Obama Couldn’t Run A Lemonade Stand (Nor could a NH Democrat) And Here’s Why?

Obama Couldn't run a lemonade StandWhen the economy got rough my employer had to cut back staffing.  By the time they were done we had dropped about 70% of our staff, down to the bare minimum needed to operate each department.   We kept the best people and asked them to do a lot more for the same money, and sometimes less. We went to smaller quarters.  We re-thought everything.  We looked for fat and cut it.  We analyzed how we did things when we were busy and a bit lazy and got into shape.

As it turns out, there were better, faster, and more efficient ways to get the same things done with fewer people, while spending less money.  We needed to do that, we did it, and we are surviving.  And if ever it comes time to grow again, then we’ll expand with more care and efficiency than before.

If we apply the way Democrats approach Government to business (our lemonade stand) it is the exact opposite.

Read more

Ask A NH Democrat: About Having “A Conversation About Taxes”

Back in 2010 Barack Obama’s excuse for not allowing taxes to rise (by letting inherited tax cuts expire) was that despite Democrats four year grip on congress and their parties complete control of government for two years, it wasn’t time to let that happen.   But not to worry.  He’d let taxes go back up at … Read more

Ask A New Hampshire Democrat: About The Hostage Situation

There are those among us who are concerned that New Hampshire sends more federal tax dollars out of the state than it gets back.  The same people, typically Democrats and Moderate Republicans, argue for more Federal meddling in state affairs.  The same people who also complain about “out of state influence” in local elections.

If you send more money to DC so you can then act the hero when we get it back, complete with strings attached, other sources of out of state money will find those people and try to keep them in office so that central planners can milk all 50 teats for as much as possible and then sit in on the “hostage negotiations” when you want or need some of it back.

But wouldn’t this make more sense?

Read more

Republican Leaders Blast Democrat Income Tax Plan

Hey, the economy stinks, New Hampshire is doing better than most but the Obama economy is still grabbing at our legs, so what do you do if you are a New Hampshire Democrat?  Propose an Income tax! (To fund Charter schools!?  Collusion between the Democrats and the State Education board perhaps?)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: (603) 271-3665
October 1, 2012
 
Republican Leaders Blast Democrat Income Tax Plan
CONCORD – House Majority Leader Pete Silva (R-Nashua) and Deputy Majority Leader and Ways and Means Chairman Stephen Stepanek (R-Amherst) today blasted the newly exposed Democrat income tax plan.  Rep. Peter Sullivan (D-Manchester) filed a bill request (LSR #191) that would establish an income tax in New Hampshire.

Democrat Values Vs. TEA Party Values

The Entire New Hampshire Democrat party is running against the TEA Party.  They claim that they stand for New Hampshire values, not TEA Party values.  Well I can see why Democrats would object to TEA Party values but are they sure they can lay claim to New Hampshire Values?

Tea party originalFor the novices in the audience the TEA Party stood up to object to excessive spending and the taxes that spending would inevitably require.  (If your president spends 5 trillion dollars in just three years and you don’t make a peep in objection, that is a Democrat party value–someone has to pay for that, and it is the middle class and everyone else and suggesting otherwise it a bald-faced lie; another Democrat party value?)  Americans saw that for what it was when it started in 2009 and rose up in opposition.  T.E.A = Taxed Enough Already.

Knowing what we know about New Hampshire Democrats do you really want them speaking for your values?  I don’t think you do.  But here are a few examples of New Hampshire Democrat Values to help you decide.

Read more

What does the TEA Party want?

They say, “If you’re taking flak, you’re over the target.”  Thus the TEA Party, whose common sense demands for fiscal responsibility and constitutionally limited government are shared by most Americans, is attacked by people who most likely never attended a TEA Party meeting or understood TEA Party documentation.

Thousands of TEA Party groups and millions of members agree that passing debt to our children and grandchildren is immoral and un-acceptable, and that government spending must be limited to government revenue. 

