Grab Your Wallets, SOTH Pelosi in Control
Well, that didn’t take long. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, liberal Democrat from San Fran, has made it even easier for Democrats to raise taxes, and it was among the first things she brought to a vote.
One of the first key procedural votes in the Democrat-controlled House last week established legislative rules that Republicans say will make it easier to raise taxes by a simple majority vote.
The straight party-line vote received little attention Thursday as Rep. Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, was elected speaker of the House. [...]
Of course it was a party line vote, taxes are one of the defining issues between liberals and Republicans. Too bad the MSM was busy being willing accomplices in the making of a queen, rather than focus attention on what the Democrats saw as the first priority now that they have control of Congress. Somebody doesn’t want you to know about Democrats’ real intentions to turn Congress into a liberal mecca of taxes and spending.
You see, in the past under Republican control, a 3/5ths vote was required to raise taxes. Since Democrats didn’t get that level of a majority, they have passed a rule where a simple majority could waive that rule. Which means the rule does not apply, which means a simple majority vote would raise taxes.
“After spending an entire year on the campaign trail claiming she will not raise taxes, the first vote Nancy Pelosi brings to the floor for a vote as speaker will open the door to billions and billions of dollars of tax increases over the next two years,” Mr. Norquist said.
Many liberal Democrats vowed in the midterm election campaigns to repeal the Bush tax cuts for those in the top income-tax brackets, and party leaders already have scheduled a vote to eliminate tax breaks for oil companies, which would effectively raise taxes on the nation’s energy-producing corporations.
Our very own freshman liberal Democrat Reps. Ellison and Walz carried that mantra through their election victories and so did Sen. A-Klo. From day one, they promised to raise taxes. Besides prematurely ending the war against Muslim extremists, raising taxes was their other main unifying campaign agenda item. This new Democratic rule would provide some leeway to Democrats who are renting seats in Red Districts, who may face voter backlash from a vote for tax increases. You see, even Democrats know, not everyone wants tax increases.
Democratic officials saw Mr. Boehner’s motion as a move to tie their hands on future tax policy, and the majority leadership effectively held all of its troops in line to oppose it, even though some of its members ran on pledges not to raise taxes.
And that is really the key that people need to pay attention to. Few Democrat freshman were willing to openly embrace being a rubberstamp for Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. They scored cheap electoral points for saying Republicans were that of Bush and the Republican party. They carefully ran their campaigns in a way that fooled voters into believing they are not partisan party loyalists. Which, of course, is patently false.
“In the coming months, the Democrat-controlled Rules Committee will be pressured to repeal or waive the Contract with America’s barriers against unfair tax increases to make it easier for the Democrat majority in Congress to raise taxes,” Mr. Boehner predicted.
Remember, the Democrats want to sock it to the productive citizens of America to pay for their socialist pipe dreams. The last great hope to maintain America’s trend toward growth and prosperity is in the hands of President Bush.










I’m so glad you patriots try to avoid contributing tax revunues.
How much ‘should” I pay?
So, Andy — you don’t want to pay more in taxes. How do we pay for the soon-to-be-proposed increase in the size of the military? Where do we get the additional 20,000 or so soldiers that will be needed for a “surge”?
BTW, is that picture of the soldier at the top of the home page you? I read your bio, but it doesn’t mention anything about your military service record.
Would you enlighten us, please? In what branch of the military did you serve?
Can you show me where it says I do have to serve in order to have an opinion?
Can you show me where I said you needed to serve in order to have an opinion?
I simply asked two questions: is the picture of the soldier at the top of your home page you?
And: in what branch of the military did you serve?
Then what is the point of you asking?
If it doesn’t matter that that isn’t me, or that I didn’t serve (and have never claimed ) why are you asking?
I’m guessing it is the same old liberal litmus test that most of you use, chicken hawk.
Wow, now that’s a real argument for higher taxes, which IS what this post is about in the first place.
And considering that Pelosi opposes the surge, what does that have to do with her wanting to raise taxes, which again, to remind you, was the point of the post?
Whatever you are truing to get at doesn’t have anything to do with my post. Care to enlighten readers?
Actually, I DID ask you about raising taxes, smart guy.
My first question was: “how do we pay for the soon-to-be-proposed increase in the size of the military? Where do we get the additional 20,000 or so soldiers that will be needed for a “surgeâ€?”
Because if we’re going to increase the size of the military, we’re going to have to a) pay for it and b) find lots of new recruits.
You’ve already indicated that you are utterly opposed to any and all tax increases, and I suspect that when the call goes out for new recruits, you will be nowhere to be found.
The fact that you’re a cringing sunshine patriot who doesn’t even want to pay taxes for the war he’s cheerleading is a secondary issue.
The surge is not expanding the military. So your original question is ‘non-sensical’ as some say.