Talk of Lufkin

By Island_Guy

June 30, 2009 2:38 AM | Link to this

Sure…tax Americans again. Democrats! Obama! Pelosi; Speaker of the House! Energy! Smoke and Mirrors! More of the same old BS! Hidden Agenda’s!

Already, the US citizen is the highest taxed population on earth, and literally get nothing for spending such exorbitant amounts of cash.

Go figure! You make $50,000.00 a year. How much do you “take home”? Well, depending on most figures and deductions, on the average of half of your paycheck. About half of it, folks! You take-home 25,000.00. How much do your expenses all together and miscellaneous add up to? Now they have figured another way to screw the average taxpayer out of more? “concernedtaxpayer” should have something to add to this, and I hope she does, as I need help in this forum (positive or negative).

Seven votes short of the bill not passing. Too short a figure - too slim of a margin. Seems like the lobbyists get the gain once again with their perks and “gifts” to the voting lawmakers. (I thought Nobama was not to allow lobbyists to have such a big foot in the door anymore…but I guess it has not happened yet).

Seems even the “clean air” Act and energy conservation is being taxed to death. The USA is not going to get the message soon enough. The old “City-State Pyramid” is beginning to evolve. Go research!

By JBo

June 30, 2009 9:51 AM | Link to this

I’m not sure I’m reading this right.

Does it actually say…”This is a bad piece of legislation…?”

I think Greg Shrader is my new favorite person.

By concernedtaxpayer

June 30, 2009 11:10 AM | Link to this

Obviously I won’t make a snap judgment based on one editorial. In my opinion papers and editorials are to remain objective which this clearly does not fit the bill on that. As I have stated before a lot of our problems do have some pretty grounded roots deep in committees and their powerful chair holders. But voters ultimately shoulder all the responsibility and perhaps the only way to get their attention is exactly this way. When Congress and the whitehouse jointly make enough bad decisions driving our incomes to unsustainable levels, perhaps America will wake up. The President isn’t the only job that needs to be dealt with. Instead Democrats have used Bush to their advantage. Our country focused on Bush as the fall guy so the voters at large did not look to the entity writing the checks, i.e. Congress. Now I propose since our dutiful representatives were so consciencious when it came to how our Big 3 auto manufacturers arrived in Washington to beg for money, and seemingly putting on this facade of giving a darn for our planet. I wonder with such a focus on our environment just how many members of our dear Congress are driving hybrids? If we took stock of their homes, how many are living in homes less than 2500 square feet in size? How much energy are the homes that exceed this square footage consuming? Furthermore, how many have more than 1 home. At least one that I know of, Mr. McCain has 7. Concerned about the environment with 7 homes I highly doubt that. Let us not leave our president out either who to date only owns the 1 home, and conveniently when he decided to run for president decided to get rid of his Chrysler 300 in favor of something more palatable to the public, but his home is valued at 1.6 million dollars to accomodate 2 children, his wife, him and his mother-in-law. He uses Airforce 1 (which we know gets very good gas mileage right?) to go on datenight with his wife. And just how “Green” is the whitehouse?

Now under the premise since most of our elected officials are not really as concerned with the environment as they would like us to believe the light of this piece of legislation would lend more to the credence of the one thing we do know they put a high value on, getting money. There is another bit of legislation our entitled public are pretty much demanding which is hemorrhaging desperately in need of funds. That whole healthcare package they are trying to push through. Could this be some form of revenue for that project vaguely disguised as an environmental attempt? With any legislation though it is only as good as the people in office who carry it. It happened with the Great Depression era, the government instituting regulations and control measures to try and protect future generations from experiencing the same recessions they had endured, only to have the future generation spend decades deregulating everything for a more free enterprise system (they were probably just tired of living under the governments thumb). Right now because of greedy businesses, dishonest and unpopular republicans this is what America wants. We have to look to other candidates, think outside the box and vote for people who may not have the resources, power, money or positions our Republican and Democratic parties have, but who do not give in to the talk of the all mighty dollar and greed for their own succession rather than that of their country. There are men and women who for a fraction of a wage swelter in third world heat for causes they may or may not believe in fully aware of just how slim their chances of returning home are, while the men and women who send them there enjoy cushy offices and taxpayer perks with the ability to pad their own pockets by voting for their own raises. Senators and representatives should be paid a flat rate in accordance with how successful our economy is at the time they are in office. As a CEO with this kind of deficit and inability to pay back if they worked for a corporation they would have already been fired. We don’t make money right now so they should really be paid nothing for their services. That may be the only way to get people in there who are not chasing a money train.

By Dan

June 30, 2009 2:29 PM | Link to this

With all the new taxes generated from that cap N trade scam…or the National Energy Tax..

It should be plenty to pay for those crazy stimulus bills that were pushed through unread.