Read more

Terrie Norelli and Sylvia Larsen: Jealous!?

Late in the 2007 session, when Democrats controlled the entire New Hampshire State Government for the first time in 95 years,  then House Speaker Terri “Billion Dollar Deficit’ Norelli and Senate President Sylvia Larsen figured the beginning of a recession was a great time to add a $72,000.00 bathroom remodel onto the backs of taxpayers.  … Read more

Royal Treatment

king-obama-and-queen-michelle-antoinette-let-them-eat-cakeAuthor Robert Keith Gray has written a book called ‘Presidential Perks gone Royal.   In his book  he points out that the amount of tax money spent on this First Family,I’ll call it the Obama Dynasty, has risen tremendously.

For perspective, last year, according to Gray, Britain spent 57.8 Million to keep up appearances for entire Royal Family.  Americans spent 1.4 Billion on the Obama Presidency.  (That’s just for one year.)

Gray told The Daily Caller that the $1.4 billion spent on the Obama family last year is the “total cost of the presidency,” factoring the cost of the “biggest staff in history at the highest wages ever,” a 50 percent increase in the numbers of appointed czars and an Air Force One “running with the frequency of a scheduled air line.”

To quote Mel Brooks.  “Its good to be the king.

Once again, a Progressive confirms: if you aren’t spending it the way we think you should, we’ll tax it away from you

And then we wonder why the heck the US is dropping in the Economic Freedom rankings (down to 18th – we used to be in the top five a short few years ago)?  Could this attitude be one reason?  Hillary took off the mask and went past “tax and spend”.  Taking a page out of Moochella’s playbook (“sure – eat!  But only what we want you to eat”), Hillary makes it rather clear when talking earlier this week at her husband’s Clinton Global Initiative – translation: “You get to keep only what we think you should have – because you aren’t spending it the way we want!” (a take off on “you didn’t build it”):

And one of the issues that I have been preaching about around the world is collecting taxes in an equitable manner, especially from the elites in every country. (Laughter.) You know I’m out of American politics, but – (applause) – it is a fact that around the world, the elites of every country are making money. There are rich people everywhere. And yet they do not contribute to the growth of their own countries. They don’t invest in public schools, in public hospitals, in other kinds of development internally. And so it means for leaders telling powerful people things they don’t want to hear. It means being transparent about budgets and revenues and bringing corruption to light. And when that happens, we shouldn’t punish countries for uncovering corruption. We should reward them for doing so. And it means putting in place regulations designed to attract and protect investment.

Where do I start?  There is certainly a move afoot to “harmonize” taxes all over the globe – countries with high taxes have been trying to force those with lower ones to raise them so as not to be at a disadvantage (sorta like on a union job when the “eager beaver” gets shut down for being too quick and good, thereby making all the others look bad).  So if someone “of means” wishes to protect his assets from greedy politicians all too willing to spend other peoples’ money, there is no safe harbor.

But Hillary shows her Progressive roots – unless your money is spent on what SHE thinks is important, she is advocating taking it away by shaming others to do her dirty work (i.e., as in “don’t worry, they are like troublesome children that cannot share.  Like kindergarten children, we who are better will teach them that you can take it without feeling guilty to share”).  After all, those rich folks are screwing everyone else ought of what they need!

Read more

Face Plant – So Who Do We Tax After That?

As a followup to this post on Taxing the rich, I did want to point something else out.   Even if you taxed the rich at 100% you still couldn’t pay for even one year of Obama/Democrat spending.  Not even one full year.  And that’s just for running the government, and not a penny toward the 16 trillion dollar deficit.  And yet that is their answer for dealing with the spending problem.

Seeing as the top 5% already pay 90% of all Federal taxes this begs the question, and it’s one you should feel free to ask New Hampshire Democrats as well…If there are no rich, becasue you took all their money,  and we can’t even pay one year of the budget with this one time tax of 100%, then who do you tax to pay for the rest of that year, every year after that, and the 16 trillion dollar deficit after that?

