atl134,I guess you've never been to Saratoga Springs. It is a MIDDLE
class neighborhood, so any tax increase there will be on the middle class. And
money collected there STAYS there; it doesn't get redistributed by some
liberal plutocrat in DC. And I do not see where it would NOT affect any upper
class people who shop there, so obviously it is NOT just on the middle class.
Thanks for repeating liberal talking points, especially when they fit so poorly
as they do here. Not that they fit anywhere else, really, they they are
especially ill-fitting here. J Thompson,Judging by the bitter
old man's comment, I don't think he has ever seen the dem voting
record or bothered looking at their history. His comments tell me HE has never
risked capital on any venture, never bet his life savings on a business and
hoped it would succeed. He'd rather listen to those who preach class
warfare and tell him the other side is taking advantage of him, when it's
actually the dems that are making him more and more dependent. Utah
Bill,$600 to $800? you complain about that? really??
Re: "Fracking isn't harmless. It is already polluting drinking water in
several locations."There has never been a case of polluted
ground water caused by fracking.The closest a highly politicized EPA
study could get was that, it's still studying the findings [of a USGS
survey that did NOT find contamination in a Pavilion, WY well], but it thinks it
may have indicators that appear consistent with possible contamination by an
unknown source of aromatic hydrocarbons.Notice all the weasel
words?Fracking did not cause contamination of the only wells
actually studied to date, in WY, PA, or NY.How do I expect to have
any credibility? By sticking strictly to the facts.Unlike
disingenuous liberal activists.
I think the Matheson campaign should leave the tax thing alone. Knowing several
Saratoga residents, they are not upset with the tax rate increase. It is a
non-issue. Saratoga is quickly growing area in dire need of infrastructure. It
also has little retail businesses to tax. The people (not all but a vast
majority--are you listening Matheson supporters) wanted to maintain or improve
infrastructure and vital services. I think increasing taxes to maintain
infrastructure and vital services fits well within most conservative/Republican
ideals. Now Love has other areas in which Matheson's campaign could
attack, basically her lack of experience or tea-party views. But hammering the
tax issues is creating resentment in this district. Saratoga residents have
friends close by and all in all attacking Love on the tax issue isn't
working for Matheson.
@ procuradorfiscalRight. Fracking isn't harmless... Except for
a study by the EPA:"A 2011 investigation by the New York Times
based on various leaked EPA documents found that hydraulic fracturing had
resulted in significant increases of radioactive material including radium and
carcinogens including benzene in major rivers and watersheds"and
Duke University:"Water samples from 68 private water wells in
the states of Pennsylvania and New York were tested and some were found to have
extremely high concentrations of methane: 64 milligrams of methane per liter of
drinking water, compared with a normal level of one milligram or lower."Or the University of Texas which studied fracking in Texas:"fracking has resulted in environmental contamination"Or
when a well blew out in Penn:"A well blowout in Clearfield
County, Pennsylvania on June 3, 2010, sent more than 35,000 gallons of hydraulic
fracturing fluids into the air and onto the surrounding landscape in a forested
area. Campers were evacuated and the company"But you're
right. You stick with the facts. No evidence that fracking is negatively
impacting our environment. Yep. No evidence whatsoever. Once again,
if folks like you are voting for Mia, then heaven help us.
If you are one of those who will rely partially on Social Security when you
retire and don't mind retiring 5 or more years later than you had planned
to retire then vote for Mia Love.
To "atl134" what has Mia Love done that effects only the middle class?
My understanding was that the only significant tax she implemented was a sales
tax to replace all of the new building tax that came to a halt with the economy.
Then, the tax that she did implement was only a replaced the lost revenue and
kept the fire department and police departments running.Do you care
to explain how a property tax only effects the middle class and does not do
anything to the wealthy or poor?
I've got to hand it to Mia Love for her efforts to spin her image. For,
her record clearly shows she's not a Conservative. She significantly
increased the size of her city's government, she increased taxes three
times and even raised her own pay. If she wins (and it looks like she will)
it'll be one of the greatest image creations in recent political history.
@one old man,Would you like to be specific?Wasn't
it Obama who straddled you, me and everyone of the other 330,000,000 Americans
with an additional $16,600 in debt? How are you going to pay your share?Wasn't it Obama's policies that caused the NET income from the
average American family to drop by over $4,000 per year since he took office?Wasn't it Obama and the Democrats who would NOT stop spending that
caused our credit rating to fall which has already led to higher prices on goods
and services that we buy from other countries?Wasn't it the
Democrats who have refused to even vote on a Republican budget that has kept us
from having a budget since Obama took office?Wasn't it Obama
who told us that the Republicans could sit in the back of the bus?Wasn't it Obama who signed a bill stopping all drilling the gulf even as
he gave $2 billion to George Soros to drill off the coast of Brazil?It's not the Republicans who have hurt you. Start putting the blame on
Obama - where it belongs.
