Two points:
One, leveling the tax playing field is not necessarily always bad.
Second. $36 million in new 'fees' is not that outlandish. No taxes are welcome, but that is a drop in the bucket, relatively speaking.
Especially when compared to the tax policies of many well-respected conservative heroes I'm sure most Freepers would admire.
How do you like the "retroactive" part?
Also -- you say "leveling the tax playing field is not necessarily always bad". Where did you read anything about "leveling" the tax playing field? It's most likely he just taxed "the rich" more.
"leveling the playing field" would be if they repealed the AMT.
Read more carefully: the $36 million was just what out of staters paid in his first year. I heard that Mitt raised fees $250 million during his 4 years.