So, as usual, I didn't write it. But Maureen Dowd is just so on top of things, why bother? Here's another good Dowd column. A dig at Sarah Palin. Go forth, and read!
P.S. My favorite line is the one calling Bristol Palin the "ambassadress of abstinence." Which is demonstrated by Bristol holding her son....who was, of course, conceived in abstinence.
Showing posts with label republicans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label republicans. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Going on a little rant...about those damned republicans
As I've mentioned before, I read a lot of [Colorado] news every day at work to stay informed about what's happening here at the state house. I read a lot of conservative opinion pieces, so that I know what those crazy Republicans are up to. It's good for me. But much of the time, it's also really, really irritating.
One of the most annoying topics is TABOR, the Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (I've also ranted about this specific issue many a time). This horrid piece of legislation was enacted in Colorado in 1992, when the state was very red. Well, the state isn't so red now (actually, it's rather blue). The legislation basically made the state go broke, and it's all-around just a crappy concept. Our state revenue is seriously limited by TABOR (mainly by what is known as the "ratchet down" effect), and funding for education and transportation are particularly impacted. Democrats keep trying to amend it, or make other legislative changes that would untie the hands of the state, but it's very difficult since all changes to tax policy must be put to the voters (that's a huge part of what TABOR does). Colorado is something like 47th in education funding nationwide, and if you've ever driven here, you know how bad the roads are. We need to change the way we handle our money, and increase our taxes (or at least let the state keep the money it collects to spend it how we need/want, rather than refunding it when we collect more than TABOR allows). It's hard to argue that we don't need more money for these things. Still, the conservatives hammer on and on about how we have TABOR and how great it is. Usually, the rants I read are so full of typos I think they're written by illiterates. That's part of the irony--people love TABOR despite the fact that they never learned to write under our poorly funded public school system--because of TABOR.
There's a point here (I think). I was reading an opinion piece in the Colorado Springs Gazette that criticizes the recent CO Supreme Court decision upholding a legislative mill levy increase from 2007. I'll be the first to admit that the democrats keep trying to make end-runs around TABOR, but they're not breaking the law. If the Supreme Court upholds the mill levy change using sound reasoning, then it's probably legal. So stop whining about it. Just because TABOR is law, that doesn't make it good. Lots of law is, in fact, bad. And lots more is simply badly drafted. The system IS broken, and we're just trying to fix it. And just because legislation was once enacted by the voters does not mean that we can't later amend or overturn it. In fact, that's why our legislators meet every year and why we vote--we are changing and adding laws all the time. I'm listening to laws being passed in the Colorado state house right now.
The biggest problem I have with the TABOR supporters who keep lambasting attempts to fix the budget problems we have, is the fact that they generally don't understand what a "fee" is. TABOR specifically prohibits changes to tax policy without a consent vote of the citizens of the state. However, it expressly allows fees to be imposed without a vote of the people. There is a distinction, and it's allowed under the law. Still, republicans keep complaining that we're "disguising" taxes as fees to pull the wool over. That's just not the case. THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, and are defined by TABOR (I could go into the difference, but I don't feel like re-living law school just now). Yes, it seems like an end-run by democrats to enact fees rather than trying to get taxes approved, so that revenue can be generated. But your beloved TABOR allows this, so stop crying foul when democrats are just using the legislative process, and doing so legally, to raise money so that our bridges are safe and our kids learn how to read.
I think I'm done ranting for now. In case you want to see an example of a couple of republicans' grammatical challenges and difficulty with spelling, check out this blog posting, and look too at the comment by calGone.
One of the most annoying topics is TABOR, the Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (I've also ranted about this specific issue many a time). This horrid piece of legislation was enacted in Colorado in 1992, when the state was very red. Well, the state isn't so red now (actually, it's rather blue). The legislation basically made the state go broke, and it's all-around just a crappy concept. Our state revenue is seriously limited by TABOR (mainly by what is known as the "ratchet down" effect), and funding for education and transportation are particularly impacted. Democrats keep trying to amend it, or make other legislative changes that would untie the hands of the state, but it's very difficult since all changes to tax policy must be put to the voters (that's a huge part of what TABOR does). Colorado is something like 47th in education funding nationwide, and if you've ever driven here, you know how bad the roads are. We need to change the way we handle our money, and increase our taxes (or at least let the state keep the money it collects to spend it how we need/want, rather than refunding it when we collect more than TABOR allows). It's hard to argue that we don't need more money for these things. Still, the conservatives hammer on and on about how we have TABOR and how great it is. Usually, the rants I read are so full of typos I think they're written by illiterates. That's part of the irony--people love TABOR despite the fact that they never learned to write under our poorly funded public school system--because of TABOR.
