Dinner with Democrats

I hope that someday I am fortunate enough to be invited to dinner with Congressional Democrats. And I hope that, after they've supped their full and we've each paid our portion of the bill, the waitress returns saying we've over paid and that the restaurant needs to return some money to us. You see, I will have only ordered water, yet when the refund arrives at our table, I will request that a portion of it go to me even though I did not pay a dime towards the bill. Sound ridiculous? I agree.

Yet Congressional Democrats are threatening not to pass Bush's bill designed to stimulate the economy by giving a little extra money back to each tax payer because there is no provision in it to give money to people who don't make enough to pay taxes. They want to block the refund because it's only being refunded to people who actually paid.

Please don't get me wrong: I'm not against helping people who don't even make enough money to pay taxes. I'm all for getting them job training so they can advance in their careers. I agree with helping them put healthy food on their tables. Providing they are law abiding people, let's send their kids to school. But please don't take something that is labeled a "refund" and try to require that to goes to everyone! What if Best Buy had a rebate program and the Dems required that the rebate go to everyone, not just the people who bought the 47in HD Plasma TV? Or if Six Flags had to close due to the weather and offered to provide "rain date" tickets to the people who were there, but the Left demanded they provide the free passes to everyone. Doesn't make much sense, does it? If Six Flags wanted to provide promotional free tickets, I'd say, "go right ahead!" I'd be firmly behind Best Buy mailing out promotional gift cards to anyone and everyone. But don't call it a refund, rebate, or return. If you want to give a handout to people who didn't pay taxes, find another way to do it. Pass a different bill. But don't try to call it something it isn't.

Honestly, I think this is simply an excuse that the (D)s are using to block this attempt to revitalize the economy. The longer it's down, the more likely they'll take the Oval Office in November. It's hard when you are not the party in power. You have to hope that the country does poorly so that you can take over. So the stock market drop is fantastic for them, as is the housing slump, and the last thing they want to do right now is pass any bill that will end the dreaded "r-word" discussion. But they can't look like they are trying to keep the economy down (or that they are hoping our troops fail) ["I don't know, fly casual!"] so they have to find a reason that they hope will disguise their true intentions. I believe it was their hope that asking that money be "returned" to people who never had it in the first place would be sufficient. It is my hope that they are wrong.

And that's just my opinion. What's yours?