Pastoral Resources

Look, only in Washington is not raising taxes considered a tax cut. Nobody's getting a tax cut here. We're not cutting taxes. We're preventing tax increases from occurring.

One would expect that private property taken by eminent domain would become land available for public use such as parks and roads. Unfortunately, this decision creates a loophole for government to manipulate the definition of public use simply to generate greater tax revenue.

I doubt God would want to touch America's tax code, since it is already located in the third rung of Hell.

Small businesses are the backbone of job creation in South Carolina, but we're not maximizing our potential when we've got what's effectively the highest income tax rate in the Southeast holding us back.

The real reason to oppose increasing tax rates on the wealthy is that it's a good bet they could do more to help the economy if they keep their money rather than have their earnings confiscated by the government and spent on another round of stimulus.

Driving with one foot on the accelerator and the other on the brake is likely to get you nowhere, but certainly will burn out vital parts of your car. Similarly, cutting taxes on the middle class, but increasing them on the 'rich' is likely to result in an economic burnout.

But only 'rich' people by definition have the 'extra' money to buy things and invest to create economic growth. Do we really want to tax that 'extra' money away - and give it to the government to spend? Does that make any economic sense outside of politics and our emotional desire to make everyone suffer equally through these tough times?

We're going to look awfully stupid if we give income tax relief to people who do not pay income taxes.

Reducing the tax burden is necessary to produce economic growth.

The Iraq war was fought by one-half of one percent of us. And unless we were part of that small group or had a relative who was, we went about our lives as usual most of the time: no draft, no new taxes, no changes. Not so for the small group who fought the war and their families.

We have points in common with the FDP, particularly when it comes to tax.

We certainly could have voted on making the middle-class tax cuts and tax cuts for working families permanent had the Republicans not insisted that the only way they would support those tax breaks is if we also added $700 billion to the deficit to give tax breaks to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. That's what was really disturbing.

President Obama is making the tough decisions to get our country going in the right direction, has taken our economy from job losses to 15 straight months of job gains, cut taxes 26 times, and focused like a laser on getting the middle class back on its feet while those campaigning to replace him have failed to show they can lead on these issues.

Voters did say 'repeal health care,' they did say 'reduce the size of government.' But not a single one of them from the tea party or anywhere said 'give tax breaks to the wealthiest.'

We can push Montana forward and we can do it with out raising taxes.

I think we should worry about Social Security first and then tax cuts second.

If we increase spending, we have got to raise taxes or any combination.

I like to say I'm more conservative than Goldwater. He just wanted to turn the clock back to when there was no income tax.

Moreover, from reforming the tax code to our immigration system, to commonsense legal reform, President Bush put America on notice that he will continue fighting to make the country, and the world, a better place for future generations.

Sadly, this is the same old Republican story of Robin Hood in reverse - tax cuts for the rich while programs for average and low income Americans suffer.