Why is that?

Why is it that the Christian Right reacted with such reverence to a man who, through thinly disguised humor, disclosed his prideful self-perception and espoused a worldview that counters the biblical witness? Are they afraid of Limbaugh? Are they afraid of his followers who pack their pews?

What explains the fact that Limbaugh can speak untruthfully, and yet he goes unchallenged by conservative Christians? He certainly spoke untruthfully at CPAC when he said that conservatives did not see other people with contempt. Yet he exhibited contempt in his comments about Senators Harry Reid and John Kerry.

When Limbaugh asserted that President Obama “portrays America as a soup kitchen in some dark night,” that he wants to destroy the United States and that he was fueling “class envy,” his untruthfulness went unchallenged. Limbaugh claimed, “We don’t hate anybody.” Yet he proceeded to speak hatefully about Obama, defending his statement that he hoped Obama failed, which was hardly endearing speech.

“Under legislation the House will consider, people who buy vehicles starting next year won’t pay property taxes on those cars. They also wouldn’t pay a sales tax they’d normally pay if they bought from a dealer. To replace those taxes, all buyers will have to pay a fee of 7 percent, up to a maximum of $2,000, when they title their vehicles. Georgians who keep their present cars will still have to pay the annual property taxes until they buy another one.”

My analysis assumes faithful reporting by Mr. Salzer, and I have no reason to doubt any element of his report. Mr. Salzer implies that there is partisan dispute over whether this bill is a “tax increase.” House Minority Leader DuBose Porter affirms, in unnecessarily prolix language, that it is a tax increase. (I would offer an observation about the redundancy in “politician” and “unnecessarily prolix language,” but Ragnars ought not hurl boulders within glass abodes.)

I infer republican leaders deny Mr. Porter’s charge, even though “Tom Rice (R-Norcross) said the bill will result in state and local governments taking in hundreds of millions of dollars more than they get now from sales taxes on cars sold by dealers and from the annual property taxes. Between $100 million and $150 million of that would go to pay for a new trauma health care system”

Several observations:

(1) Elimination of a property tax is generally a good thing, as wealth taxes are generally bad things. Here the current tax is routinely assessed against a rapidly depreciating asset otherwise often necessary for generation of personal income. Such a tax punishes a wage earner as harshly as the dilettante. I generally favor taxing dilettantes more harshly than wage earners, as the former do not contribute to the weal of society. So that is a point in favor of the general intention of the legislation.

(2) Georgians who keep their present cars still have to pay the tax. Thus there is no tax eliminated for anyone. That is a point against the legislation.

(3) Any change in taxation, that results in “taking in hundreds of millions of dollars more than they get now,” is a tax increase. That is a point against the legislation.

(4) Sponsors of the legislation justify it in order to divert $100 million of taxpayer monies on subsidies to the “impoverished” health care industry. What a crock.

I freely and fairly object to democrats who call wild spending a “stimulus” when it clearly is not. The appellation “liar” is appropriate in such a circumstance, although I generally refrain from applying same.

Similarly, I object to my republicans denying existence of a tax increase when a change results in hundreds of millions of dollars more than they take in now. I object to my republicans selling as “tax elimination” that which does not eliminate anyone’s taxes. I object to my republicans concealing corporate welfare for benefit of the healthiest private industry in the state.

Duplicities of this sort are why national republicans deservedly sit on the sidelines; their state brethren are slow learners pursuing the same path. Those pushing this legislation may not be “my republicans.” Who is running this burlesque?

“To compare Wooten’s blog to Bookman’s is like comparing filet mignon to sardines. You’ve got the sardines over at Bookman’s, lotsa them. The steak is here.”

Why didn’t you just say………. “Let them Eat Cake” ?

Well Churchill’s MOM…… You shouldn’t have gone there about the Younger Palin girl…….Remember they Paraded her all over the TV, and at the Convention……That WAS a Proud moment for the “Right Wingers” ! Now she is just like the rest of the “Knocked up kids out there”…..No Daddy for the kid……

Gee funny how that sometimes happens ? Too bad the Parents of this kid didn’t pay attention !