Tag: New Hampshire Democrats - Page 2

Democrat Contradictions – Out Of State Influence in Local Elections

September 26, 2018August 13, 2012

by Steve MacDonald

Democrats in New Hampshire take a lot of money from outside the state. Don’t take my word for it, just go look it up. Millions and Millions. They use candidates, campaign committees, so-called non-profits, and even have super wealthy out of state special interest donors making personal donations here and there to move money around the campaign finance camp fire, often right into the state Democrat party coffer, then back out to your local races.

No one should be surprised or even taken aback at this because it is all part of the business of politics, every party does some of this, it is all perfectly legal, and everything was fine up until the point when the New Hampshire Democrat party decided to make it a recurring campaign issue against Republicans. It wasn’t Democrats who were affected by objects of out of state money and influence, just the Republicans.

Democrats are clearly guilty of hypocrisy on the issue (no surprise there), but whenever they start a narrative like this it is usually because they are doing something else that might be worse, that they need you to be distracted from. And guess what? They were.

New Hampshire Democrat Party Ad – Mostly False…According to Politifact

September 26, 2018July 24, 2012

by Steve MacDonald

(reposted)

Let me state upfront that most ‘Fact-checkers,’ those of leftish media entities in particular, are not much different than so-called ‘non-partisan’ groups set up by Democrats. They exist to mislead people by reinforcing a progressive narrative. So I provide these observations about this report with a large grain of salt, even though ( in this case) it tends to favor my potions on the issues presented.

PolitiFact has awarded a recent New Hampshire Democrat Party Ad with the distinction of being ‘Mostly False.‘ This would be important if not for the fact that almost everything Democrats actually believe is false to begin with, but let’s play along and see why, in this case, “mostly” proves both PolitiFact and myself correct.

Will NH Democrats Drool At Developments In France?

September 26, 2018July 20, 2012

by Steve MacDonald

France’s golden age passed long ago, and thanks to the French is doomed never to return.

The New Socialist dominant government has set right to work doing something New Hampshire Democrats did (to a lesser extent) when they had complete control of our state government. Right out of the gate the French Socialists are raising taxes. But not just any taxes. €7.2 Billion in one off taxes on wealthy households and big corporations…because the country continues to spend more than its economy can come up with. Sound familiar? Their debt is at 90% of GDP.

What else sounds familiar? How about wealthy households and corporations leaving France to escape confiscatory taxation?

Let’s Play Spot The Socialist Dullard

September 26, 2018July 15, 2012

by Steve MacDonald

New Hampshire has it’s share of obvious Socialist thieves. Democrat candidate William ‘Hud’ Connery is an admitted socialist. Folks like Catholic Socialist Peter ‘Can’t wait to get Connery on the team’ Sullivan, are a half-shade less obvious; Sullivan is an anti tax pledge guy as well and a supporter of Jackie ‘Tax and Spend us” Cilley so tax and spend or spend then tax are job one–complete with the class warfare tax the rich meme that has become a prominent feature of Democrat rhetoric everywhere you shop for flavorless-left wing political pablum–with a Marxist twist!

So I’m sure this is just a coincidence then, that.. “In 1848 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels frankly proposed “a heavy progressive or graduated income tax” as one of the measures by which, after the first stage of the revolution, “the proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeois, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state.” And doesn’t that just mesh so well with what I just wrote here? and tried to simplify here.

So what about the other socialist hiding in the proverbial New Hampshire bushes? Now that we have the Outsourcer in Chief channeling Elizabeth Warren, insisting that anyone who is successful didn’t do that on their own, we have another opportunity to play ‘Spot the Socialist Dullard.’ It’s validation from on high for left wing big government pragmatists everywhere.

What about the New Hampshire Budget?

September 26, 2018April 11, 2012

by Steve MacDonald

One of the major themes of the New Hampshire Democrats is that the current New Hampshire Republican majority is not focusing enough on the budget and the economy, and spending too much time on other issues. But this is an understandable position for leftists.

When the Democrats ran the entire state for four years, every session (almost every week) was about the budget, and how they had to raise more revenue. The reason for that is that their estimates were always so distant from reality, and their over spending so profligate, that they could not help but be obsessed, at every opportunity, with trying to fix a mess of their own making. The budget (and the economy)–how they might milk more taxes and fees out of the taxpayers or regulate and tax local businesses–was always on the agenda, often into the small hours of the morning of the day after the day they were supposed to have this all worked out by law. So Democrat stewardship of the budget and the economy was one long, constant, cluster-***k. (With what time they could spend ducking their budget woes wasted on trying to stomp out free speech, socializing medicine, scaring off more business, and a long laundry list of other nonsense too long to regurgitate here.)

The Republican majority, on the other hand, doing what you do at the grown-up table, already took care of all that business in the first session. Budget, estimates, revenues, done. No last minute nonsense, no late night sessions. No passing bills without hearings or making up taxes or fees they would later have to rescind–whose revenue they would then also have to “find” again and again… and no Rube Goldbergian accounting tricks, or counting money from this year for that year, or adding in the potential sale of things like land that you will never actually sell. None of that.

The Democrats hate the Republicans for that.