No, Mike. Many, if not most, of us on this side also believe in self-reliance
and hard work. But when we see the middle class being pushed and bashed
downward by the GOP and its henchmen and contributors, we need to fight back.
We need to fight back before the middle class is completely destroyed and unable
to rely on ourselves and our hard work.Remember, our productivity is
up tremendously, but our pay has not budged. On the other hand, what has
happened to the pay scales of wealthy who almost always contribute much less in
the way of sweat equity toward the money they pull in off the backs of those who
are actually doing the work?
Let's get to the bottom of this. A majority of the posters on this thread
believe in gay "marriage". They oppose Mia Love because she believes in
traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Yesterday, on the KSL Doug
Wright show, in a debate, Jim Matheson also told us that he believes that
marriage is between a man and a woman. Neither candidate in the 4th District
believes in same-sex marriage. Neither candidate would vote for same-sex
marriage. In the 4th District, the matter of marriage is settled.That leaves us with nanny government vs self-reliance. Jim
Matheson believes that somebody else should pay for college and other government
programs. Mia Love believes that we should each pay for all personal welfare
needs and that government has no role in doling out money to students or to
anyone else who thinks that government owes them anything regarding their
personal welfare.The choice is clear. Those who want somebody else
to pay for their sustenance will vote for Jim Matheson. Those who have a
back-bone and know that self-reliance is the American way will vote for Mia
This author suggests that "If she really wants to be courageous, she should
suggest compromise, ..."Is this the same compromise Obama
suggested when he said "We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They
can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."?A vote for
Jim Matheson is a vote for the US House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi. Yes,
when Mia Love is with compared with Pelosi she most certainly is a breath of
fresh air. Let's see what the voters think about her on November 6th.
@Redshirt"She said that before she ever considered a tax increase she
asked herself if it was sustainable and if it was right. "I
guess she finds them to be right... when they're on the middle class.
To "Dane Henderson" why should Mia Love have to run on a promise to
compromise?Think of it this way. If you had a teenage daughter come
home from a date and tell you that she and her boyfriend compromised on the
values you hold most dear, would you be proud of her or disappointed?As for Mia Love, she has some good ideas and good values to back them. On a
recent interview she was asked about tax increases. She said that before she
ever considered a tax increase she asked herself if it was sustainable and if it
was right. Right now our politicians ask neither one of those questions before
raising taxes or spending money.What do you think, do you want your
elected representatives telling you how they compromised with everybody or how
they stood up for your values?
@Mike Richards"Mike Lee, Jason Chaffetz, and Mia Love are people
of integrity."I'll give you that one, but let me press you
further - what has Jason Chaffetz accomplished in his four years as a
Representative that is of actual substance? Preening in front of Fox News is
not an accomplishment. I want to know what he has done for Utah and for the
country. He is now going to be my representative and I'd like
to know why I should vote for him. I don't see any actual accomplishments
out there to draw me to him.
Again, what has the good mayor of Saratoga Springs done to improve the
infrastructure of her city besides collecting a paycheck? Where was she during
the recent bouts of floods and cleanup? What is the real tax record of her
administration? She wants to take credit for balancing the city budget but with
a city manager isn't that on him? How many cities of Utah are running a
deficit? Not many? The only fresh air here is a gamble that Boehner and Cantor
will be elected so we can grind everything to a halt in Washington. This my
friends is deriliction not contribution.
"Then there's the illegal regulation of "fracking," an activity
that occurs so deep in the earth as to be outside of, unaffected by, and
unaffecting to, our environment. This is done solely to harass and increase
costs to the natural gas producers, again, at the expense, primarily, of the
Nation's poor."Try telling that to people who can now
ignite the water coming out of their faucets. Seriously, how do you
expect anyone to believe in anything you say when you state such ridiculous
claims like what you just said about fracking? How do you expect to have any
credibility?Unbelievable! If folks like you are the ones
believing in Mia Love, then heaven help us all... Please Jim Matheson, for the
sake of our children and grandchildren, please win!!!
Good letter, Dane. I'm very tired of hearing Mia love mindlessly repeat
Repub soundbites. As the debate hosted by Doug Wright showed, Mia can't
answer real questions. She just has well-rehearsed lines.@procurFracking isn't harmless. It is already polluting drinking water in
several locations.@Mike RichardsMaybe Mike, Jason, and
Mia are people of integrity. But integrity simply means being consistent with
your principles. If your principles are wrong, then integrity is not such a
great quality to have. Hitler had impeccable integrity. He told us exactly what
he was going to do, and he did it. That's why Mike, Jason, and Mia scare
me. They've told us what they want to do, given enough power. It would be
disaster. Obstructionism is bad enough, but if they were able to actually carry
out their plans, we'd be in deep sheep-dip.
Thanks, Dane. It's good to know that there are a few other people out
there who are able to see through the smokescreens to the truth.
