The Grinch who taxed Christmas

**Posted by Phineas

I knew Obama was desperate for revenue — any revenue– but taxing Christmas trees to pay for programs to “improve their image?”

Somehow, call me crazy, but I think a Christmas tree has a much better public image than our president.

via Baseball Crank.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

7 Responses to "The Grinch who taxed Christmas"

Carlos says:

November 8, 2011 at 10:49 pm

Face it, Phineas, the Grinch has a better public image than the president.

So do the banana slug and weasel.
Deedee says:

November 8, 2011 at 11:05 pm

Leave it to a brain dead liberal (but I repeat myself) to create a tax on the sale of a product that sells just fine, to fund a study on why the product sells.
STUPID.
Zachriel says:

November 9, 2011 at 9:02 am

Sigh.

“the Christmas tree industry has been working since 2008 — before President Obama was elected — to partner with the Department of Agriculture and establish a marketing campaign funded by tree growers in order to promote the sale of fresh Christmas trees.”
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201111090001
Drew says:

November 9, 2011 at 11:26 am

You are so full of it, Carlos. The President has a much greater approval rating than banana slugs and weasels.

Now, ticks and cockroaches……that’s different :d

And Zach – you do understand the difference between privately funded and a tax, right?
Carlos says:

November 9, 2011 at 1:13 pm

Sorry, Drew, I stand corrected.
alanstorm says:

November 9, 2011 at 3:06 pm

Zach does indeed misunderstand, as only a liberal can. It does not matter that the lobbying started before Obama became president. Is he president now, at the time this idiocy was put into place? Why, yes he is. Since he is Chief Executive Officer, It’s on his watch, he owns it. Side note: Maybe you’re trying to demonstrate how much better GWB is than Obama. After all, he was able to resist enacting this, and Obama couldn’t. Was that what you meant?

Probably not. Anyone quoting Media Matters is unlikely to have their head screwed on very tightly.

Anyway, your point is moot. If you’re trying to blame the industry, you also fail spectacularly. They are free to lobby all they want, but they can’t enact such a tax. That requires a complicit government agency. Or is that what you meant, that you were pointing out the need for less government? Welcome to the Tea Party!

No, I suppose you were just trying to blame GWB and the tree industry, to deflect blame from Obama. You fail.
Zachriel says:

November 9, 2011 at 6:05 pm

Drew: you do understand the difference between privately funded and a tax, right?

Yes. Checkoff programs are common in the commodities industry, including some familiar industry campaigns such as “Milk Does a Body Good,” “Got Milk?,” “Pork. The Other White Meat”, “The Incredible, Edible Egg”, and “Beef: It’s What’s for Dinner.”

Comments are closed.