Ray Buckley’s Punchlines on Voter ID

September 26, 2018January 18, 2012

by Rick Olson

This morning’s Union Leader features State Democratic Chairman Raymond Buckley calling for “bipartisan support” for prosecuting those who used the names of dead Granite Staters to receive ballots during the presidential primary.

Not at all surprising. In fact, many have wondered how long it would be before we heard from “Buckles the Clown” regarding the ongoing saga of Democratic advocacy of Vote Fraud in the Granite State. Just another punchline from “Buckles.” Seriously. When has Raybo ever done anything for a higher bipartisan purpose?

What a Twit

September 26, 2018October 17, 2011

by Steve MacDonald

Twitter’s Link service automatically shortens links when you put them into Twitter, and even identifies the untrustworthy ones for the recipients. An example of this comes courtesy of Harrell ‘Jersey Shore’ Kirstein, who sent me a direct message with a link that produced such an alert.

Twitter’s link service at http://t.co is used to better protect users from malicious sites that engage in spreading malware, phishing attacks, and other harmful activity.

A link converted by Twitter’s link service is checked against a list of potentially dangerous sites. When there’s a match, users can be warned before they continue:

Why would the spokes-model for the New Hampshire Democrat Party be sending me a Direct Message on Twitter, linked to a dangerous web site, at 2:45 AM on a Sunday morning?

NH Dems Endorse Obama Tax Increase

September 26, 2018October 8, 2011

by Steve MacDonald

As reported in the Union Leader Ray Buckley and the State Democrat party would like people to call members of congress and encourage them to support Mr. Obama’s tax on investors and job creators so Democrats can fund public sector union jobs and keep the dues-donations rolling in. They also support the push to defer millions in social security revenues on to the shoulders of our children, though Buckley words it differently.

The plan would cut the payroll tax that 30,000 New Hampshire small businesses pay, provide tax relief for families, funding for police, firefighters and teachers, school building improvements and transportation projects in the state.

This entire effort is another organized scam to fund unions and Democrat campaigns, in the run up to November 2012, at taxpayer expense. The payroll tax cut is a useless gesture, not a cut but a deferment, so what we have is more of the same catastrophic economic policy that has kept us in a recession and on the brink of collapse for three years now.

NH Democrats Still Want To Limit Free Speech

September 26, 2018September 3, 2011

by Steve MacDonald

What price for speech? In the waning days of New Hampshire’s leftist experiment of 2007-2010, in the months leading up to the crackling heat of the 2010 election, the Democrat-lead state legislature attempted to pass the Sullivan/Hassan speech intimidation amendment attached to NH HB1459 .

This kitchen-table Frankenstein was strung together by Democrat party Committee creature Kathy “Lawsuit” Sullivan and then Democrat state Senator Maggie “The Red” Hassan, from dead bits of left wing jack-booted policy dreams. The goal was to quickly replace the gag that the Supreme Courts Citizens United v. FEC ruling had removed. They would require businesses to get permission to engage in political speech if they intended to spend over a certain sum.

Assigning government regulated speech limitations based on some arbitrary, government defined value was hardly the worst of it. The democrats also wanted to empower third parties to intimidate political speech for them as well. Anyone with the money and time could file a lawsuit against any business that it thought could have violated the law. This would give every out of state funded left wing non-profit the ability to pay its left wing, democrat supporting lawyers, to cast a chilling anti-speech pall across the New Hampshire Landscape. Fear of litigation would instantaneously exclude thousands of voices from the political debate simply because they could not risk the time and expense of being sued, even erroneously, should they fail to dot all the I’s and cross all the T’s.

From square one this was a partisan, prejudicial and intentionally unconstitutional act.

Government can do nothing without first denying someone of their legally earned income, so this bill established that it was acceptable for 51% of those doing the taxing to define what constituted free speech. When that happens free speech is no longer a protected right, it is a legislated privilege regulated by a democratic mobocracy. It no longer mattered that every business pays some kind of tax, in most cases dozens of them, to finance government. It did not matter that the right to free association can take the form of a business or group that might have an interest in it’s relationship to how government exercises power in their name. All that mattered to New Hampshire Democrats was that free speech continues to be a barrier to their political success, and if they could silence any class of persons they could find a way to silence any dissenter they chose.

Ask yourself, which party is forever trying to limit free speech and the answer is Democrats? The war on business, the fairness doctrine, the war on new media and Fox news. The insults and slurs hurled at the TEA party. These are all efforts to intimidate or limit speech to which the left objects. They have no interest in fairness or equality of message. They seek to control the message.

The New Hampshire Democrat effort to complicate, regulate, and even intimidate anyone out of having free reign to speak about how or how often they are taxed, about how those taxes are used, and to actually sanction random intimidation by entities outside the government, should have immediately disqualified them from every holding another elected office. We came just a few votes shy of passing a bill that Governor Lynch said he was prepared to sign.

This is not something we can forget. It defines the character of everyone who voted for it, sanctioned it, or supported it. This thinking permeates everything about their grasp of your relationship to government. They still think this way, and they will continue to argue in support of it, even though their actual justifications for it, are fatally flawed.