Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pelosi on Unemployment Benefits Extension: Id rather not pay for it
Breitbart.TV ^

Posted on 02/06/2012 11:48:21 AM PST by Pacothecat

Pelosi: 'I Don't Want To Pay For It...Surcharge' The Rich For Doctors Visits and Unemployment Benefits

http://www.breitbart.tv/pelosi-on-unemployment-benefits-extension-id-rather-not-pay-for-it/


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: braking; communism; corruption; crushthedemocrats; democrats; eattherich; elections; fraud; govtabuse; healthcare; liberalfascism; liberals; nancypelosi; nannystate; nodemocrats2012; obamacare; pelosi; progressives; redistribution; richdemocratvoters; shadowparty; soaktherich; socialism; socialistdemocrats; socialisthealthcare; spreadthewealth; stealthewealth; surcharge; taxcheatparty; welfarestate

1 posted on 02/06/2012 11:48:31 AM PST by Pacothecat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat

she is the rich.


2 posted on 02/06/2012 11:50:09 AM PST by sappy (criminaldems)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat
What I want to know is when the FTC is coming after her for insider-trading.

Congress is covered by the current law. The FTC has said as much.

3 posted on 02/06/2012 11:54:05 AM PST by Joe the Pimpernel (Too many lawmakers, too many laws, too many lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sappy

Please Lord a 15 on the Rickter(sp?) Scale Earthquake for 15 Minutes Epicenter-Fisherman’s Wharf while she is in the district get rid of Her, Boxer and Feinstein and thier WORTHLESS District @ the SAME time!


4 posted on 02/06/2012 11:54:16 AM PST by US Navy Vet (Go Packers! Go Rockies! Go Boston Bruins! See, I'm "Diverse"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat

I propose the following. A 100% tax on every dollar a politician and spouse make about the base salary for their position.


5 posted on 02/06/2012 11:54:23 AM PST by Drill Thrawl (The damage is too extensive. Burn it down and start over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat

I musta missed that part in the Constitution that says “tax the rich and give it to the parasitic multitudes”.


6 posted on 02/06/2012 11:57:25 AM PST by traditional1 (Stay thirsty, my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

I just need 3weeks.

I’m leaving this hell hole for North Carolina for good with my family. California lost yet another taxpaying family.


7 posted on 02/06/2012 11:57:56 AM PST by sappy (criminaldems)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat

Whatever happened to “equal protection” under law?


8 posted on 02/06/2012 12:04:41 PM PST by tractorman (I never miss a chance to tweak a liberal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sappy
she is the rich.

Yes, that's one of her (and Warren Buffett's) talking points. So what?

We used to let charitable organizations help the needy when and where they determined help was needed.

But, since the SCOTUS decided "promote the general welfare" means Congress can do just about anything it damn well pleases, charities (and the accountability they naturally exercise) will soon be relics of a bygone era.

9 posted on 02/06/2012 12:05:42 PM PST by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: traditional1
I think it's a penumbra that emanates from the Kelo decision.

-PJ

10 posted on 02/06/2012 12:06:00 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (If you can vote for President, then your children can run for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sappy
she is the rich.

Yes, but remember, the "Law" does not apply to Dems. /sarcasm>

11 posted on 02/06/2012 12:06:13 PM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tractorman
Whatever happened to “equal protection” under law?

Not sure that applies here. No doubt the libs deem this to be more like the progressive income tax rates where the "rich" get to pay more than do "working families" (in Dem-speak).

12 posted on 02/06/2012 12:10:07 PM PST by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat

Years of botox use has finally destroyed what few brain cells Pelosi had left. Unfortunately she keeps on getting re-elected because the district that she represents are a bunch of far left whack job kooks. Hey Nancy, I got news for ya, you are RICH, I say we raid her wallet and just go nuts


13 posted on 02/06/2012 12:10:34 PM PST by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sappy

If you’re headed to the Charlotte region, might I suggest you locate just across the border in South Carolina? Lower income tax, no estate tax, lower property & sales taxes & lower motor-fuels taxes. Unfortunately, NC in general, and Charlotte specifically is being over-run by liberals, and they’ve never seen a tax they haven’t liked.


14 posted on 02/06/2012 12:10:51 PM PST by Be Free (Liberalism is a disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: traditional1
I musta missed that part in the Constitution that says “tax the rich and give it to the parasitic multitudes”.

No problem. That's why we have the SCOTUS--to show us what we missed!

Welcome to the oligarchy, where any 5 robed oligarchs can rule supreme over the unwashed masses.

