Friday, July 16, 2010

Impressions from this morning's candidate forum: Jim Moeller - "Candy isn't food."

.
I've got to admit, I've frequently wondered how it is that the fringe left can do what they do.

Well, I sure got a lesson this morning.

State Representative Jom Moeller (D-Vancouver) solemnly informed us of two different facts that I had never considered: the first "Candy is not food." The second: We have undergone $12 billion in budget CUTS over the last 4 years.

Utter nonsense, of course. When an item goes from not being taxed to being taxed, that's an increase.

No spin. No BS. Moeller's take was that, in fact, the candy tax that HE was entirely responsibe for introducing, wasn't an increase because according to Moeller, they had removed the tax from candy several years ago, and they were just "buying it back."

Seriously.

As for the fictional $12 billion, that one wasn't really addressed. What I know is that when I went to work in Olympia on Leg staff in January of 95, our biennial budget was around $13 billion.

Right now, it's arorund $35 billion.

It took us a mere 108 years to get to the point of having a $13 billion dollar budget. It has taken 15 years or so to triple that figure.

There can be no doubt because no other democrat from the 49th or the 17th had the guts to show up, that Moeller's presense was designed entirely to jam a stick in the eye of the Christian Chamber putting the meeting on... and he was doing it with a smile.

But his claims were so wildly inaccurate as to be worthless. His vituperative partisanship was a sickening display.

But the Christian Chamber is just learning. This was their first candidate forum. Maybe next time, they keep the d's in their own forum until at least after the primary.

With big government, massive spending democrats like Moeller, is it any wonder we are where we are?
.

1 comment:

Lew Waters said...

What most politicians never explain, when they mention "budget cuts," is that almost every time they announce a "cut," in reality, it is nothing more than a reduction in the amount of a proposed increased spending.

An example, a $10 Billion spending increase is proposed. $1 Billion is removed and they cry a 10% spending cut, hiding that in reality, it is, $9 Billion more is still being spent.