DeRoche is the minority leader for a reason, and he is filling the role like it was made for him, at least the minority part. He plays no part in actual business and just criticizes. He's very good at that.

The Democrats did the right thing or arrogant Bishop would just continue to drag his feet to make the governor look bad during his run for governor. It's about time the House Democrats got some balls and stoop up to that arrogant ass. It's far too early to be campaigning for governor at the expense of the state.

It's sad that all you guys do here is pull for and cheer any bad news Michigan receives. You cheer every time the unemployment numbers are slightly higher or the same and when any job is lost. It's sad you're pulling against the state you live in just for political power.

If Michigan is such a paradise to live in under the Granholm/Dillon dictatorship, then why is there a mass exodus of people from Michigan and why are so many people trying to sell their homes???  I'll grant you that Michigan may be Socialist paradise for neo-communist liberals like you, Comrade Granholm, and Andy "Double Dealing" Dillon.  However, the majority of Michigan's residents did not vote for Granholm or Dillon for the purpose of increasing government spending and raising taxes.  

In fact, it is well documented that Granholm committed the legal equivalent of "fraudulent misrepresentation" when she flat out lied upon being asked if she would raise taxes during her reelection last year, which she unequivocally denied.  Granholm also committed the legal equivalent of "silent fraud" by failing to disclose that state government spending was already materially exceeding the budget one month prior to her reelection.

Let's see how the vote went, shall we:

Republicons absent: Patterson
Republicons voting against: Nancy Cassis, Alan Sanborn
Democrats voting against: Glenn Anderson, Liz Brater

Everyone else in the Senate was a go on the tax increase.

But it is funny watching you spin this new tax as a compromise when your boy Bishop likes it, and a tax hike when the Dems do.

Nick, it's so cute watching you spin this that if I was your aunt, I would squeeze your cheeks!

And to once again remember Jay Z's immortal proverb about arguing with fools.

Enjoy the rest of your Sunday!

You want to slam the Republicans?  Go right ahead.  It is DECEMBER- two months AFTER the budget was supposed to be adopted. The Governor's first lame attempt went down in absolute flames with the business community, not to mention the fact that it would have cost more to implement than the State would collect.  There's some great planning. What do the residents of this battered state get?  More dodging of responsibilities by the House Majority Leader.

I can hardly wait to see what you Democrats come up with for new taxes for the next budget, because you're going to need it.  Property values are declining, and Oakland County is already looking at a $5 million decline in property tax revenues.  How many more millions of dollars will be lost due to declining property values?  Businesses will close as a result of this ridiculous super tax-on-tax just passed, which will decrease sales and SBT tax revenues. So you and your feckless leader will have an even deeper hole to dig out of.  

Did you hear about the cross dresser executive order Granholm signed over the weekend?  Probably not.  State workers can now cross dress to work.  Very classy.  And just in time to put a huge smile on your boy John Stryker.

Do me favor, every time you get your paycheck pending your employed, remember what Granholm said in the free press, your money is not yours, its mine and the governments money.  

All except Patterson, Cassis, and Sanborn.  Patterson was absent.

House Republicons: Amos, Gaffney, Nofs, Palsrok, Ball, Wenke, Calley, and Rocca.

Also missing your condemnation of this new increase.

Still, like I said, slice it how you want, but a new surcharge on the MBT is still a hike compared to the tax structure prior to October.  Bishop allowed the vote on the hated service tax to begin with knowing it would pass (not to mention the income tax, which I seldom hear you guys crying about, and the Senate Republicons approved a budget that used every penny that is coming from the new taxes.  In other words: Increased spending.

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/business-14/119651334237350.xml&storylis t=newsmichigan&thispage=1

"The surcharge is expected to replace the entire $600 million in revenue the service tax would have raised in the 10 months remaining in this fiscal year, an amount that's expected to increase to around $750 million in the next full fiscal year."

by djtyg on Tue Dec 04, 2007 at 08:54:02 AM EST

Still, that would be in contrast to this article:
http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/business-14/119651334237350.xml&storylis t=newsmichigan&thispage=1

"The surcharge is expected to replace the entire $600 million in revenue the service tax would have raised in the 10 months remaining in this fiscal year, an amount that's expected to increase to around $750 million in the next full fiscal year."

$750 million.  Increase.

Ummm.  I think you need to learn to read, dude.  "expected to increase to around $750 million..."

Some fine points:

1. expected
   
2. increase to

But your argument is saying that an increase in revenue means it's a tax increase.

That's like saying President Bush's or Reagan's across-the-board tax cuts (which led to the largest revenues in their histories) were in fact tax increase, specifically because they generated more revenue.  This is patently absurd.  

Or your reasoning is flawed and your ability to read diminished.  Either way, it casts doubt on your other conclusions (like "Republicons" being Evil, and Bishop is some bad guy).

Someone who can't look at a single sentence that they quote, and understand what it's saying just shows the absurdity of their argument.

Anything to attack Republicans, you partisan hack.  

Detroit give tax breaks to Quicken, drops property taxes, gives significant incentives to business.  Yet nobody wants to do business in Detroit.  Granholm wants to give people breaks that buy homes that can't afford, but wait, residents are unemployed because of Clintons NAFTA.  SHAFTA NAFTA!  If Granholm can give tax breaks to Toyota, why not Big 3?