This is in response to Tom Harrington’s Letter in one of our local papers (his is after the jump):
Let me see if I get this straight – Tom Harrington, in his Letter, says that Republicans campaigned on the phrase “not a revenue problem but a spending problem”, he voted for them, they are now acting upon that campaign promise, are cutting spending – and he’s mad about it?
He also claims that the same phrase was a rhetorical trick to stifle debate. Yet, he along with all of the other NH voters (as well as across the nation) participated in that same debate for months before November 2 and decided it’s fate on that date; the vast majority said “no mas” to any more Democrat / Progressive spending. Now, those newly elected officials are now making good on their promises – and he’s mad about keeping them keeping a promise?
Yes, NH IS one of the states with the lowest tax burdens in the country. However, it seems that Mr. Harrington is none too pleased that people are none too willing to jack up their own taxes to support his causes – and that’s a Scrooge problem? A selfishness problem? Or a selfishness on his part in that he covets what others have ? Is he openly advocating that people should be forced to give up their private property (their money earned by their labor) by higher taxes – is that the purpose of his Letter?
Yeah, like raising taxes always leads to smaller government – that’s worked out so well in states like California, Illinois, New York, and New Jersey, right? All teetering on the brink of bankruptcy not from a lack of revenues but because of a lack of prudence and frugality, and a disregard of proper priorities.
The Lord desires an income tithe of 10% to be given of one’s free will; Government (summed across all levels) involuntarily takes far north of that from most of us – much to be given to others as coerced charity (which is not charity at all). Dontcha just wish that the “HAVE-YOUR’s” crowd would tell the “HAVEs” (the rest of us) when enough of OURS would be enough for THEM? Sadly, it seems, that people who believe that they have better purposes for other peoples’ money are never satisfied – “it’s never enough, is it”?
I’ve known Tom for a good long number of years – he is a good and decent man! But on this, I believe him to be in error. Hey, what are friends for if not to do the right thing when see each other straying off the path and guide them back a bit?
And if he wishes to publish a rebuttal and continue the debate – welcome!
If the democrats in New Hampshire want anyone to take them seriously on why we should not lower the cigarette tax, they had best find a better spokesperson than House rep. Christine Hamm from the Peoples Republic of Hopkinton.(PRH)
Government is a necessary (preferably limited) evil, laid out like a salad bar. There are all kinds of services your tax dollars pay for. Some of them are for “just in case kinds of things” like public safety. Then there are roads and schools and clerks and so on. And then there are unemployment, welfare, heating aid, and a host of social support services, and the cost of the bureaucracy itself. 
Yes, those were Congressman Frank Guinta’s words as 
I have said since Nov 2 that we had to watch your backside and protect it from the Progressives and Establishment types, with pikes. Like these guys (<—-). 
I was just thinking back to all the loose talk from the left about ending the gun ban in the New Hampshire State House. How they imagined someone just unloading over testimony supporting same sex marriage–to use one example–kids getting cut down in the cross-fire. And how they fell over themselves trying to scare parents into keeping their children from ever visiting the place because it was now just too dangerous.