Mar 4, 2013 Political
In 2011 Barack Obama came up with the idea of the sequester. The plan was to force Congress to come up with a financial plan or each side’s top programs would get cuts. The idea was that Republicans would not want to see cuts to Defense and Democrats would not want to see cuts to social programs and other non defense agencies so they would all come together, sing Kumbaya and come up with a plan.
The election fell in between and Obama and his Democrats could not address the issue because they wanted tax increases that they could not tout if they wanted to keep their positions. Obama wanted to win a second term so he could not talk about his radical plans or he would lose.
Republicans felt sure that Romney would win and they would take the Senate so they could undo the damage caused by years of stupidity from both sides.
Romney did not win and the time for the sequestration cuts was rapidly approaching. Both sides worked against each other in an effort to fix the mess they created. At the last minute a deal was struck that increased taxes immediately for high income earners and pushed the sequestration cuts off until March First. John Boehner took heat for allowing the tax increases and he should but looking at it now his move might have been a good one.
If sequestration had taken place at the beginning of the year then ALL of the Bush era tax cuts would have gone away. This means there would be tax increases on everyone. Yes, even though Democrats have been screaming that the Bush tax cuts were for the rich they were forced to admit that everyone would be affected if the tax cuts went away.
The reality that the tax increase would hit the middle class and that Republicans would be blamed forced Boehner and Republicans to allow taxes to increase on about 2% of wage earners. At the same time, the deal made the Bush tax cuts for the other 98% permanent. This means that a tax increase on the middle class cannot be held over the heads of the Republicans. They are now in a stronger position to bargain because only a direct act to raise taxes on the middle class can make that happen. No matter what happens, inactivity or allowing the sequester to proceed will not cause taxes on the middle class to go up.
Sure, hundreds of thousands of the middle class will be affected by the sequester but that is by design. The White House came up with sequester and the cuts associated and the White House is ensuring that those cuts directly harm people so that those people will get upset with Republicans and hold them accountable. The Democrats need people to be miserable or they will realize that government is too big and cuts are not a bad thing.
This is why the cuts are taking place in a fashion that will cause direct harm to people and programs that directly involve people.
There is a lot that can be cut that would not harm people but that would not accomplish what Democrats want, direct dependence on government.
In any event, the average person will feel little affect from the cuts. Many federal employees will as will those who depend on services like meals on wheels. But, for the most part, the average person will notice little disruption in their lives.
Other than, of course, the disruption that has been with us since Obama first took office.
Democrats got their tax increase and were to bargain in good faith for spending cuts. They did not (which is not a surprise). Now they are screaming for more tax increases on the wealthy. They talk about closing loopholes (government speak for parts of the tax code people use to pay less in taxes, parts that Congress put there in the first place) and increasing rates on an even larger pool of wealthy taxpayers but refuse to discuss cutting. They want tax increases NOW and cuts sometime in the future.
Republicans are having none of that and are, so far, standing firm on their stance that there will be no more revenue (government speak for taxes). The Republicans do not have to worry now about an automatic tax increase on the middle class because the Bush cuts were made permanent so they have the upper hand.
Democrats might have overplayed their hand because they thought once Republicans allowed a tax increase in December they set a precedent and would cave again.
It is possible that Boehner gave his party a stronger position by allowing a tax increase on the top 2%. Democrats cannot hold that ax over the heads of the Republicans and must now gin up anger within the base in order to get things done.
So far the public has not been in much of an uproar and it looks like Democrats are scratching and clawing in order to get tax increases.
The sequester will begin to hit harder in the next few weeks and then we hit the end of the last continuing resolution. Boehner and his party might be in the driver’s seat because he took the wild card, tax cuts on the middle class, away from the Democrats.
It is time for Boehner to step up and rule with an iron fist. It is time for tax reform and spending cuts. He has the weapons at his disposal.
Because no matter what, Obama will ultimately be held responsible for any disaster that takes place in the coming months.
His stenographers in the media will try to deflect the blame but many Americans are paying attention each day (though we will never be rid of the low information voters).
Democrats toasted the tax increase while bringing in the New Year but they might have given away their bargaining chips in the process.
Never surrender, never submit.
I knew this all along but now Barack Obama has confirmed it. The Senate passed his version of the tax cut extension and that version stripped out the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. The so called millionaires who make more than $250,000. Barack Obama said that he wants the House to pass this as it keeps tax cuts in place for 98% of the people.
