homer1 wrote on Jul 7, 2008 6:41 PM:
" Brian is that you? Yo mama is proud of that name. "
notme wrote on Jul 5, 2008 10:28 AM:
" On this thread faase points out how the insurance industry is out of control and needs overhauling, and on another thread faase and others want to put even MORE insurance requirements on people, interesting contradiction.
I also like the "promotes the general welfare" quote, considering the courts have ruled consistently that government is under no obligation whatsoever to do so. "
tax-me-more wrote on Jul 5, 2008 10:23 AM:
" Interesting how some refer to the Republicans as "borrow and spend" but that is exactly what Doyle has done, borrow money for the roads because he spent the gas tax monies on other things.
Without freezes, where would our taxes be? Government already taxes 33%, I'll ask again, how much is government entitled to?
The suggestion that somehow politicians, regardless of party, are being honest gave me one of the best laughs I've had in a long time. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 4, 2008 11:57 AM:
" mullman71: You must have missed the movie "Sicko". You must have missed the news of those unable to afford or being denied health insurance or the lawsuits of those dying who are supposively covered. The health insurance industry is sick and needs an enema. While I do agree government should fix the things they can, its obvious to me that the health insurance services industry is in need of overhauling. The reasons I support a national health insurance plan is preexisting conditions being removed, it goes where ever I go, and everyone is covered. This service expounds on the premise that the government "promotes the general welfare" of its citizens and not the profits of those investors. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 4, 2008 11:44 AM:
" Myturn: Yes I do believe in what I'm saying. Even Reagan tried this tactic, but failed to cut spending. I've heard many times over the GOP cry to "starve the beast and the beast is government. This is how you make get government off your backs," as once spoken by Reagan in a speech in Iowa. So please, you must have missed these speeches over the years. The "borrow and spend" Republicans are doing more harm than good. The time to change course and be responsible is now. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 4, 2008 11:36 AM:
" enuffalready: Businesses pay taxes out of what they charge consumers whether they reside here or not. The difference is that out of state people also pay that tax too. Thompson change this by helping his contributors shift the tax burden to homeowners. Along with his accounting shifts and borrowing, the state remains in a fiscal mess. Guys like Mike Huebsch have yet to fix things, instead just wish to starve government of money needed. Republicans use "freeze, cuts, and borrowing" to starve government of taxes needed today by penalizing future generations. Examine each one of those words and you can see the shifting done by the GOP. Those who tax and spend today are at least being honest with you that government costs this much to run and aren't mortgaging the future on our kids or grandkids. "
mullman71 wrote on Jul 3, 2008 1:43 PM:
" kamikazefaase, Republicans have never suggested "starving government." We simply want our government to do what they are supposed to and stop the wasteful spending on "services" that people can do for themselves. For example, instead of the state taking over the healthcare industry (the private industry already provides excellent healthcare and insurance options are numerous) how about they fix some dams and other infrastructure in the state? "
Myturn wrote on Jul 3, 2008 12:50 PM:
" "If you starve government long enough" Come on Kami, you don't believe that so why post it? "
enuffalready wrote on Jul 2, 2008 11:30 PM:
" To Kamikazi:
Business entities don't pay taxes. The consumer (you and I) are the ones that pay the taxes for them. So if you raise their taxes all you are doing is raising your own taxes. "
tjviking57 wrote on Jul 2, 2008 5:25 PM:
" Counter Point you are the one that is wrong. I researched it and in the tribune an article that had Mike's comments in it he stated that was the main reason. Mike was opposed and held up the budget becasue of the cigarette tax. He did not agree with the dollar a pack tax increase on cigarettes. The money raised was going to go to educating poeple on the dangers of smoking and patches. Instead he held it up so my insurance can continue to go up because of the health costs of second hand smoke. Thanks Mike keeping working on health care for Wisconsin. Taxes on cigarettes is the correct tax. "
Vicky wrote on Jul 2, 2008 5:10 PM:
" Speaking as a resident of Holmen - yes, my property taxes have gone up in the last 15 years - BUT - we now have great schools (with another one being built), fantastic parks, a great aquatic center, many fine new homes, a safe community, etc...... I think my tax dollars have been well spent and I am proud of Holmen. Cheryl Hancock, as a school board member and resident, is equally as proud, I am sure. "
ryeguy wrote on Jul 2, 2008 4:42 PM:
" One reason property taxes have gone up over the past 10 years is that the republicans have systematically shifted the burden of services from the progressive tax based on income at the state level to the regressive tax based on home property at the local level. Mike H has been at the forefront in this effort, one which is killing the middle and lower income people and benefitting the wealthiest. The debate should be about HOW we tax. Freezing taxes at the state level has not frozen my taxes at all! "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 2, 2008 4:27 PM:
" tax-me-more: Because businesses, especially corporations since under Tommy Thompson, fail to pay their share of taxes, homeowners pay the bill. If these companies were to pay the preexisting percentage share, homeowners could have their taxes frozen for at least five years. In addition, if fines and other taxes like alcohol and tobacco were significantly raised, then the deficit the Republicans have given us would not require accounting tricks or delays to get things done. We are getting what we pay for every time Mikey has his way. No accountability, fewer road repairs, less protection or services, worsening of schools, poor judgment in hiring. There is a price to pay for starving government of its resources, especially done the GOP way. "
kegger wrote on Jul 2, 2008 4:22 PM:
" You all need to keep in mind that this was an interveiw not a press release by the Hancock campaign. It seems that the media is the one to jump on the negative train and I would bet that there was a lot more to what she said than what was quoted - just like her announcment, she talked about being a part of groups that have accomplished alot but the media chose only to quote the one comment that could be construed as negative out of 20 other comments and examples. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 2, 2008 4:18 PM:
" mullman71: If you starve government long enough like Republicans do, it cannot fulfill its functions. Therefore, unless Mikey wishes to address how government is spending its money, especially on his watch, while its suppose to fulfill these functions then he is just blowing smoke. He freezes local governments and school districts preventing them from meeting the needs of their people while pocketing contributions from outside his district. Hmm, I'd vote him out just for that reason alone. "
dmm wrote on Jul 2, 2008 2:38 PM:
" I know both candidates personally and they are both fine people. It is clear to me which one I will vote for but I have no need to discredit the other based on our differences. Can we for once have a race that is positive and not negative? I would like to see Cheryl talk about what she would do in office that would be positive, not just that Mike isn't bringing enough pork back home or bowing to Doyle's budgets. I would like to see Mike stress the good things he has done for the area and the State while in Madison, not just attack Cheryl as a tax and spender. Wouldn't that be a refreshing change to what politics has become lately? "
CounterPoint wrote on Jul 2, 2008 12:56 PM:
" TJVIKING, your memory does not serve you correct. Huebsch opposed over a billion in new taxes. I am tired of politicians who run on a "balanced budged" platform when their plan is to simply raise taxes enough to pay for whatever programs they deem necessary. We need some government spending control, and that is what Huebsch has tried to do. For Hancock to blame Huebsch for the late budget last year shows how ignorant and short sighted she is. I guess being in the top 10 highest taxed states is not enough for some people. Are the rest of you TRYING to run every business out of the state? "
diduknow wrote on Jul 2, 2008 11:41 AM:
" Disappointed in the headline. Did Handcock ask her quote to be the headline to her campaign? Why cant we have a campaign with a positive twist? It may be hard to believe but those in the public offices are people and they are trying to do their best. Huebsch should be running for Governor, he was helped us in more ways than many know. "
kegger wrote on Jul 2, 2008 11:32 AM:
" Who is using a smokescreen? If you read the article by Magney about financing in the 94th you see that Huebsch openly admits that he has been spending most of his time traveling around the state helping others get elected - is that what we elected him to do? Hancock got it right when wondering what has he done for his constituents? "
tjviking57 wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:06 AM:
" If my memory is correct the only tax raise that Mike Huebsch was opposed to in the budget was the cigarette tax increase. Why would you not support that Mike if you are so health concious? Again if my memory is correct that increase in tax was going to offset health care cost related to smoking. Education against smoking, patches to quit smoking etc. So before you are so proud of your stance on no tax increase in the last budget think about what your stance cost the rest of us insurance payors who don't smoke. "
tax-me-more wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:05 AM:
" Fourth, she is a double talker who does NOT support your constitutional rights. Just look at the guy holding the war protest sign. She says the schools are private property, thus he couldn't be there. If that is true, then any child ever interviewed by a teacher or HHSS on school grounds has had their civil rights violated as children cannot be interviewed on private property without parental consent. So Hancock supports violating our civil rights, or our freedom of speech, or maybe it is both, which ever suits her at the time? "
tax-me-more wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:03 AM:
" First, government already takes 1/3 33% of what we earn. I have repeatedly asked the same question and NEVER gotten an answer, how much is enough?