Re: "Can you back that up with anything . . . ?"Oh,
there's plenty out there.Start with going WAY beyond their
Congressional mandate by calling CO2 a pollutant under the Clean Air Act,
permitting unsustainable regulatory burdens and causing untold misery and
expense -- primarily to the Nation's poor -- attempting to
"alleviate" what can't and shouldn't be alleviated.Go next to the aggressive and uncontemplated use of the Endangered Species
Act, not to protect animal or plant species, but to bludgeon industries,
necessary development, and military training into oblivion.Then
there's the illegal regulation of "fracking," an activity that
occurs so deep in the earth as to be outside of, unaffected by, and unaffecting
to, our environment. This is done solely to harass and increase costs to the
natural gas producers, again, at the expense, primarily, of the Nation's
poor.The EPA is simply too evil and too powerful an oligarchy to
permit it to operate unchecked as it has in the past. It should be eliminated,
but must, at least, be controlled.
Dane“We already have too many of those partisan team players who
have created the most dysfunctional Congress ever.”You’re talking about Harry Reid, right? You’re also referring to
BO’s political advisors who told him to back out the budget deal first
struck in the summer of 2011 because it made him look weak.“breaking up the big banks” uh, nothing broke up the
big banks, they are still intact.“support the president no
matter which one is elected” So every member of congress from
the beginning of our republic who ever voted against a sitting president got it
wrong? No, congressmen are to represent their CONSTITUENTS, not give a rubber
stamp to the president.
Mike Richards said: about Mike Lee, Jason Chaffetz, and Mia Love. "In
Congress, they are almost nonexistent."I agree with you mike, at
least jason and mike, but I'm sure we can expect the same from mia.By the way, when Obama is elected once again, what would be the purpose
of having another obstructionist elected? when We really need people who can
compromise to get things done. While Jim may be to right leaning for me he is
most certainly not a "party first, man."
A Representative's duties are listed in Article 1 of the Constitution.
Most people can read that entire article in less than ten minutes. Why not
start there?The Constitution enumerates a Congressman's duties
in Article 1, Section 8. Those enumerated duties are the ONLY duties that we
allow Congress to perform. All other duties are left to the States or to the
people according to the 10th Amendment. Unless you want Mia Love to violate the
Constitution, she is not allowed to do most of the things that the letter writer
suggested. Any person with integrity cannot "compromise"
the duties of her office. She cannot agree to do something politically popular
if that "something" is not an enumerated duty. People of integrity do
not compromise on anything that would require them to be dishonest.Mike Lee, Jason Chaffetz, and Mia Love are people of integrity. They are
rare. In Congress, they are almost nonexistent. Instead of chastising Mia Love
for being honest and honorable, she should be praised. Her opponent, Jim
Matheson, has compromised his integrity MANY times as he voted with Ms. Pelosi
to do things NOT permitted by the Constitution. He needs to be replaced.
procuradorfiscal said: "Because the EPA is evil and is destroying the
country it claims to be protecting."Can you back that up with
anything, anything at all, beside pollution lobbyist's who represent some
of the nations biggest polluters from your own county? procuradorfiscal said: "Suggesting Mia Love is not a breath of fresh air,
since she campaigns on a promise of avoiding dishonest, etc..."I
guess knowing the difference between fresh air and more of the same polluted old
ideas is why I can see the need for agencies like the EPA.Mia is a
recording of republican catch phrases, pull the string and a random quote or key
GOP talking point comes out.Mia seems like a nice enough person and
probably a good mayor of a small town, she's just not ready to represent
the bigger issues until she understands them better. We already have
jason and mike who don't understand much and just vote party lines to be
safe. Matheson's about 50/50 which mean he's at least thinking
about the issues.
"Because the EPA is evil and is destroying the country it claims to be
protecting."And you accuse others of being out of touch? Interesting.Why does Love attack college students and the
EPA instead of defense spending? Oh yeah, because folks from her party, like Jon
Boehner, benefit greatly from having defense spending dollars filtered to their
states for jobs. Even here in Utah, she wouldn't ever dare touch Hill Air
Force Base. Yet, what is it really? It's nothing more than government
welfare. If we shut down the Hill our country would be no less safe. Yet,
politicians from Utah definitely would fight tooth and nail to keep that place
open. Funny, she'll attack folks like college students but she
won't attack the out of control spending that her party likes.Also, we need to come to gripes with things like compromise. There's no
way we're going to erase this deficit off cuts only. Tax increases are
absolutely necessary. Anyone suggesting otherwise is COMPLETELY out of touch!I agree with the letter writer, repeating the tea party dogma spewed by
so many already is anything but fresh.
Re: "Why campaign against . . . the EPA?"Because the EPA is
evil and is destroying the country it claims to be protecting.Why
else?Suggesting Mia Love is not a breath of fresh air, since she
campaigns on a promise of avoiding dishonest, destructive, Washington-as-usual
politics merely illustrates how out-of-touch with real people liberal naysayers