For GOP only

[mr_genius]

Nobody's dumb enough to come out and say "I'm raising taxes!" They'll diguise it as a "rollback of Bush's evil tax cuts for the rich." (Of which, I must be filthy rich, because I enjoyed a part of those cuts.)

 

the dems think we're all so stupid we won't realize that saying "rollbacks of evil tax cuts for the wealthy" is the exact same thing as "raising taxes".

 

if you make over 50,000 a year the dems will consider you "wealthy". might take em a couple of years to get to that tax bracket, but they will attempt raise taxes substantially on many people who are not really wealthy if given the chance.

Edited January 10, 2007 by mr_genius

[kapkomet]

the dems think we're all so stupid we won't realize that saying "rollbacks of evil tax cuts for the wealthy" is the exact same thing as "raising taxes".

 

if you make over 50,000 a year the dems will consider you "wealthy". might take em a couple of years to get to that tax bracket, but they will raise taxes substantially on many people who are not really wealthy.

 

I'm shocked.

[mr_genius]

2/3 = 67 votes in the Senate

 

true, but it takes 3/5 to stop a filibuster.

 

3/5 = 60 votes in the Senate

 

[NorthSideSox72]

the dems think we're all so stupid we won't realize that saying "rollbacks of evil tax cuts for the wealthy" is the exact same thing as "raising taxes".

 

if you make over 50,000 a year the dems will consider you "wealthy". might take em a couple of years to get to that tax bracket, but they will attempt raise taxes substantially on many people who are not really wealthy if given the chance.

I see paranoia reigns supreme.

 

I'll point this out again - so far, the Dems have done almost exactly what they said they would do, and the legislation they have pushed (smoking ban aside) has all been positive. Not one peep about taxes, other than PAYGO, which Republicans seem to like just as much as Dems.

[mreye]

true, but it takes 3/5 to stop a filibuster.

 

3/5 = 60 votes in the Senate

 

 

True, but you said it takes 60 to override a veto. It takes 2/3.

 

Fillibuster is completely different.

[mr_genius]

True, but you said it takes 60 to override a veto. It takes 2/3.

 

good call

 

I see paranoia reigns supreme.

 

 

almost exact thing i posted about has happened before with democrats. if you agree with raising taxes to cut the deficit, thats fine. no need to insult posters accusing them of mass paranoia.

Edited January 11, 2007 by mr_genius

[NorthSideSox72]

good call

almost exact thing i posted about has happened before with democrats. if you agree with raising taxes to cut the deficit, thats fine. no need to insult posters accusing them of mass paranoia.

I do apologize if that was insulting - not my intent.

 

What I am saying is, the Dems have so far talked nothing about raising taxes, and only hinted at reversing Bush's cuts. And the way some people are talking, its as if we are all going to get a big old bill to pay for a bunch of new programs.

 

In reality, the Dems passed PAYGO legislation in the House, forcing some degree of fiscal responsibility. I just wish people would acknowledge the reality that SO FAR, the Dems have only done POSITIVE things in regards to financial and tax issues. Instead of pointing at all the supposed negative things they MIGHT do.

[mreye]

I do apologize if that was insulting - not my intent.

 

What I am saying is, the Dems have so far talked nothing about raising taxes, and only hinted at reversing Bush's cuts. And the way some people are talking, its as if we are all going to get a big old bill to pay for a bunch of new programs.

 

In reality, the Dems passed PAYGO legislation in the House, forcing some degree of fiscal responsibility. I just wish people would acknowledge the reality that SO FAR, the Dems have only done POSITIVE things in regards to financial and tax issues. Instead of pointing at all the supposed negative things they MIGHT do.

 

Pfft, where's the fun in that?

[southsider2k5]

I do apologize if that was insulting - not my intent.

 

What I am saying is, the Dems have so far talked nothing about raising taxes, and only hinted at reversing Bush's cuts. And the way some people are talking, its as if we are all going to get a big old bill to pay for a bunch of new programs.

 

In reality, the Dems passed PAYGO legislation in the House, forcing some degree of fiscal responsibility. I just wish people would acknowledge the reality that SO FAR, the Dems have only done POSITIVE things in regards to financial and tax issues. Instead of pointing at all the supposed negative things they MIGHT do.

 

So wait, we are not supposed to read into the parties actions anymore? I get to read crap on here such as conspiracies involving Bush manipulating world oil prices for reelection, and I am not supposed to speculate on why the Dems are doing the stuff they are doing? Please.