So let’s work this out. The tax cuts Obama wants to keep in place are for the middle class. Doing what Obama wants will keep tax cuts in place for 98% of the people, therefore Bush’s tax cuts were for the middle class (or 98% of Bush’s tax cuts were for the middle class).
You see, for ten years or so the Democrats have been screaming that Bush’s tax cuts were for the rich. They denied that the middle class benefited from the cuts and they always portrayed it as if the lion’s share went to the wealthy folks. Obama has now confirmed that 98% of the cuts that George W Bush enacted went to the middle class and only 2% went to the wealthy. So Bush’s tax cuts were not tax cuts for the rich.
I know it is hard to believe given how every Democrat was bleating something different for the last decade but now they are confronted with the issue and have to actually tell the truth. They cannot end the taxes or it will hurt the middle class and that would spell disaster in November. So they had to come clean with their story and had to admit that they lied and deliberately misled people for a decade in order to gain political favor.
Joe Biden did not yet get the memo because he is still talking about how Republicans and George Bush gave rich people tax cuts. His booze addled brain cannot comprehend that his boss is saying the exact opposite.
The tax cuts should be made permanent for everyone. In fact, they should be cut even more to stimulate growth. The Bush tax cuts did not cost the government money (government has no money) because more money flowed into the Treasury after the cuts. The problem is that Congress has no control and it spent the increased money and then some. They did that when Reagan cut taxes and the Treasury got more money. Then they blamed the tax cuts on the deficit. They cannot control themselves and that is why we have money troubles.
The next time some liberal moron tells you that Bush cut taxes for the rich make sure to point out that their messiah Barry said otherwise.
Then have them look at the government’s own numbers.
Nah, forget that. Liberals do not like the truth because it makes them apoplectic.
Never surrender, never submit.
Jul 24, 2012 Political
In the last decade or so since the “Bush Tax Cuts” were enacted the Democrats and their media wing have portrayed those cuts as tax cuts for the rich. During the campaigns and throughout the years whenever there was a debate about the budget and the deficit the Democrats would say that George Bush gave tax cuts to the rich and that those tax cuts for the rich were hurting the economy.
I, as well as many others, tried to explain that the Bush Cuts helped the middle class and the poor much more than the rich. The rich ended up with more of the burden as the middle class and poor had their taxes lowered by much greater percentages and that the cuts ended up increasing revenue to the Treasury. This is not a matter for debate here and anyone who is willing to invest time can look at the government’s own numbers to see that it is true.
The bottom line is that Democrats always rejected the idea that the Tax Cuts helped those who are not rich. No, they were ALWAYS Bush’s tax cuts for the rich. Listen to any debate and read any transcript and you will see how these tax cuts were defined by the left. For the rich, period…
So if these tax cuts were only for the rich and since Obama and the Democrats want to raise taxes on the rich, why not just let the tax cuts expire and the net effect will be a tax increase on the rich?
Sounds perfectly logical since the tax cuts were ONLY (according to the left of years gone by) for the rich, letting them expire will only affect the rich.
Except it won’t. You see, the Democrats are now forced to admit that the Bush Tax Cuts were not tax cuts solely for the rich and that they were for everyone across the board. Democrats are fighting tooth and nail to remove the wealthy from any extension of the cuts thereby preserving the part that applies to those who are not rich.
You see, if they had been honest back then they might have credibility now but they were not. They played their second favorite game of class warfare (first favorite is using the race card) in order to demonize George Bush and the rest of the Republicans as the party of rich people.
By now recognizing and fighting for the tax cuts that apply to those who are not rich the left has admitted that they were wrong. It has admitted that the Republicans cut taxes for everyone and it has admitted that they were lying in order to win.
If what they said in the past was actually true they would just let the taxes expire but they can’t.
They are caught up in their web of lies regarding taxes and tax cuts.
The Democrats have shown us that they are lairs and that they cannot be trusted with regard to this issue (or any other for that matter) so why should we even listen to what they have to say on the matter?
They lied then and because they did those who are not wealthy are about to see a huge increase in their taxes.
And please, don’t let some liberal tell you that they always meant the part that applied to the rich. They never acknowledged any tax cuts for those who were not rich and always portrayed the cuts as cuts for the rich. They don’t get to change that now just because they got caught up in their lies.