15 posted on 02/06/2012 12:13:43 PM PST by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

It’s actually the Commerce Clause that is used expansively, but your point is well taken. It has given us the war on poverty and the war on drugs, which many here shamelessly support.


16 posted on 02/06/2012 12:18:53 PM PST by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sappy
Welcome, help us elect a republican governor and turn state bright red although Obozo didn't really win this state last time, FRAUD.
17 posted on 02/06/2012 12:22:10 PM PST by boomop1 (term limits is the only way to save this country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat

Hey Nancy!

You’re not rich because of superior intellect or inovation.
You’re rich because you are corrupt!

Why don’t we impose a 90% tax on folks like you?


18 posted on 02/06/2012 12:23:50 PM PST by G Larry (I dream of a day when a man is judged by the content of his character)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

What if the rich leave the country, Nancy. Then what? Because YOU are driving them out.

Hmmm? Then what?

Imagine all these people needing help ..and no “rich” to pay for it.

No middle class either.

Imagine it.

Nancy, you STINK. BADLY.


19 posted on 02/06/2012 12:47:44 PM PST by LibsRJerks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat
" Pelosi: 'Surcharge' The Rich For Doctors Visits and Unemployment Benefits " was not the published title and had to be changed.

Please do not make up your own title or alter published titles.

Thanks.

20 posted on 02/06/2012 12:52:49 PM PST by Admin Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sappy

Yeah, but since she “speaks lib” she gets a pass, or thinks she should.

Funny how these people impute righteousness on themselves.
[Real] Christians understand that our righteousness is imputed on us by faith in Christ.
Most religions of the world “earn” righteousness by their works.
And liberals impute righteousness by mere advocacy.


21 posted on 02/06/2012 12:54:55 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pacothecat

I like the idea of imposing a “congressional inverse tax” on members of Congress. It would work like this:

For every percent the tax rate of ANY segment of the American taxpaying populace is increased, the salary of each member of Congress WHO VOTED FOR IT and of each of their staff is reduced by like percentage. The only vote counted for this purpose is the final vote and excludes any previous votes on measures later amended prior to the final vote.

Conversely, To be “fair” and to provide an incentive for tax cuts, the same would result in the reverse, with a “twist”. For every percent the tax rate of EVERY segment of the American taxpaying populace (across the board) is decreased, the salary of each member of Congress and of each of their staff is increased by like percentage

So, for example, a 6% increase in capital gains tax (from 15% to 21%) would result in a 6% decrease in salary of each member of Congress who voted for it (and a 6% decrease in salary of the members of their staff).

Alternatively, for example, a 6% decrease in capital gains tax (from 15% to 9%) would result in a 6% increase in salary of each member of Congress WHO VOTED FOR IT as well as a 6% increase in salary of each member of their staff (those who voted against the cut, and their staff, would receive a decrease in salary).

For example, if the capital gains tax rate is eliminated altogether would result in a 15% increase in salary for those who voted for the reduction (and a 15% decrease in salary for those who voted against the cut).

This would apply only when a tax measure is actually enacted into law. If Congress has to overrides a presidential veto to enact such a tax measure, the President would have his/her salary increased or decreased accordingly (effective the date of the veto override vote). If the President simply signs the measure, then his/her salary remains unchanged and we thank him/her for cooperating.

This bold plan would mean that when Congress enacts a tax measure that benefits the people, they are rewarded. And, when Congress enacts a tax measure that harms the people, they are harmed financially as well.

I realize that most Democrats (and many RINOs) would never agree to such a notion (and the law of unintended consequences would probably be invoked in a way that would cause me to pull down this proposal), but it is fun to contemplate such a scenario.


22 posted on 02/06/2012 12:55:19 PM PST by Let_It_Be_So (Once you see the Truth, you cannot "unsee" it, no matter how hard you may try.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Be Free

Raleigh area, which I hear is fairly liberal, but that can’t possibly be more liberal than the Gay Area.


23 posted on 02/06/2012 1:44:09 PM PST by sappy (criminaldems)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Joe the Pimpernel

If that’s true, I’m sure the FTC has been told they will look the other way if they want to keep their jobs.


24 posted on 02/06/2012 2:07:15 PM PST by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
"No problem. That's why we have the SCOTUS--to show us what we missed!"

Democrat voters below:


25 posted on 02/06/2012 2:55:35 PM PST by traditional1 (Stay thirsty, my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Click the Flames

Your Conservative Source of News and Information

Abolish FReepathons
Donate Monthly

Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up!

26 posted on 02/06/2012 3:46:52 PM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson