vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

5.07.2007

Uncertain times

Dave Janawicz, the Statehouse's police chief, sends out a weekly e-mail with the schedule of various Statehouse events. In this week's, he sums up the uncertainty of the impending end of the legislative session.

Saturday, May 12, 2007:
Anticipate Legislature to be in Session for
adjournment?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Sunday, May 13, 2007: Mother's Day
Hopefully CLOSED.

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 9:09 AM |

Comments:

Sooner the better! I wonder sometimes, if anywhere in the universe there exists a more incompetent group of people than the dimocrat/progs that make up the Vermont House and Senate majorities!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:36 AM, May 07, 2007

They will need to extend the session by a few weeks, so that the Brattleboro impeachment people can commence impeachment proceedings against David Deen:

http://www.greenmountaindaily.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1207

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:26 PM, May 07, 2007

It won't matter whether they extend the session indefinitely, it will still go down in the books as a complete fiasco.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:25 PM, May 07, 2007

The impeachment fanatics should start impeaching each other.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:28 PM, May 07, 2007

So says the Impeach Fuzz.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:24 PM, May 07, 2007

Screw impeachment - it just wastes
our taxes and does absolutely nothing for us. We need to concentrate on getting out of this WAR!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:48 PM, May 07, 2007

It would be a fascinating study to see, in aggregate, how much these impeachment people pay in taxes every year vs. what they collect in welfare benfits.

If we impeach the entire government, how will their welfare checks be delivered?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:06 PM, May 07, 2007

there's no case to be made for impeachment at all. those who advocate for impeachment clearly don't understand our consitution.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:07 PM, May 07, 2007

Oh, sure! Now just because I support impeachment you want me to read the Constitutiton?! I know what it says! It says, if we really don't like the policies of the current President, we get to impeach him!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:41 AM, May 08, 2007

The impeachment crowd - the sorriest excuses for human beings yet seen in Vermont. Can anyone say "soap"? Or maybe "read the constitution and then tell me what Bush is impeachable for"?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:53 AM, May 08, 2007

If you don't like your president, impeach him. Don't like your congressman - impeach him. Don't like your local legislator because he won't support impeachment of someone else - impeach him too. Don't like your mailman - impeach him. Just impeach everyone.

Meanwhile, in the real world, us working slobs will do what we've done for years - we impeach those we don't like - at the BALLOT box.

Get a life, take a shower, put on some deodorant, and make something of yourself. Try getting a job. And if you can't figure that out, pack up your yurt and head back to New Jersey.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:54 AM, May 08, 2007

Wow. The Right Wingers are showing their true colors this morning.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:33 AM, May 08, 2007

True colors =

1. Hard working
2. Productive
3. Contributes to the community
4. Pays taxes
5. Pays taxes
6. Received no services from the state

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:57 AM, May 08, 2007

interesting that no one is defending impeachment. perhaps those who supported it are coming to realize that it's indefensible?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:52 PM, May 08, 2007

Conservatives receives NO services from the state?

they don't use the state highways??

they don't send your kids to public schools??

You don't depend on the police to enforce the law?

Conservatives NEVER use 911?

Never use ambulances?

Never use Doctor Dynosour?

Never use a state park or a boating access?

If a conservative says that they don't receive state services, they are full of baloney.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:22 PM, May 08, 2007

Conservatives use the state services they pay more than their share for. They make up the slack for the underachieving leftists that amuse themselves by seeing how outrageously filthy they can be at their "sit-ins" and how obscene and dim-witted they can be in their vile blogs that appear in Seven Days and other far-left internet sites around the state. Just never enough time for them to work and pay taxes!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:02 PM, May 08, 2007

this conversation is just stupid.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:34 PM, May 08, 2007

any conversation that includes bubba's 12 year old mind is stupid.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:27 PM, May 08, 2007

This would be a far more meaningful discussion site if the right was represented by someone other than Bubba. His posts really are pretty juvenile, and they do a real diservice to thinking Republicans. Obviously, he's got plenty of free time on his hands.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:58 PM, May 08, 2007

yeah, Bubba. If you're always working so hard why do you have so much time on your hands to post on blogs?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:19 PM, May 08, 2007

Hey, How 'bout that Shumlin !

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:48 PM, May 08, 2007

So the latest on these impeachment slobs. Rep. Welch offers to meet with them at 9AM on Saturday and they complain that its too early in the morning. What do these lazy fXXXers do all day that makes it so hard to get up in the morning?

Get a job, get off welfare, take a shower, and get real.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:29 PM, May 08, 2007

Lazy people have way too much free time.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:57 PM, May 08, 2007

I am retired. For the leftist "anons" I will explain: years ago, people worked hard, saved some money, and eventually retired after maybe 30-40 years if they were lucky. I realize this concept doesn't ring a bell with many of today's youth who have moved to Vermont to live off the fat of the land, namely, those who DO work and pay taxes. Just thought I'd try to instill a little history into our modern-day "Vermonters". Oh, I forgot - Bernie promised you all a "worker's paradise, didn't he!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:19 AM, May 09, 2007

Actually Bubba, I seem to remember the slogan:

Jim = Jobs

What happened there?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:43 AM, May 09, 2007

What legitimate business would ever move to Vermont in today's anti-business, pro-tax environment? Answer: businesses run by contributers to the dimocrats/progs that are expecting to be awarded no-bid contracts paid by the taxes of the "little guys" in Vermont. These include mainly environmental or global warming scams run by flatlanders that know a bunch of suckers when they see them! Sort of like the solar-panel gurus 30 years ago that forgot to remind people that the sun just don't shine in Vermont.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:57 AM, May 09, 2007

Maybe if Douglas and Vemonters like yourself could come up with some new and innovative ways to reduce the tax burden and make the climate more "business-friendly," that would be a start. You're quick to point fingers but devoid of any new ways to generate additional revenue. And when it's suggested to tax increased profits at Yankee or a nominal amount on commercial property transfers, you scream bloody murder, even though these taxes do not impact homeowners at all. Are you familiar with the old saying, "People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones?"