Never surrender, never submit.
Aug 4, 2010 Political
The Democrats are between Barack and a hard place during this election season. Many of them are likely to lose their jobs and if the Republicans gain the majority in one chamber then Obama will essentially be cut off at the knees. For years Democrats have been strong proponents for tax increases. While they claim that tax increases are on the rich they eventually end up taxing many more people, particularly those in the middle class.
Democrats like Obama preached about targeted tax cuts for the middle class. Remember, it was he who said that 95% of us would not see a tax increase. That has gone by the wayside as taxes have risen and will continue to rise. In 2011 we are set for a huge tax increase when the tax cuts that George Bush pushed through expire.
Now for years the Democrats have told us that these were tax cuts for the rich. In any debate the Democrats will frame the argument in those terms. The tax cuts were for George Bush’s rich friends. Tax cuts do not stimulate the economy and you have to find a way to pay for the money the government “lost” as if government actually has any money. Taxpayers have money that government extorts.
So we find ourselves in the middle of a heated election season and Democrats are running for cover. They are trying to convince the people back home that they were looking out for their best interests. Despite voting for things that the majority of Americans opposed, Democrats are running as if they fulfilled the will of the people. Funny, when the polls indicated that the American public had stopped supporting the war effort the Democrats said we needed to end the war (and they made up stories about being tricked into voting for it) because it was the will of the people. These same Democrats ignored the will of the people when they pushed through the Socialist agenda of Barack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm).
In any event, the Bush tax cuts are causing heartburn for Democrats. Democrats will tell you that tax cuts hurt the economy and they will raise taxes every chance they get. It is how they feed the ever growing beast that is government. But now that the economy is in the dumper and is not recovering they are worried about raising taxes. They realize that allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire will result in a tax increase. Many of them have had to admit that this is not the smartest thing to do because it will stifle an already stagnant economy. They say we need the tax cuts to help STIMULATE the economy. Got that? Tax cuts stimulate the economy.
But why worry? The Bush tax cuts were only for the rich, at least that is what the Democrats have told us for nearly a decade. If the tax cuts were only for the rich and the Democrats were discussing raising taxes on the rich anyway, why does it matter? Those evil rich people can afford a tax increase so just let the Bush tax cuts expire. According to Democrat mythology the only people who will be affected are the rich because tax cuts were only for Bush’s rich friends.
Therein lies one of the problems for Democrats. The Bush tax cuts helped the middle class the most. That’s right, no matter what your liberal friends and the Democrat politicians have been telling you, the Bush tax cuts provided the greatest benefit for the middle class. If the Democrats allow the tax cuts to expire the middle class will get socked the hardest.
Therein lies a few more problems. Since Democrats are talking about only letting the tax cuts for the rich expire and extending the tax cuts for the middle class, they are admitting that the Bush tax cuts affected the middle class. In order to save their rear ends they have had to admit that tax cuts stimulate the economy and that the middle class received tax cuts from George Bush.
And it gets trickier. Barack Obama is not receptive to the idea of extending the tax cuts. He wants to end them especially for the rich. But in doing so he will be admitting that Bush gave the middle class tax cuts and that Obama just extended them. This will go against everything Obama has said about Bush and tax cuts as Obama is one of the loudest voices in proclaiming that Bush gave tax cuts to the rich.
And maybe even trickier. If Obama decides not to extend the tax cuts for the middle class January 2011 will provide a rude awakening to many middle class people who have been duped by Democrats into believing that the Bush tax cuts were for the rich. This is a potential disaster for Democrats. They have bamboozled a lot of people about tax cuts for the rich so much so that many people in the middle class who actually benefited from tax cuts do not know or understand that they were helped.
If Obama allows the tax cuts on them to expire a lot of people will have less money in their paychecks and when they go to their HR department to ask why and are informed that the tax cuts expired so their rate went up the little light bulb will go on and they will realize that they actually benefited from the Bush tax cuts after all. They will know that they were lied to by Democrats who harped on the same lie for a decade and they will know that Obama lied because he raised their taxes.
