Liberty MavenObama asks, “Who are you going to believe, me or that lying dictionary?”
November 13th, 2009 12:39 pm | by Mike Miller | Published in Big Government, Environment, Market Regulation, Obama, Politics, Taxes, law | 4 Responses
D o w n s i z e r – D i s p a t c h
The “cap and trade” bill will supposedly limit CO2 emissions. But it’s really a giant tax increase, mostly on the middle class. This violates promises President Obama and the Democrats made to get elected. The President even wants to redefine the word “tax” in order to hide the fact that he’s breaking his promise (see my letter to Congress below).Please send Congress a letter opposing the “cap and trade” tax increase.
You can copy or borrow from my letter to write your own . . .
I’m tired of being lied to by scheming, busybody politicians. President Obama and the Democrats promised there would be NO new taxes on the middle class. But everywhere I look I see middle class tax increases.
The healthcare bill is full of them, and the cap-and-trade bill is NOTHING BUT a middle class tax increase. It will raise my gasoline and electric bills to accomplish a supposed public purpose (as defined by you guys). That’s a tax, by any definition (except a politician’s).
I’m tired of you guys playing fraudulent word-games to avoid responsibility for your actions. For example, I’m offended by this ABC interview from September 20 between George Stephanopoulos and President Obama:
STEPHANOPOULOS: “I don’t think I’m making it up (that you’re going to raise taxes). Merriam Webster’s Dictionary: ‘Tax: a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes.’”
OBAMA: “George, the fact that you looked up Merriam’s Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you’re stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition.”
This is evidence that moral rot has taken hold with the President.
Does he believe that words should be defined to suit his personal needs, instead of by common usage as reflected in an authoritative dictionary?
- The “cap and trade” scheme is for a public purpose (as defined by you guys)
- It will cost me more money, therefore . . .
- It’s a tax — a tax INCREASE that the middle class will have to pay in violation of the promises we were made
I know you folks don’t read your bills, and neither you nor I can be certain that your staffs are really telling you everything you ought to know about the legislation you pass, so maybe you should read this post by Declan McCullagh at CBS News.
The “cap and trade” scheme could cost American families $1,761 a year – equivalent to a 15% income tax increase! Your staffs should also brief you on the European experience with “cap and trade.” It hasn’t capped emissions — they’ve grown instead. Cap-and-trade is both a failure and a tax increase.
Look, I have to be frugal during hard times. But I can’t do that if you guys increase my taxes. Stop breaking my budget! Scrap the “cap and tax” bill!
END OF SAMPLE LETTER
Send your letter to Congress here.
Please take additional steps to spread the word, recruit more DC Downsizers, and increase the heat on Congress:
- Ask other people to send a letter to Congress — forward them this message (be sure to clip off the Dispatch footer when you do)
- Digg this message on our Blog: http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/cap-and-trade-obama-asks-quot-who-are-you-going-to-believe-me-or-that-lying-dictionary-quot
- Start a monthly pledge so we can reach more people https://secure.downsizedc.org/contribute
- Make a one-time donation to further our work https://secure.downsizedc.org/contribute
Your support is our progress.
Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.
is the official email list of DownsizeDC.org, Inc. & Downsize DC Foundation
Follow LM on Twitter
November 13th, 2009 at 7:28 pm (#)
I'v been contacting my Reps on the Scam for a while now. This is one email response I'v gotten back.
As a U.S. Senator and as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, I have a responsibility to review proposed treaties to ensure that they preserve and advance our national interest.
On June 26, the House narrowly passed the legislation by a vote of 219 to 212. The full Senate has yet to consider this legislation.
I am opposed to any sort of system to cap carbon emissions permits because it is an unwarranted tax increase on the American people.
In addition to the cost, some have expressed concerns regarding what impact an international agreement could have on U.S. sovereignty. Be assured, I take my responsibility to uphold the Constitution very seriously and will not support efforts that threatens our sovereignty. I will keep your views in mind as debate on this important issue continues. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can ever be of assistance.
November 13th, 2009 at 7:28 pm (#)
I'v been contacting my Reps on the Scam for a while now. This is one email response I'v gotten back.
As a U.S. Senator and as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, I have a responsibility to review proposed treaties to ensure that they preserve and advance our national interest.
On June 26, the House narrowly passed the legislation by a vote of 219 to 212. The full Senate has yet to consider this legislation.
I am opposed to any sort of system to cap carbon emissions permits because it is an unwarranted tax increase on the American people.
In addition to the cost, some have expressed concerns regarding what impact an international agreement could have on U.S. sovereignty. Be assured, I take my responsibility to uphold the Constitution very seriously and will not support efforts that threatens our sovereignty. I will keep your views in mind as debate on this important issue continues. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can ever be of assistance.
November 13th, 2009 at 7:28 pm (#)
I'v been contacting my Reps on the Scam for a while now. This is one email response I'v gotten back.
As a U.S. Senator and as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, I have a responsibility to review proposed treaties to ensure that they preserve and advance our national interest.
On June 26, the House narrowly passed the legislation by a vote of 219 to 212. The full Senate has yet to consider this legislation.
I am opposed to any sort of system to cap carbon emissions permits because it is an unwarranted tax increase on the American people.
In addition to the cost, some have expressed concerns regarding what impact an international agreement could have on U.S. sovereignty. Be assured, I take my responsibility to uphold the Constitution very seriously and will not support efforts that threatens our sovereignty. I will keep your views in mind as debate on this important issue continues. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can ever be of assistance.
November 13th, 2009 at 7:42 pm (#)
Thanks for the comment!
Which Senator gave you that reply?