blog on Racism causing Breat Cancer:
“Breast Cancer Link to Racial Discrimination.” No doubt that Reuters headline, and others like it, pleased race-baiters who would have us think every problem blacks have is due to persistent prejudice. Sadly for them, as I write in The American Spectator Online, the report is politically correct trash that any conscientious landfill would reject.
Yes, statistically it’s a bunch of hooey, as you might guess. But here’s just a bit of interesting data that blows it to bits that would have taken any decent reporter a couple of minutes to find. Breast cancer rates are much lower for black women than white women. According to the National Institutes for Health, for the latest year for which data are available black women have only 84 percent the rate of breast cancer as non-Hispanic white women.
Asians, incidentally, have 68 percent the rate of whites and Hispanics 62 percent. Now here’s the real stunner. American Indians, plagued by the inherent discrimination of the horrendous reservation system, have less than half the breast cancer rate of non-Hispanic whites.
The obvious conclusion: Reverse discrimination causes breast cancer.
(Yeah, I’m just kidding.)
———
And just to be sure she knows, the Pentagon let Hilaryblub Clinton know just where she stands with regard to the defeat meme - although it may have been a mistake saying what he said, Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman needed to say it:
WASHINGTON - The Pentagon told Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton that her questions about how the U.S. plans to eventually withdraw from Iraq boosts enemy propaganda.
In a stinging rebuke to a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman responded to questions Clinton raised in May in which she urged the Pentagon to start planning now for the withdrawal of American forces.
“Premature and public discussion of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq reinforces enemy propaganda that the United States will abandon its allies in Iraq, much as we are perceived to have done in Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia,” Edelman wrote.
He added that “such talk understandably unnerves the very same Iraqi allies we are asking to assume enormous personal risks.”
Not to be outdone, the Clintonista camp hotly replied:
Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines called Edelman’s answer “at once outrageous and dangerous,” and said the senator would respond to his boss, Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Isn’t that kind of like “I’m gonna tell your daddy on you!“?
———-
And for a bunch of good laughs, check out this post on Wizbang. Paul puts up an observation on a VOIP company that went belly up and a new outfit that may change the scenery in the VOIP world. The story is interesting to technoweenie’s but what is truly funny are the comments inspired by one infamous idiot - Lee Ward. You have to read it to believe it and then you’ll laugh your ass off.
Hint: Lee is an idiot.
Oh, did I already mention that?
———-
Finally, from the Patriot Post newsletter:
Good economic news
Warning: The following may upset the psychological equilibrium of John Edwards’ groupies following his recent poverty tour. (Ed. note: Yes, John Edwards really did go on a Poverty tour - I’m not kidding.)
The Dow Jones closed at a record 14,000 yesterday; the U.S. economy continues to grow; and, according to the Institute for Global Economic Growth (IGEG), the whole of planet earth is not such a bad place to live after all, either. In fact, according to Institute Chairman Richard Rahn, the world this past year actually became a better address to call home. Not only is widespread economic growth happening but also the rate of growth of the world gross domestic product has reached five percent per year. At this pace, per capita income is set to double in 15 years, and nearly every country in the world is rising with this tide. As if this promising news weren’t bad enough for the naysayers, the IGEG reports increases in literacy rates, improvements in life expectancies and decreases in the percentage of the planet’s population suffering from malnutrition.
On the other hand, just to be fair, there is some bad news. Rahn warns of a dangerous threat to the world’s well being. Identified by initiatives calling for increased taxes and government-controlled “enterprise,” this hazard could spell ruin for the world economy. Perhaps you will recognize the threat—it goes by the name of the U.S. Congress.
*Sigh*. Isn’t Congress supposed to be helping us?
July 21st, 2007
Posted by
bit |
Moonbats, Humor, morons |
post comments
In an ironic twist, an activist/actor playing the part of an Israeli soldier stages a mock West Bank checkpoint scene at a Tel Aviv cinema location - doing their best to depict the “inhuman” aspect of checkpoints:
“The message here is that of peace,” said Nir Nikadi, an actor from the Arab-Hebrew Theater, who played the soldier. “I think checkpoints are inhuman. Putting people in cages is inhuman,” he added.
“We are two nations living here, with extremists on both sides. I want to be able to go to Gaza and eat hummus there, to live in peace,” he said.
And he is probably correct that it’s somehow “inhuman”. But when asked about those checkpoints? -
Asked what he thought would happen if checkpoints were removed , Nikado said that “extremists like Hamas and Islamic Jihad could exploit the situation“.
No kidding. Doesn’t sound like the Israeli left wing moonbats are any smarter than the American counterparts. They are in lockstep with their enemy as the dumocrats are with ours/theirs.
