Posted on 10/28/2003 12:00:20 PM PST by happydogdesign
Support Making the Internet Tax Moratorium Permanent! Some Senators want states to tax your internet!
The Senate is poised to pass historic taxpayer protection legislation this week. S. 150, the Internet Non-Discrimination Act will permanently extend the current Internet access tax moratorium. Unfortunately, the bill is being held up by a few misguided Senators. While opponents of the permanent Internet tax moratorium claim that the bill imposes significant costs on the states, the true agenda is to tax the Internet. Passage of the Internet Non-Discrimination act represents an important first step in keeping the Internet tax-free. If these Senators are successful in killing the bill, states and localities will be able to begin taxing everything that is available through the Internet, including e-mail, all sales and services, and even parental filtering software.
Some states are hoping to raise taxes on Internet services immediately upon expiration of the existing moratorium on November 1st!
(Excerpt) Read more at stopinternettax.org ...
Recall their A$$es!!!!!!
I know I would have. Springer would be easier to get rid of in 6 years. Maybe if these idiots start losing some elections the state parties would stop offering up these RINO's for elected office.
"Please tell me that Voinabitch isn't, once again, wanting to enable someone to take more of my money.
I swear I will be voting for whoever runs against him next year.
And no, I don't care if it "gives" the senate back to the dems because they already run the place and I want this RINO off of my payroll."
Your sentiments about your RINO "Voinabitch" reflect mine for our two RINO Senators from Maine; Susan COLLINS and Olympia SNOWE, who not only voted to aquit Boss Klintoon but recently voted in opposition to the "Partial Birth Abortion" ban.
SNOWE was the one who essentially held the Federal Budget hostage and would not let it pass through her powerful Finance Committee until President Bush caved in and let her cut the tax relief package in half.
I think that she really wanted to scuttle the whole idea, but it was a "compromise" of sorts, apparently.
We get the impression that Sen. O'SNOWE never saw an abortion or a tax she didn't like.
Somewhat to their credit, they both voted against the pay-raise. I rather suspect, though, that they knew that it was a done deal, and have been known to throw Reganesque Republicans a bone now and then with a token vote on issues of minor import.
But the Democrats and "Progressives" still end up with most of the meat from Maine's table.
My nose still hurts, I had to hold it so hard when I voted "R" the last time we re-elected SNOWE - but the Senate Majority depended on it, even though she is the only Candidate the Maine Republican Party ever will support or elect to that seat as long as she wants it.
A few Maine Conservative dissidents have tried to oppose her in a Primary, but they might just as well go a-hunting grizzley bear with a sling-shot.
And as you allude to, even the Republican "Majority" is a moot point now.
"Jumpin' Jim" JEFFORDS voided the majority from the 2K Election with his treason (hear that, Jim; "TREASON"), and currently although Dems only have to have a 51% grasp on the Senate to weild majority control, 'Pubbies have to control 67% of the Seats in order to do the same - since that's what is required for "Cloture" to break the fillibuster Dems threaten every time a Bill, Judicial Nominee, or issue comes up that they disaprove of for whatever reason.
No doubt the "Progressives" in both Parties would tell us that "It's only FAIR!".
And by the way; the term "control" of Senate seats applies a whole lot more to one Party than it does to the other, does it not?
So until and unless the GOP can pull off getting 67 or more REAL REPUBLICANS (which the RINOS will tell us they ARE, having redefined the term as successfully as the ANSWER and ACLU crowd have redefined "Patriot") we will ever be in minority status - or at least cower and act as if we were.
I really had much higher hopes for Dr. Bill FRIST than this when I advocated for his appointment as "Majority" (yeah; right!) "leader".
Might we wonder if Hellary has a goodly chunk of him in her grisley trophy collection as well as cuttings from "Nute", "Torch" Toricelli and "Beam Me Up" Jim TRAFFICANT? (Demo-Dissidents).
Did anyone hear Jimmy T. cry "I said 'Beam me UP, Scotty; not 'Beam me IN (to JAIL) Hillary!" as they led him away in chains?
And we're not talking "scalps" here, gentle reader.
As far as I know, the Queen never was required (or even asked) to return any of those (what; 700 or so) FBI dossiers she aquired from the FBI back when she was behind the throne (as opposed to Monica, who seems to have crouched UNDER it).
Would it surprise you any if her Klinton-Appointed moles still ensconced deep within the bowels of the FBI have kept her stolen files well updated, and added to her collection from time to time?
Or if anyone in Congress might be so imprudent as to resist her Parties overtures, would it surprise you terribly if they got a phone call some dark night detailing whatever dust-bunnys and mouse skeletons thier private closets might hold, and what a party said "secrets" might have should said dissident fail to see the error of their ways and reconsider their positions on the issue?
You might be.
I, quite frankly, would not.
To date I have not heard how our two esteemed Senators from Maine have voted on this issue, but I would fully expect them to be taking their marching orders and showing their loyalty to Tom, Teddy and Hellary, rather than FRIST or BUSH.
At lest SNOWE can usually be relied upon to champion the Socialist cause; COLLINS occasionally splits from her lead, but not all that often, it seems.
If anyone knows, let us in on it, won't you?
Did you hear Dr. Allan KEYES speak just before the CA Re-call election on behalf of McCormack (?), the Conservative Candidate who was summarily abandoned by the GOP in favor of the much more "viable" Arnold?
He said something to the effect of any Pro-Abortion Candidate who wins will not do so with the help of his vote, and any Pro-Life Candidate who loses will not do so because of his lack of support.
I still like that man!
And suffice it to say that the good Ambassador did not lose the last Presidential Republican Primary because of your humble correspondant's lack of support or vote.
This Internet thing is much too fat a cash-cow for our tax-and-waste Politicians to leave alone forever, you know. It's probably only a matter of time before we see little "User Fees" or "Federal Internet Connection Assessments" and "State E-Mail Charges" to "Wire the Schools to the Internet" and such appearing on our ICP bills.
Much as we are still paying to hook up the telephone connections to the Congress and White House during the Spanish-American War, we (and our Descendants as long as Civilization shall endure) will be paying to hook our Schools up the the Internet long after we are dust and bones.
It's for the Children, don't we know.
This is a serious restriction on free speech. Even if your state doesn't choose to tax the internet, you could still get stuck with taxes, and you will have no say in it.
You probably remember him following Al Gore around like a puppy dog in early 2001 before he ran for Senator.
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.