More on him in a minute.

Late last year when a do-nothing democratic congress was winding down and bellyaching over what to do with the "Bush tax cuts", there was a lot of give and take going on so that our esteemed elected officials can go home for the holidays (apparently it's not PC to call it Christmas any more), and enjoy a brief respite from their overworked schedules.

As part of that overall package, one of the items that was agreed to, was a cut in the Social Security taxes paid for by your average everyday American Worker (those of us still left working anyways), from 6.2 to 4.2%. The tax cut was originally scheduled to last for one year and allowed us to keep about $40 of our own money.

Naturally, the democrats at that time hated it, and they still hate it. People keeping more of the money they had earned? It's, it's, it's inconceivable!

Too bad for them, or so I thought.

With the recent debt-ceiling debates and the hard line over tax hikes in Congress going the way they did, it should've been a safe bet that the GOP had received the message loud and clear; raising taxes, especially during a recession, was a terrible idea.

Fast forward to today, and new signs that republicans are signing up with democrats to jack our taxes (again).

Apparently Rep. Dave Camp, Ways and Means Committee Chair, didn't get that "tax hikes bad/people keeping money good" memo.

When asked about this issue recently, his office had stated:

"Tax reductions, "no matter how well-intended," will push the deficit higher, making the panel's task that much harder, Camp's office said."

What kind of mamby-pamby response is that?

The good representative appears to be taking a page from the democrats and utilizing his own unique manner of communicating. Using the democrats own lexicon, no less.

It should already be well-established that when money is taken out of the hands of government and left in the hands of those who have earned it, the economy is all the better for it.

That was the argument behind maintaining the "Bush tax cuts" in Washington.

That was the argument behind the MBT reforms in Lansing.

So why should individuals keeping the money that they have earned be any different?

Ironically, that fact has not been lost on Pres. B.O.

You heard me correctly, True Believers (I'd never thought I'd see it myself): Barack Obama is actually pushing against a tax hike and against republican opposition.

The House "leadership" is ambivalent about this tax. So is the Senate.

GOP candidates for President? Mums the word.

I'd like to share a quick quote I got sometime back from David Crocket.

"There is one thing now to which I will call your attention. You remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men - men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased--a debt which could not be paid by money--and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $10,000,  when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."