I believe this is where Brian Greenspun gets his ideas
The Las Vegas Sun is so bad, in fact, they've been relegated to an "insert" in the Las Vegas Review Journal - in other words, they have to pay people to read them).
I have many gripes with the paper (logical failures)(complete misunderstanding of how the state's budget works) and how, for years, they've bought into the doom and gloom budget scenario of every state agency including education. My gripes mostly have to do with how the Sun editorials and some of their writers reach their conclusions through their collective small intestine. Sorry to be crude, but it is true.
Ok, back to the story....
On what must be a slow day, the Las Vegas Sun has an article titled "Anti-Tax zealots say their tax hikes keep pledge intact."
Democrats in Nevada are looking to raise an additional $1.5-$2 billion to keep Nevada's spending bender going (to maintain the same levels of spending during the boom that ended in 2008). Republicans under Sandoval are looking a little less (mostly through gimmicks and fund sweeps) and want to avoid raising taxes (what would be the third time in ten years).
Several Republicans signed a "No Tax" pledge, but it has been long established that a revenue-neutral tax (that is you raise taxes in one area and lower them in another to offset the increase) is OK! Some Republicans have proposed reducing exemptions on mining while lowering other taxes. Others think including services in the sales tax is a good idea (and it is) so long as they can lower the overall sales tax rate (our sales tax is awfully darn high).
My problem isn't the fact that the Las Vegas Sun wrote an article about a long settled issue, but that the title of the article refers to people who disagree with tax hikes as "zealots."
A zealot in his own right
Brian Greenspun, the editor of the paper, would probably never go so far as to call people who always demand tax increases as "Pro Tax Nuts" ...perhaps because he is one himself.
Look, I can recognize we disagree on how much the government should spend, but Brian Greenspun doesn't even bother trying to understand his ideological opponents. Few people on the political right are advocating "no to tax increases" because they want to destroy the future, but because government often incompetently manages our money and our affairs. People who argue against tax hikes believe that the way we run government results in waste, excessive spending, and failed policy goals (see public education). Instead of just throwing more money at the problem lets reform how we address the problem - ie, use resources more effectively.