Looks like all that new money coming in could lead to some good abuse and fraud scam.

Thanks Obama and the d******* who voted for this b******.

By muscleman

June 30, 2009 3:41 PM | Link to this

Global warming is real and it is man-made.

By Island_Guy

June 30, 2009 6:57 PM | Link to this

Dan, for one…I did not vote for Obama. As an Independent, I did not see anyone to vote for this year. I will next time, though. I could care less if Mickey Mouse is on the ballot!

By Angelina_Citizen

June 30, 2009 9:02 PM | Link to this

Muscleman, prov eit

Prove is real. Don’t just claim that a bunch of scientist say so, prove it. It cannot be proven. The average temperature has decreased every year for the last eleven “NASA satellite data” that is proof. Even the most adamant climatologist will tell you it is a theory (a guess). So you have a group of morons passing laws about something that does not exist.

By Tom from Florida

June 30, 2009 11:00 PM | Link to this

Obama lies…

No new taxes for anyone under 250,000… well let’s start with SCHIPS, 32 billion over previous bill… to be paid for by an increase in tax on cigerettes. Guess the only smokers make over 250,000 (I do not smoke). Also according to the last numbers, 22 million new smokers will be need to pay for it… Obama better not quit smoking.

BE ABLE TO READ EVERY BILL for 5 days before a vote. Has this happend yet on any bill? Members of congress do not get that either. But it seems they do not care if they read it or not.

My house was built in 1914. It would destroy all it’s charm to tear it apart to make it energy effient. All the stained windows would have to go. And then how much energy would be lost to make all the changes, get them on site, install them, remove the old stuff and dump it in a landfill.

By AntonioSosa

June 30, 2009 11:22 PM | Link to this

It’s hard to believe that there are still people who believe in the global warming/climate change fairy tale! Obama and his accomplices obviously don’t believe it. They are ready to let companies emit CO2 as long as they pay! Some of the “dumbed down” U.S. population (as per Pravda), however, are ready to kill the economy to “stop global warming”!

When it became evident that the earth was not warming, Obama and his accomplices came out with “climate change,” which made the hoax even more ridiculous! Even the words “climate change” are NONSENSE. By its very nature, climate changes. The climate on earth has ALWAYS CHANGED and will continue to CHANGE, no matter what we do.

And it’s even more absurd to claim that humans are responsible for climate change! It’s like saying “Wet Rain” and then blaming humans for rain being wet! No matter what we do, rain will always be wet!

By concernedtaxpayer

July 1, 2009 9:08 AM | Link to this

They may be overexaggerating global warming/climate change, government tends to overexaggerate anything that will add more money to their collection plates. President Obama is nothing more than a pitchman for the government. He’s good at it, the people like him. Most of the people are too dumb to notice or just don’t care when he makes prejudice remarks (i.e. southernor’s clinging to their guns and religion, or the infamous retard remark both unscripted), or blatantly lies to them because he does it with such style and charm. He isn’t the only one lying or grandstanding. Ms. Pelosi has been caught in a few herself, and if anyone bothered to dig a little deeper, it would be a marginally impossible task to find even 1 member of congress not guilting of witholding information, lying or stretching the truth to get the funding they wanted for whatever their pet projects are.

I do not agree that a house built in 1914 should be torn down or modified right out of its original stature, that has managed to remain standing for almost 100 years, to make way for something more environmentally friendly. But there are unoccupied buildings around town and around our country which have been left standing usually with large tax abatements and they are empty and have been for years. The proper course of this to generate revenue and secure commercial property already in existence instead of giving them abatements, give them a choice of being taxed out of it or incentive to recruit business to this property we already have. Hurricane Walmart has cut down beautiful forest land, knocked down a few residential homes to not only make room for it’s store but the leach businesses that will inevitably line up beside it. All while the building they used to occupy on the other side of town, as well as the Albertson shopping center die a slow death. Walmart received a hefty tax cut to buy the property in the first place and then stuck the taxpayers with the million dollar man in road construction, when surprise surprise the road system on whitehouse and Brentwood wasn’t not near up to par to sustain the kind of traffic generated by the store. They could have purchased the Randall’s Clark shopping center or any of the buildings they had previously leased on the other side of town, instead it was more cost efficient to violate our planet further with this expansion. When the state or city wants to expand the roadways the owners are given the option of selling them the property, battling it in court (usually losing), or having it condemned and taken anyway. Anyone owning and operating a large empty shopping center that is generating little to no revenue for the community should have similar options, fill those buildings, sell it or lose it.

By hats off to Obama

July 1, 2009 2:47 PM | Link to this

It so refreshing to have a president who believes in science.

By Angelina_Citizen

July 1, 2009 5:30 PM | Link to this

What science? Back it up with facts.

By Dave

July 1, 2009 5:30 PM | Link to this

yea! political science