Thanks for Commenting
To put it another way, Tom Udall voted in favor of passing the budget bill, which contains some changes to the tax code. Steve Pearce voted against it. With two exceptions (out of 465) the vote was entirely party-line. The bill will be vetoed by the president and re-worked regardless.
Do you ever concern yourself with context at all?
Where's your outrage for Pearce's continued support of subsidies for oil companies?
Additionally:
"Is there any wonder that most people think Congressman Tom Udall is too liberal to be elected to represent everyday New Mexicans in the Senate?"
Have you really achieved such a high level of cognitive dissonance that you actually believe this in the face of Udall's 20 point lead in the polls? I understand that your goal is to help perpetuate GOP echo chamber memes like this but you might want to at least make them mildly believable.
Bills often contain "sub" bills that have nothing to do the the major bill.
When a senator or representative votes for the larger bill, and coincidently votes for the sub bill, they might not even be aware that it is there.
I understand that these sub bills can be inserted in the middle of the night before the vote.
In any case is it honest to then represent to your readers that that is really their position?
If so, then you should be toting Heather Wilson's line about how Steve Pierce is out to screw widows and orphans.
I'm having a little trouble with the rhetorical logic in this article. On one hand you say that,"Congressman Tom Udall wants to become Senator Tom Udall, yet he's voting to eliminate the 10-percent bracket for lower income taxpayers."
On the other hand you say,"We're talking about people barely making the minimum wage, and Congressman Tom Udall voted to raise their taxes."
In what way does eliminating a tax bracket raise the tax for the people in the bracket.
It seems like Udall voted to eliminate the taxes for people presently paying 10 percent of their meager earnings.
Would not having the lowest tax bracket "eliminated" be beneficial for the people most economically stressed?
If the working poor are not paying taxes, then how does this harm the families of the 14th district?
Liberals coming to power must raise taxes for the rich. Windfall tax should be an effective tool to motivate the finance industry to hold the market more stable. Short term gain is usually at the expense of long term sustainability. Short term gain for corporations should be discouraged by the tax code.
Supply side tax cuts have failed to pay for the monstrously expensive Republican war in Iraq. Given that and the tail end of a highly leveraged economic cycle, how do we pay for conservative big government?
Commenting by HaloScan
