Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) was asked whether the Democrats should work with Republicans in extending the current tax system or if they should allow it to expire and raise taxes on everyone.

He compared it to negotiating with terrorists.

No…really:

Asked if Democrats have a responsibility to move forward with a  bill that can become law – in other words, a bill Republicans will support and not block– here’s what Menendez said:

“Do you allow yourself to be held hostage and get something done for the sake of getting something done, when in fact it might be perverse in its ultimate results? It’s almost like the question of do you negotiate with terrorists.

Republicans are crying foul.

Gee, you think?

Considering that the head of the Democrat party, President Obama, has been an advocate of negotiating with radical Muslims who throw acid in the faces of women and kill children, it’s very clear what the Democrats are willing to do and what they are not.

They are willing to allow real terrorists to regain power in the country where the 9/11 attacks were made, but refuse to negotiate with publicly elected representatives of the American people, especially those who dare to believe people have a right to personal property, regardless of how much personal property they own.

How do these cretins even have the offense in this battle?  Everything they have done since 2006 has been a complete disaster.

Is Congress more ethical?  Hardly, considering a Democrat was just censured, an action that hasn’t happened in 27 years.

Is the economy better than in 206?

No, it’s bad and getting worse.

Yet these guys have no problem saying that what is needed is further looting of the American taxpayer.

Another thing,  how were they allowed to describe what is going on as a tax break for the rich?  This is an extension of the current tax system.  If they just extend the current tax system, no one is getting a tax cut.

No one.

It’s simply a matter of continuing what is going on right now.  The Republicans are not saying, “Not only do we want this, but cut taxes on the ‘rich’ by eleventy billion percent.  Mwahahaha! Now, throw more children in the meat grinder for John Boehner’s tanning lotion!”

But the press doesn’t call them on this, just like they allow them to call this an extension of the Bush tax cuts.  By calling it the Bush tax cuts, they hope to get the people against it because in the Democrats little bubble world, everything Bush is bad.

It’s a way of selling the Democrat plan, which is Marxist.  That’s not hyperbole.  They advocate a progressive tax on income.  Here’s Marx:

…the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.

Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.

These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.

(While you’re at it, look at that list and you can see all the things on it are things Democrats fight for.  Tells you something, doesn’t it?)

For Marx, the proletariat is the wage slave, while the bourgeois is the rich.  So, Marx wants a “heavy progressive or graduated income tax” in order for the wage slaves to “use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the [rich].”

Sound familiar?

It’s called the Democrat platform.

So there’s the current state of the Democrat party.  Willing to work with real monsters, unwilling to stray from the Marxist plan for communist revolution and still trying to use Bush to scare the people and sell their plans.

Is it any wonder they took such a beating last month?