Comments on: Cantwell, Murray explain yes votes on tax deal

By: seabecker

seabecker — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 21:16:19 +0000

“… the [sales tax] deduction has put an average of $600 more per year in the pockets of Washington state taxpayers.”

Your bias is showing. Why not say, “… the deduction has saved an average of $600 more per year from being taken out of the pockets of Washington state taxpayers.”?

Such deductions do NOT put anything into our pockets, they keep the gov’t from picking our pockets as much as they’d like.

By: bradypaul

bradypaul — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:24:28 +0000

++++++
Murray said. “Extending benefits to those who need them least and adding to our deficit is wrong.
++++++

Allowing someone to keep the money they’ve earned is not “extending benefits”.

Murray’s ignorance never ceases to amaze me.

By: TheMASO

TheMASO — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 02:42:16 +0000

…and Cantwell is up for re-election–a worthy motive!!!

By: uratroll

uratroll — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 01:47:11 +0000

Can’t believe Murray was reelected. Ugh!

By: DubyaFTW

DubyaFTW — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 01:01:31 +0000

Murray and Cantwell know tax increases in a recession are disasterous, but keeping taxes the same changes nothing. The reason they support them is because they and the media have been saying “tax cuts” for two years, which they are not. Soon, they’ll be able to say, “See, tax cuts for the rich didn’t stimulate the economy! We told you so!”, while avoiding the wrath of the electorate if they were to throw us into double-dip recession with more taxes.

By: AreYouHighOrWhat

AreYouHighOrWhat — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:27:01 +0000

SERIOUSLY? I expect the apologist Les to offer up a pile like this, I expect SOMEONE at the TNT to at least have some class about what they print. It’s WELL DOCUMENTED all over the internet, Cantwell sold her vote (and Murrays) for renewable energy credit earmarks. Disgusting. Unamerican. Repulsive. Just like the ethanol subsidies tagged onto the bill.