There's a point here (I think). I was reading an opinion piece in the Colorado Springs Gazette that criticizes the recent CO Supreme Court decision upholding a legislative mill levy increase from 2007. I'll be the first to admit that the democrats keep trying to make end-runs around TABOR, but they're not breaking the law. If the Supreme Court upholds the mill levy change using sound reasoning, then it's probably legal. So stop whining about it. Just because TABOR is law, that doesn't make it good. Lots of law is, in fact, bad. And lots more is simply badly drafted. The system IS broken, and we're just trying to fix it. And just because legislation was once enacted by the voters does not mean that we can't later amend or overturn it. In fact, that's why our legislators meet every year and why we vote--we are changing and adding laws all the time. I'm listening to laws being passed in the Colorado state house right now.
The biggest problem I have with the TABOR supporters who keep lambasting attempts to fix the budget problems we have, is the fact that they generally don't understand what a "fee" is. TABOR specifically prohibits changes to tax policy without a consent vote of the citizens of the state. However, it expressly allows fees to be imposed without a vote of the people. There is a distinction, and it's allowed under the law. Still, republicans keep complaining that we're "disguising" taxes as fees to pull the wool over. That's just not the case. THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, and are defined by TABOR (I could go into the difference, but I don't feel like re-living law school just now). Yes, it seems like an end-run by democrats to enact fees rather than trying to get taxes approved, so that revenue can be generated. But your beloved TABOR allows this, so stop crying foul when democrats are just using the legislative process, and doing so legally, to raise money so that our bridges are safe and our kids learn how to read.
I think I'm done ranting for now. In case you want to see an example of a couple of republicans' grammatical challenges and difficulty with spelling, check out this blog posting, and look too at the comment by calGone.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Palin is on those substantive issues!
Listening to NPR this morning, a Libertarian Palin supporter called in to talk about all of the substantive issues that Palin is focused upon, naming among them that Palin is an admitted pot smoker. The caller said that because of her focus on such substantive issues, Palin is a great candidate for vice president, and the caller will be voting for the McCain/Palin ticket.
Yes. Pot smoking is a substantive issue that should help us determine who we vote for.
Yes. Pot smoking is a substantive issue that should help us determine who we vote for.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Republican National Convention (Part I)
Here are some of my observations from watching last night's RNC events on CNN:
Fred Thompson was talking about the “economic downturn” and how Obama wants to raise taxes during this time—wasn’t it McCain who said the economy was fine? So what’s this Republican talk suddenly about problems with the economy? Plus, Obama will only raise taxes on the rich folks who don’t notice the problems with the economy. Hypocrisy much?
Thompson also made a comment about how Republicans will protect newborns. What exactly is it that Democrats are doing to endanger newborn children? Encouraging infanticide?
I love that the Republicans complain that Obama is a “celebrity,” and that’s the only reason why he’s appealing to Democrats. But I put this to you—Schwarzenegger, Jesse Ventura, Ronald Reagan… Republicans LOVE celebrities. Where are all of the elected Democrat celebrities?
Another problem I have (though this is one you’ve heard over and over)—Obama’s inexperience is one of the most common reasons Republicans decry Obama. But Palin has WAY less experience. Somehow, when it’s a Republican, it doesn’t matter.
The audience tried to get a
I saw a sign in the audience that read “Democrots for McCain.” Seriously, if that’s evidence of your intelligence level, go right ahead. Because you don’t even know which way is up.
And here are a couple things gleaned from listening to NPR:McCain badly wanted Lieberman for his running mate, but chose Palin because some Republicans were threatening to bring a competing nominee at the convention. He chose Palin only to avoid an insurrection at the RNC. Because the party is in enough trouble as it is.
How are you a huge supporter of family values when your teenage daughter is getting knocked up? If you were such a great mom, wouldn’t you be able to instill your values in your girl so that doesn’t happen? I thought only low-class welfare mothers got “knocked up.” Maybe they have a nicer term for it when it’s rich people?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
