Deep Dish Chicago Way
16 minutes ago
"Because Less Gub'ment Means More Liberty"
Dear Friend,I was motivated to dash off a snarky email retort that in all likelihood went to a blind in-box no one will ever read.
The so-called "Internet Tax" is an issue that many on our side of the political spectrum - the right side - are misrepresenting. The actual name of the bill is The Marketplace Fairness Act, and it is a common-sense solution to the unequal tax treatment of online retailers and their brick-and-mortar competitors that affirms federalism by empowering states to make their own revenue policy choices.
No one is in favor of piling new tax burdens on hard-working Americans, least of all Let Freedom Ring, but this bill does not impose any new taxes.
As conservatives, we must: a) ensure that all businesses and entrepreneurs are able to compete under the same rules on a level playing field, b) that the rule of the law is upheld, and c) affirm the principle of federalism.
Further, we should ensure the cost of government is not hidden from its citizens. The Marketplace Fairness Act addresses each of these conservative goals.
... et cetera ...
You are correct this bill does not impose any new taxes. But you miss the point. The bill imposes a punative compliance burden. For this reason it must not become law.==
If the Fed Gov really wants to do this, it should simply build the secure web service online merchants can call in real time to determine tax based on the client device's geographic location. I could reach into my LinkedIn network to assemble a team of half a dozen people to build the web service in a few months. I am far from unique in this regard. But, of course, as we've seen with the Obamacare exchanges, asking the Fed Gov to actually build something that runs on the web and provides a useful service is in fact an impossible dream.
LAS gay? Preposterous! All those years that kid mooched off my liquor cabinet - I must have dropped a hundred hints and he never once took the bait. And that cheap stunt calling in Dithers to do an interview is nothing more than theater of the absurd. Dithers might as well be a blind squirrel - he couldn't find his nuts if you drew him a map. Senator Graham is secure in his position as our high profile token.
The president was amazed that people did not read the plain language in the bill which bans using the background check information to amass a registry of gun owners. But he’s wrong. They read it. They just didn’t believe it.Memo to Barry: If you want to get things done in this town, it takes something they didn't teach you in Community Agitator school. Leadership. Like the Reagan-O'Neill (mostly Reagan) Pennsylvania axis in the 80's, or the Clinton-Gingrich (mostly Gingrich) Pennsylvania Avenue axis of the 90's. Still not too late for you to read about how these guys actually met face-to-face and negotiated in good faith and in private.
Like they didn’t believe that the requirement that only fiscal bills could pass with a bare majority would stop Obama from passing the health care bill with only a majority.
Like they didn’t believe that the ban on recess appointments when Congress was not in recess would stop Obama from naming National Labor Relations Board members without Senate confirmation while the Senate was not in recess.
Like they didn’t believe that the president wouldn’t allocate to himself the executive authority to pass the DREAM Act after it was rejected by Congress.
Like they didn’t believe that the feds would try to name ministers in churches, and so forth and so on.
You can’t abuse the public’s trust as much as this president has and then cry when they don’t trust you.