Ask them. (You could also ask them if this would mean the Democrats are shutting down government, ask them who built what, ask them how this much irresponsible spending is not a tax on the middle class–seeing as you can’t pay for any of it without taxing them…use your imagination, they have left you with so many lies there is no shortage of material to work with.)

Read more

Ask A New Hampshire Democrat About Taxing The Rich

Ask a New Hampshire Democrat about taxing the richThe distance between left wing rhetoric and reality is wide, particularly on the issue of taxing the rich.  This classic bit of class war rhetoric is used to deflect any deeper inspection of the problem, and the flaws in the Democrat’s solution.  And the flaws are huge.  Immense.  Enormous.  Disqualifying in fact.  So ask a New Hampshire Democrat about taxing the rich.

Read more

Remembering Democrat Rule – “Look To The Sky…”

Marjorie Smith NH Democrat
“Look to the sky when estimating revenue – we need the money.”

“Look to the sky when you do revenue estimates because we need the money.”

-Marjorie Smith (D- Durham) Chair House Finance Committee 2007

One month after the supposed start of the ‘Great Recession™’ and just a few months after New Hampshire Democrats historic spending spree, a partisan vote of the General Court’s Joint Facilities Committee increased pay and benefits for 145 members of the legislative staff.  The hike added almost a million dollars on the backs of taxpayers at the beginning of an economic downturn.  More spending without concern for how we’d pay for it.  A trend New Hampshire Democrats would continue into the next session.  An attitude Marjorie Smith (D- Durham), the chair of the House finance committee, would frame with the words “Look to they sky when you do revenue because we need the money.”

Hang on a moment while I add a line to my check register that says I made an extra million dollars this year.  Oh look, time to go shopping!  Shall we proceed?

Read more

This seems about right – but he’s WAY too polite

‘Grok friend Chan over at Weekend Pundit has a quick succinct summary of Barack Hussein Obama’s 4 years: Despite the water-carrying the MSM is doing for Obama, the narrative has been shifting from Romney’s perceived ‘deficiencies’ to Obama’s failures, both foreign and domestic. His Middle East foreign policy has been shown to be a disaster … Read more

Notable Quote: A Lesson For Tax and Spend Democrats?

“…Despots we see, do plunder their subjects, though history and experience tell them that, by prematurely extracting the means of profusion, they are in fact devouring the seed-corn from which the future harvest of revenue is to spring.” -Thomas Babington Macaulay  

Remembering Democrat Rule – No Taxes Means More Taxes

In 2007 New Hampshire Democrats assumed complete control of state government.  And much like the Democrat rhetoric in the current 2012 campaign, back in 2007,  their first budget,  New Hampshire’s first budget over 10 billion dollars, was billed by the Democrats as a budget that “addresses our state’s priorities without new taxes.” Addresses our ‘State’s’ … Read more

Is UNH Using Their Letterhead To Play Politics?

A recent letter from UNH President Mark W. Huddleston, emailed to  persons associated with UNH, appears to be asking recipients to pressure (maybe engage and encourage is a better term) the New Hampshire legislature into restoring budget cuts made last session to the University system.

I have no issue with “Huddleston the activist” doing that on his own time, but Politicking on State University Letterhead?

That’s a no no.

Read more

Remembering Democrat Rule In New Hampshire – In The Beginning…

Tax Money down the toiletIn the 2006 Elections Democrats took control of the New Hampshire House for the first time in 95 years (giving them complete control of State government for what would end up being four years).  What happened after that must not be forgotten, for it is the doom of men that they forget.

They forget that the House Democrats first move was to turn budget policy on its head.  Instead of estimating realistic revenues so that the governor could have a guideline for his budget, they would let the governor request a 14% expansion of state government in February of 2007, to which they would pad or add their spending spree agenda items before figuring out how to tax New Hampshire citizens to pay for their wish list.

Read more

Share to...