[NorthSideSox72]

So wait, we are not supposed to read into the parties actions anymore? I get to read crap on here such as conspiracies involving Bush manipulating world oil prices for reelection, and I am not supposed to speculate on why the Dems are doing the stuff they are doing? Please.

Not what I meant either. Honestly, I am just annoyed with the fact that some people's fears rule their views so fully that they cannot accept any positive from one party, or any negative from the other. That mentality bothers me. I am sure I did not state this very well.

[mr_genius]

I am just annoyed with the fact that some people's fears rule their views so fully that they cannot accept any positive from one party, or any negative from the other.

 

 

well, this is the GOP only thread

 

totally biased posts are to be expected

 

Edited January 13, 2007 by mr_genius

[EvilMonkey]

Not what I meant either. Honestly, I am just annoyed with the fact that some people's fears rule their views so fully that they cannot accept any positive from one party, or any negative from the other. That mentality bothers me. I am sure I did not state this very well.

Hey, how about that positive thing in raising the minimum wage for all! Oops! I guess they left some people out. Seems a major business in Pelosi's distric gets an exemption from the minimum wage bill. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

 

 

GOP hits Pelosi's 'hypocrisy' on wage bill

By Charles Hurt

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

January 12, 2007

 

 

House Republicans yesterday declared "something fishy" about the major tuna company in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco district being exempted from the minimum-wage increase that Democrats approved this week.

"I am shocked," said Rep. Eric Cantor, Virginia Republican and his party's chief deputy whip, noting that Mrs. Pelosi campaigned heavily on promises of honest government. "Now we find out that she is exempting hometown companies from minimum wage. This is exactly the hypocrisy and double talk that we have come to expect from the Democrats."

On Wednesday, the House voted to raise the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour.

The bill also extends for the first time the federal minimum wage to the U.S. territory of the Northern Mariana Islands. However, it exempts American Samoa, another Pacific island territory that would become the only U.S. territory not subject to federal minimum-wage laws.

One of the biggest opponents of the federal minimum wage in Samoa is StarKist Tuna, which owns one of the two packing plants that together employ more than 5,000 Samoans, or nearly 75 percent of the island's work force. StarKist's parent company, Del Monte Corp., has headquarters in San Francisco, which is represented by Mrs. Pelosi. The other plant belongs to California-based Chicken of the Sea.

"There's something fishy going on here," said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, North Carolina Republican.

During the House debate yesterday on stem-cell research, Mr. McHenry raised a parliamentary inquiry as to whether an amendment could be offered that would exempt American Samoa from stem-cell research, "just as it was for the minimum-wage bill."

A clearly perturbed Rep. Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who was presiding, cut off Mr. McHenry and shouted, "No, it would not be."

"So, the chair is saying I may not offer an amendment exempting American Samoa?" Mr. McHenry pressed.

"The gentleman is making a speech and will sustain," Mr. Frank shouted as he slammed his large wooden gavel against the rostrum.

Some Republicans who voted in favor of the minimum-wage bill were particularly irritated to learn yesterday -- after their vote -- that the legislation did not include American Samoa.

"I was troubled to learn of this exemption," said Rep. Mark Steven Kirk, Illinois Republican. "My intention was to raise the minimum wage for everyone. We shouldn't permit any special favors or exemptions that are not widely discussed in Congress. This is the problem with rushing legislation through without full debate."

A spokeswoman for Mrs. Pelosi said Wednesday that the speaker has not been lobbied in any way by StarKist or Del Monte.

[NorthSideSox72]

Hey, how about that positive thing in raising the minimum wage for all! Oops! I guess they left some people out. Seems a major business in Pelosi's distric gets an exemption from the minimum wage bill. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

So... minimum wage protections are extended to the Marianas, along with the boost for all 50 states, but they didn't add Samoa. Yeah, that sounds about right - the Dems are doing some good, but the leaders of the march (Reid and Pelosi) still want their slice of the pie.

 

This is exactly what I have been trying to point out - the Dems are doing a lot of good, but like many politicians in both parties, they still want to take their piece. But at least the Dems are taking 51 steps forward, in addition to 1 step back.

[Damen]

So... minimum wage protections are extended to the Marianas, along with the boost for all 50 states, but they didn't add Samoa. Yeah, that sounds about right - the Dems are doing some good, but the leaders of the march (Reid and Pelosi) still want their slice of the pie.

 

This is exactly what I have been trying to point out - the Dems are doing a lot of good, but like many politicians in both parties, they still want to take their piece. But at least the Dems are taking 51 steps forward, in addition to 1 step back.