And the UN is sure to keep those damn Israeli’s under a watchful eye, thanks to such courageous members like Nikado bringing the abominations of Jewery to the world’s notice:
Members of the UN’s new human rights watchdog on Tuesday formally agreed to continue their scrutiny of Israel while halting investigations into Cuba and Belarus - a move that immediately drew fire from Canada and the United States.
The decision was part of a package of reforms adopted by the members of the Human Rights Council to change how it conducts its future work, including how and when to launch investigations into some of the world’s human rights offenders.
The world hasn’t gone mad. We just keep getting a little more stupid. We’re multicultural, zero-tolerance, kumbaya sitting weenies who keep on with that nasal toned incantation of “Why can’t we all just get along?” - right up to the point where we’re killed sitting on our ass.
Where’s John Bolton when you need him? Oh yeah, the dumocrats didn’t “like” him.
June 19th, 2007
Posted by
bit |
Moonbats, morons |
post comments
Rep. Tom Tancredo is showing a little resolve of the open defiance by some cities to current immigration laws by publicly pronouncing “sanctuary” for illegal aliens. In a twist of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, cities like San Franciso (whose surprised?) and Denver have publicly proclaimed “sanctuary” for illegal aliens by refusing to query the status of any immigrants (or anyone else, for that matter) and therefore negating any deportation processes.
Michelle Malkin has a post on this with the news from Cong. Tancredo’s website:
There was a glimmer of hope on the shamnesty landscape today in the House. Stalwart immigration enforcement proponent Tom Tancredo won approval–by a significant margin–of his amendment banning DHS funds for renegade sanctuary cities. From Rep. Tancredo’s website:
U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo’s (R-CO) amendment to cut funding from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Bill (H.R. 2638) for cities that employ a sanctuary policy passed the House with strong bipartisan support today; 234 to 189.“The times, they are a changing,” said an exuberant Tancredo, who had introduced the same amendment several times in the past with far less support. “This should also serve as a warning sign to the White House and supporters of re-introducing an amnesty bill from the Senate. If that legislation makes it to the House, it is in serious trouble.”
The Amendment would prevent cities like Denver and San Francisco who employ a sanctuary policy for illegal aliens from receiving first responder funds, including law enforcement and terrorism prevention grants, among other programs.
It’s a step in the right direction. The Democrat support for the bill–234-189, with no fewer than 49 Democrats voting in favor–is a good sign. Is it a sign of things to come as the second Senate showdown looms next week?
Hopefully a sign of things to come. The White House may have to listen - even if they don’t want to.
And Michelle also notes that in a fitting tribute to Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott’s abandonement of conservative principle, the erstwhile nutroots have bought Trent Lott’s name and sent it to Moveon for proper handling. Go ahead - type in www.trentlott.com and see what you get (or click on the provided link).
June 17th, 2007
Posted by
bit |
Moonbats, Getting it Right |
post comments
Speaking of the British sailors and their seizure by Iran, the only voice in our government that stood up for them was - George Bush, the President. Not that our Congress was sitting idly by -there was a resolution (non-binding, I’m sure) on the floor of the House condemning Iran and Ahmanutjob for their actions. But Pelosi abruptly adjourned the session before a vote could be made. Richard Miniter of Pajamas Media had some observations:
Speaker Nancy Pelosi adjourned the House before allowing a vote to condemn the illegal seizure of 15 British sailors and marines by the outlaw state of Iran, saying that she wanted more time to study the consequences.
Her aide added, in a background briefing to the press, that unanticipated consequences can be the worst kind and that one has to be careful with foreign affairs.
As usual, a nullity is followed by a truism.
Of course, there are unanticipated consequences of inactions too as well as perfectly foreseeable consequences of inactions. The trick is balance them. Will the Iranians see Pelosi’s pause as wise or cowardly? Will it encourage or discourage them? Will the British rise to our rhetorical aid when our soldiers are in harm’s way?
Frankly, condemning the mullahs should have been a lay-up. It was the right thing to do and in America’s interest too.
Yet it might have been in Bush’s interest as well, something which Pelosi cannot permit herself to do, even accidentally. Hence all of the talk about unintended consequences. It does the Democrats no credit that their leader would rather hurt a lame-duck president than help an ailing ally.
Yep, it’s a lot more important to fake an excuse than to stand by your country. She hates Bush that much. Besides, Assad was waiting on her - and that was more “important”.
What a Bitch.
April 4th, 2007
Posted by
bit |
Deranged politics, Moonbats |
post comments
If you look at what the dumocrats are trying to do with a war funding effort, check out Michelle Malkin’s post on the the pork producing lines in the current “War Spending Bill” - one version in the House and another in the Senate. This is how votes are bought - pork.
In the end, the anti-war types still cannot bring themselves to address the issue. Somewhere, buried in the morass, there is hand-tied funding for the War on Terror - which equates to “cut-and-run”.
They need this “spine transplant procedure” - quickly.
