Monday, July 19, 2010

The Columbian's Moeller problem.

Lately our local cancer on our community, the paper, has done a series of articles on the moronic candy tax that just went into effect.

They've editorialized about it, shown the stupidity of it and the hardship of it.

What they've also done for the last several months is deliberately fail to mention the sponsor of that bill, one State Representative Jim Moeller, (Socialist 49).

I've mentioned that on a few occasions; it goes to the pattern of their leftist bias and their efforts to help their political allies by lying through omission at all levels, like their despicable efforts to rehabilitate Brian Baird's self-shattered image.

Compare and contrast that failure on the local rag's part with this effort in an article today concerning the re-implementation of the license scofflaw squad and efforts to identify those who live here while licensing their vehicles in Oregon to avoid the sales tax and other fees; a laudable goal to be sure.

But said story also included this little tidbit:
Early this year, state Rep. Jim Moeller, D-Vancouver, persuaded lawmakers to restore the program, which brought in far more money than it cost. Rep. Jim Jacks, D-Vancouver, was a co-sponsor.
It's not particularly rocket science to figure out why the scum at the Columbian cover for Moeller when his stupidity is on display and people would actually hold him accountable for his moronic "candy is not food" garbage.

It's because these leftists want to protect him.

It's just the tiniest bit odd, don't you think, that they not only mention Moeller as the prime sponsor of this bill, but Jacks as a co-sponsor? Obviously, when it comes to a bill most people would like while they REPEATEDLY fail to mention that it was Moeller's ability to "persuade lawmakers" that taxing candy and providing yet ANOTHER reason for us to shop in Oregon actually made sense, this rag will stop at nothing to keep the light of day from shining on these types of bills.

Why do you suppose that is?

Despicable scum.

Not Moeller. As a socialist, he can't help taxing everything in sight to help pay for his union thug buddies.

No... I'm referring to the paper, where they shamelessly huckster for fringe leftists at the expense of telling the truth... ALL the truth... and doing what they can to make sure they make it harder to hold the fringe leftists they like accountable. But then, I'm sure that Moeller was also one of the bigger cheerleaders for the B&O tax break these slime arranged for while the rest of saw our B&O taxes went up.

I'd say at this point that these slimeballs ought to be ashamed of themselves... but it's fairly clear that they're incapable of that ability.


Lew Waters said...

Moeller and Jacks both supported every tax increase we just received. Jacks, now famous for saying during the 2008 campaign about revenues, "I don't know how to fix it, I'm not a tax expert," has accomplished nothing but rubber stamping everything placed before him by the Democrats in Olympia.

He claims to have spoke to 50 businesses to see what they needed to recover, then proceeded to slap them with B&O taxes and work to destroy their businesses.

Moeller, when approached by me on drawing Oregon businesses to Washington after Oregon passed measures 66 & 67, slamming their businesses with job destroying taxes, replied he couldn't wait to do the same in Washington.

The only answer is to get rid of these two liberal/progressives in November.

Craig Riley and Bill Cismar are running against each of these two.

We have to take back our state and dump "da candyman."

Just a guy said...


Anonymous said...

Remember those famous words:

"The candy man can, the candy man can, the candy man can make the world taste good...."

Inspired from a famous 1970's movie... I'll leave it to you all to remember the full and how it applies to this situation... :)