 

There isn't any evidence Pelosi had anything to do with Samoa. The bill was written by George Miller, and the Samoan delegate, a Democrat, had been urging Democrats to avoid exempting Samoa from current law.

 

That's not to say money didn't play an issue here and it shouldn't be reexamined in the future, but this Washington Times-led decision to paint this on Pelosi is without any merit. Besides that, what a difference a few months make when now Republicans are forced to complain that minimum wage wasn't extended far enough.

 

I'll take it.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

How shocking is it that Pelosi applies the law to everyone else but corporate interests based in her district. Honest government indeed.

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

How shocking is it that Pelosi applies the law to everyone else but corporate interests based in her district. Honest government indeed.

Well, indeed, someone was greedy. But it seems it wasn't Pelosi.

 

Like I said, most of these folks will take their cut. But I'll take the steps forward, thank you.

[mr_genius]

How shocking is it that Pelosi applies the law to everyone else but corporate interests based in her district. Honest government indeed.

 

 

how bout it. the dems are full of it. just like Ted Kennedy being all for wind energy, well until he could (gasp) see one of the wind towers in the distance from his home. oh, imagine how horrible that would be to wake up in your mansion and have to see a windmill off in the distance.

[Balta1701]

Link.

Fending off charges of favoritism, House Democrats say a just-passed minimum wage bill will be changed to cover all U.S. territories — including American Samoa — before it reaches President Bush's desk.

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters she has instructed the House Education and Labor Committee to help get the bill changed to "make sure that all of the territories have to comply with the U.S. law on minimum wage."

 

Her remark Friday followed accusations from Republicans a day earlier that American Samoa, which is not now covered by the $5.15 an hour federal minimum wage, was not included in the law raising the federal pay floor to $7.25 an hour because StarKist has a large cannery in the island chain. StarKist is owned by Del Monte Foods Co., which has its headquarters in San Francisco, Pelosi's district.

 

The bill was passed Wednesday by the House as part of the Democrats' 100-hour agenda. The measure included in its coverage another U.S. territory, the Northern Mariana Islands, which had been shielded in the past from the wage law with the help of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, and GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, now serving a prison sentence.

 

Spokesmen for both Pelosi and Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the author of the minimum wage bill, said it excluded American Samoa at the request of nonvoting Delegate Eni Faleomavaega, a Democrat who represents the Pacific island territories in the House.

 

Raising the federal minimum wage would devastate the local tuna industry, Faleomavaega said in a statement last week, noting that American Samoa's economy is "more than 80 percent" dependent on two U.S. tuna processors, Chicken of the Sea and StarKist. Faleomavaega said the Labor Department reviews Samoa's minimum wages every two years.

[southsider2k5]

Link.

 

Well its nice to know that all it takes is a little bad press for Nancy to change her mind...

[Balta1701]

Well its nice to know that all it takes is a little bad press for Nancy to change her mind...

Nothing 'tall wrong with that.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Nothing 'tall wrong with that.

 

 

More like it took her getting caught doing exactly what she promised not to do for her to change her mind. I thought business as usual was over in Washington?

[NorthSideSox72]

More like it took her getting caught doing exactly what she promised not to do for her to change her mind. I thought business as usual was over in Washington?

Nice obfuscation.

 

No one (here) has claimed that the Dems' take-over would represent the end of business as usual. The theme here is of improvement, and that is absolutely happening. And as for Pelosi, this was never about her. It was about some regional magistrate trying to have his way.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Nice obfuscation.

 

No one (here) has claimed that the Dems' take-over would represent the end of business as usual. The theme here is of improvement, and that is absolutely happening. And as for Pelosi, this was never about her. It was about some regional magistrate trying to have his way.

 

 

Obfuscation my ass. They ran their whole campaign on 2 themes, Iraq and corruption in Washington. Now she comes out with a sweetheart deal which exempts big business in her own district from a law that affects everyone else. That's just total bulls***.

[Rex Kickass]

A sweetheart deal in a bill that she didn't author and whose "exclusion" was placed in by the delegate of the affected area which has been overturned.

 

If this was business in usual, that exclusion would still be there.

[EvilMonkey]

A sweetheart deal in a bill that she didn't author and whose "exclusion" was placed in by the delegate of the affected area which has been overturned.

 

If this was business in usual, that exclusion would still be there.

Isn't she in charge? If it happened on her watch, she should get the s*** for it, just as surely as she would take the acolades were it to be a good thing. You are full of more than tuna if you think that were the parties reversed, the reaction would be the same.