The Democrats are in a tough spot. There is only one choice that will provide the least amount of damage and that is extending the cuts for all Americans. The problem with that is their base, the morons who believe that tax cuts were only for the rich, will be forced to admit that the Democrats either lied or extended tax cuts for the rich. The Democrats would love to just allow the cuts for the rich to expire but by their own words they admit that doing so will not help the economy (tax cuts stimulate and the rich pay the most taxes).
The Democrats are really in a bad way on this issue. They are debating tax cuts vs allowing them to expire and they are conflicted. They are always conflicted in an election year because during election years Democrats pretend to be moderates who are in favor of tax cuts and reigning in spending. Once they get elected or reelected they go right back to tax and spend. If this were not an election year the issue would not matter and even though no harm will be done until 2011 Democrats must act now to keep the increases from coming. This is why they are having the debate in the first place.
As for Obama, I think he would be fairly happy to see his majority go away. He has gotten a lot of his agenda through and it is unlikely that it will be repealed until we are rid of him (he can veto any legislation). The only thing Republicans can do is not fund any of it. The power of the purse is still in the realm of Congress. I think Obama would be happy having Republicans in the majority.
What? How could that be? Obama is floundering and he will not be reelected in 2012 if things stay as they are. Democrats and their agenda will not fix the economy and this will spell disaster for Obama. He knows that Bill Clinton was in a similar spot when he was in his first term but once Republicans took over they straightened things out. Balanced budgets, the imaginary surplus, welfare reform, and many other items were part of the Republican agenda that Clinton was forced to go along with and for which he later took credit. This helped him get reelected.
Obama is looking at a similar situation. He might figure having Republicans in to clean things up will make him look good and if they screw things up even worse (unlikely) he will have them to blame and if there is one thing this guy is good at it is the blame game. Either way he will be on more sound footing when asking people to give him four more years.
As for his party, they are running from him and backing an extension of tax cuts.
That just about says it all…
Never surrender, never submit.
Jul 16, 2010 Political
For a very long time we have heard the Democrats lie about the Bush tax cuts. They always characterize those cuts as tax cuts for the rich. In reality, the middle class and those who pay no taxes made out better than any other group and the rich still pay most of the taxes in this country. That has not stopped Democrats from describing the tax cuts as cuts for Bush’s rich friends.
The Bush tax cuts are set to expire which should not be a problem because the tax cuts were only for the rich. The Democrats have no problem raising taxes, especially on the rich, so allowing the tax cuts to expire and thereby raising the taxes of the rich should be a no brainer for Democrats.
But this is an election year so reality is setting in. The Democrats are now discussing extending the tax cuts for the middle class. In June Steny Hoyer said that tax increases would eventually be necessary in order to get our debt under control but that he expected Congress to temporarily extend the middle class tax cuts:
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday that tax increases will eventually be necessary to address the nation’s mounting debt, raising a difficult election-year issue as Democrats fight retain control of Congress.
Tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush are scheduled to expire at the end of the year, affecting taxpayers at every income level. President Barack Obama proposes to permanently extend them for individuals making less than $200,000 a year and families making less than $250,000—at a cost of about $2.5 trillion over the next decade. Breitbart
So there you have it, an admission from a Democrat that the Bush tax cuts were not for the rich. The middle class had cuts as well as demonstrated by Hoyer. Certainly the rich had their taxes cut, everyone who pays taxes did (and those who do not got rebates and credits) and since they pay most of the taxes theirs went down as well.
So the next time a Democrat claims the tax cuts were for the rich ask him what he would say if it were an election year.
And while we are busting myths, let us look at the idea that tax cuts do not stimulate the economy. Democrats believe that taxing (especially the rich) is the way to pay the bills and that cutting taxes does not stimulate the economy.
They believe that until there is an election ahead at which time they talk about tax cuts to stimulate the economy. With regard to the middle class tax cut extension:
“What you want to do is stimulate at this point in time, so you certainly do not want to increase taxes on the middle class, middle-income working Americans,” Hoyer told reporters. Reuters
What you want to do is stimulate so you CERTAINLY DO NOT want to raise taxes.
This rests the case. Tax cuts, not tax increases, stimulate the economy.
If they would have practiced this instead of passing a trillion dollar stimulus we would be well on our way to recovery.
Rush Limbaugh laid out that plan and Obama should have listened.
Speaking of Limbaugh, where is the outrage from liberals who get their panties in a wad when conservatives talk about people and death?
Never surrender, never submit.