Second, a radical left PAC from out of state calling itself the progressive majority supports Hancock.
Third, as others have posted, she ha NEVER voted for or passed a budget that had a LOWER TAX LEVY than the year before. She has voted HIGHER TAXES ever since being elected to the board. "
Greenlite wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:52 AM:
" Hancock really hasn't done all that much as a school board member in Holmen either. I can't think of any new or innovative ideas that she or any other board member has initiated in the past years. They have all basically been puppets for Fred Frick. They did what ever he wanted them to do. She would go to a few state school board conventions, schmooze with others, and spout out FF stuff. "
Myturn wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:51 AM:
" The UWL system just hired a Chancellor that his previous bosses had a vote of no confidence and they were not aware of it? Thank Goodness for Mr. Huebsch. Gee, should 'someone' be asking questions of the sytem? "
Greenlite wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:43 AM:
" If the Dems are elected and have their way maybe I'll just not be concerened with working, and let the Government take care of me. I mean after all why should I bust my a_ _ all week to give half or more to Madison or Washington when I can stay home, watch the weather channel, let the rest of you Dems work, give your payolla to the gov. and I reap the bennies. Sounds like I'd have it dicked, man. "
The Real World wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:40 AM:
" We are headed for a very serious debt problem in Wisconsin. Doyle wanted a billion in new spending and if it weren't for Huebsch, we would have gotten it. Anyone who thinks tax increases are acceptable don't realize that it only leads to forcing more people into poverty. "
Greenlite wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:36 AM:
" Cheryl's comment on a balanced budget in Holmen is a smoke screen. The school board doesn't have much of a choice but to pass a balanced budget. They will either direct the school district to "cut", or they will raise taxes to cover the expected costs. Look to see what has happened to property taxes in Holmen in the past 15 yrs. Do you really think that Cheryl will change her colors if she is elected? "
Mr. Miagi wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:28 AM:
" Repubs such as Mike Huebsch should be grateful that their supporters are so close minded. All they have to do is say they won't raise taxes and they get support. People need to look at the big picture on some issues. A little bit of increased taxes can go a long way if they are used properly. Mike Huebsch is lucky he has such control over his support groups. There are many issues where Mr. Huebsch is just a puppet to special interest and big money groups, such as the tavern league. It's time to get with the program and implement the smoking ban that more than half the country has already done. Too bad that Tavern League has their hand in your pocket with that hole in the bottom. "
mullman71 wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:35 AM:
" Mike Huebsch nailed it in his reply. God Bless him for standing up for tax payers and doing what he can to get government out of our pockets and off our backs as much as possible. "
Mack wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:22 AM:
" No kidding. Huebsch is a model of the suckup to special interests that sold out America. It is so prevelant that it is now an issue in every campaign. "
Grant wrote on Jul 2, 2008 6:55 AM:
" I wonder if Mikes double dipping will come into the campaign?I just hope it doesn't "
Rickey wrote on Jul 2, 2008 5:56 AM:
" Repubs should be ashamed of Themselves the shape this country is in compared to 2000 "
Advertisement