By the way Bubba:
Were you a supporter of Bush's tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans Bubba? That was a good idea, eh?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:23 PM, May 09, 2007

Of course I support Bush's tax policies - not taking money from those that earn it - rich or middle class - is what has jump started the booming economy we now have (at least in 49 states). Did it ever occur to you that something is wrong when a state that ranks as the highest in the country in taxes also has the poorest pro-business reputation as well? 2,000 new jobs to Tupelo, Ms averaging over $20 an hour NOT INCLUDING benefits (Toyota) sure sounds better than EHV Weidman (St. Johnsbury) expanding out of state! However, Vermont will probably remain a third world state until all dimocrats/progs are removed from office. And we get a new group of young people to stay in the state that worry more about work opportunities than "what kind of benefits can the state give me".

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:12 PM, May 09, 2007

Booming economy??? What??? Where??? Are you referring to the stock market boom? If so, read this:

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/050307LA.shtml

And I still failed to hear any new revenue ideas coming from you. Is your plan to turn Vermont into Mississipi? If it is, you have a lot to learn.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:45 PM, May 09, 2007

The southern states are booming and Vermont is dying. Duh! Does that tell you something? I tried to explain to you that letting people keep their money helps businesses expand because people buy more! Duh! During the Reagan years as well as now, the treasury takes in more money because taxes were cut. Unemployment, by the way, is now lower than at anytime during Clinton's 8 years. The market is booming, even if you don't think that matters; as for Vermont, the state needs new business. Get rid of ALL environmental regulations and start over again. Get rid of all of the "environmental" and "social-worker" slugs in the state and start over again. Ban teachers from striking and double the teacher/student ratio; Eliminate ALL welfare, fire the workers, and start over again. But most important, Vermont MUST rid themselves of the leftist dimos/progs and start over!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:08 PM, May 09, 2007

Sigh... Why bother. Your ideas are as neandrathal as I expect you are. Keep your head buried Bubba. Is there a way to filter out your posts?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:15 PM, May 09, 2007

If I am so "neandrathal" why is Vermont RAPIDLY becoming the Mississippi of the 21st century?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:07 PM, May 09, 2007

Bubba has a point. You can't blame the bad business climate in Vermont on Douglas. He can only do so much. The Shumlington crowd convenes in Montpelier every January and starts raising taxes and trying to run businesses out of Vermont. That is NOT Douglas' fault. He can veto, but he can't stop the Progs-disguised-as-Democrats legislature from trying to wreak havoc on the business climate here. I can think of a bunch of businesses that have left, but I can't think of one that opened here recently. And d'ya think this most recent scandalous money-grab by Shumlin (against a business that doesn't even contribute to global warming, and which was already party to a tax deal with the state in 2005) is gonna entice businesses to locate here. Gee, I wonder.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:44 PM, May 09, 2007

Okay. So how would you increase revenue genius? And Bubba's idea to eliminate all environmental and social programs is not an option. Also, how would you provide tax breaks to businesses to draw more here without cutting into the quality of life that Vermont boasts over many, many other states? I'm waiting....

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:10 AM, May 10, 2007

"Quality of life" is in the eye of the beholder. Do states like Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia that have plenty of good jobs not have an equal, if not better, quality of life, with their ocean, mountains, and rurals areas, not to mention a far cheaper cost of living? How about Arizona, Colorado, and the rest of the far west? Since when does impoverishing people equate with "quality of life"? Vermont has a lot of good NATURAL qualities like many, many other states. Because a manufacturer or bank or computer company build there doesn't make a state unappealing! Vermont's "Quality of Life" is VASTLY overrated.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:26 PM, May 10, 2007

Whoa! Why do you assume we need to "increase" revenue? You start with a crazy assumption. How about we level fund the budget to the same as last year? Why does the revenue have to increase every year? Howabout we take a year off now and then from increasing the revenue? Then we wouldn't need to confiscate money, Soviet-style, from a business that thought it had a tax agreement with the State.

And maybe you haven't heard, "genius," but we already have a $29 Million budget surplus this year because tax revenues are higher than expected? Howabout if the legislature were to just accept that gift and call it a day? But, no, because the legislature wants to use that new-found money for other "stuff," they still insist on imposing a brand new tax burden on VY.

Bubba's proposal to eliminate all environmental and social programs may not be an option (I certainly agree), but between cutting some programs and wisely using the $29 Million surplus, we could easily maintain our current "quality of life" without having to impose a new confiscatory tax on an existing, tax-paying business.

How quickly we forget that the federal government actually shrank under Clinton. My quality of life didn't suffer.

Genius.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:46 PM, May 10, 2007

My family revenue doesn't increase every year. Some years it goes down. Guess what? In the years it goes down, I spend less. The State of Vermont should try that.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:48 PM, May 10, 2007

here, here!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:42 AM, May 11, 2007

If the Energy Efficiency bill is as critically important as Shumlin and Symington say it is, they should be willing to put their (ooops, our) money where their mouth is and use the $29 Million unexpected budget surplus to fund that bill, instead of a confiscation from a private compnay. But, no, they won't do that, because that would require our "leaders" to have the courage to tell the voters that we can't give you back the budget surplus money in the form of property tax relief, because we feel it's important to spend it elsewhere. No, they won't do that, because they don't have the guts. Instead, let's pacify the voters and find our money by taking it from an entity that doesn't get to vote.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:29 AM, May 12, 2007