UPDATE:
Victory Caucus has posted what the Reid, Pelosi, Murtha Plan for Victory really looks like.
March 23rd, 2007
Posted by
bit |
Deranged politics, Moonbats |
one comment
Heidi Cullen’s fatwa takes shape. From Cox And Forkum…
Stretching the Truth
From The Telegraph: Scientists threatened for ‘climate denial’.
Scientists who questioned mankind’s impact on climate change have received death threats and claim to have been shunned by the scientific community.They say the debate on global warming has been “hijacked” by a powerful alliance of politicians, scientists and environmentalists who have stifled all questioning about the true environmental impact of carbon dioxide emissions.
Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, has received five deaths threats by email since raising concerns about the degree to which man was affecting climate change.
One of the emails warned that, if he continued to speak out, he would not live to see further global warming.
“Western governments have pumped billions of dollars into careers and institutes and they feel threatened,” said the professor.
“I can tolerate being called a sceptic because all scientists should be sceptics, but then they started calling us deniers, with all the connotations of the Holocaust. That is an obscenity. It has got really nasty and personal.”
So it has. Thanks Al.
March 13th, 2007
Posted by
bit |
Deranged politics, Moonbats |
post comments
If you haven’t heard, Fox news was sponsoring a debate of Democrat presidential candidates (that sounds so lame) in Las Vegas. The Nevada Democratic Party has cancelled the debate - though most involved will say it was the far left group MoveOn.Org that actually caused the cancellation. Fox News pointed to a story from the Las Vegas Review Journal that says it more explicitly. And it’s basically because the Democrats don’t have the balls to watch Fox News Channel.
The Nevada Democratic party’s recent decision to cancel a FOX News sponsored debate between presidential candidates was a move triggered by the left’s “lunatic fringe,” according to an editorial published Saturday by the Las Vegas Review Journal.
The party had originally agreed to allow FOX News Channel to co-sponsor the debate between Democratic presidential candidates in Reno in August, but backed out of the deal Friday afternoon, citing comments made by FOX News president Roger Ailes as the reason for the decision.
The Journal’s editorial, however, blames the “socialist, Web-addicted wing of the Democratic Party” for sabotaging the debate, saying they were “apopleptic” over the thought of having to watch FOX News Channel in order to see their candidates.
The editorial goes on to argue that if the Republican party decided to pick and choose coverage based on political leanings as the Democrats are doing, they would have rejected PBS, CBS, NBC, ABC, National Public Radio and The Associated Press decades ago.
That last sentence is certainly true. And add al-Reuters news to that list.
To tell you the truth, I don’t find Fox any more “newsworthy” than anyone else. They report the same crap as the other news media. Their embellishment is a little less obvious. Perhaps the biggest reason the left dislikes Fox News so much is that Fox doesn’t really do the thinking for them. The article in Las Vegas Review snickers over the left wing response:
Hard-core liberals can’t stand the Fox News Channel. Passing a television that’s tuned to the conservative favorite forces many of them to close their eyes, cover their ears and scream, “La la la la la la la la la!” Then they dash to their computers and fire off 2,500 e-mails condemning the outlet, none of which are ever read.
And:
You’d think the deal called for having Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter mock the candidates between comments. No, even unfiltered, unedited, live debate between loyal Democrats couldn’t be entrusted to Fox News.
Oh wait… how does that laughable bumper snicker go? “I think for myself - therefore I am a liberal”. That’s about as clearly defined as “I support the troops but not the mission”.
And a news channel is just too much for these people to handle. No wonder they don’t understand the enemy.
The Las Vegas Review summed it up well:
This hyperventilation results from the fact that far-left Democrats have no comparable media outlet, nor any widespread national appeal, for their radical views in favor of heavy-handed regulation, wealth redistribution, diplomatic capitulation and economic protectionism. So they attack their rivals’ messenger with a reckless barrage of rhetoric that cuts down their own allies with friendly fire.
By Friday, the Nevada Democratic Party caved in to the lunatic fringe and began seeking a more “appropriate” television partner.
Comedy Central, perhaps?
The very best the liberal dumocrats could do. Pathetic. Even Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich is calling the debate cancellation by “candidates who would rather run and hide” as manipulation.
As I said in an earlier post, welcome to the real world Mr. Kucinich.
March 11th, 2007
Posted by
bit |
Moonbats, Misfit Media, morons |
post comments
I don’t have anything to add to the Scooter Libby deal. Hey, if a guy wants to hack it out at the top levels of government and goes by the name of “Scooter”, somebody’s gonna burn him someday. But the hysterical reaction by the left is fascinating. And all they got Scooter for was perjury.
Clinton didn’t even know what “is” is. But he knew what a blow job was.
Cox and Forkum say it best - even though the cartoon is from October, 2005.
March 9th, 2007
Posted by
bit |
Deranged politics, Moonbats |
2 comments
