When it comes to healing America’s ailing economy by cutting taxes, President Obama is all for the idea—unless it benefits the most financially successful Americans.
That would be the “wealthy,” a class of elitists among whom are listed Mr. and Mrs. Barack Obama, current residents of 1600 Pennsylvania, Washington, D.C.
Probability of address change within the next 24 months? High and growing!
Obama’s philosophy on taxes is right out of the leftist handbook for perpetuating economic mayhem and ruin:
1. Although the overwhelming majority of taxes are paid by the so-called rich, cutting taxes for this class of Americans is unthinkable.
After all, most rich people are Republicans, and white, to boot! Why bring relief to white Republicans, even if it will help the overall economy?
2. In contrast, the less successful deserve robust tax cuts, even though they pay little or no taxes to begin with.
In addition, unlike the wealthy, the ranks of the less successful are populated with huge numbers of people of color, every last one of which is a Democrat.
Obama’s goofy logic may be the result of too much interaction with VP Joe Biden who has stated publicly that paying higher taxes is the “patriotic thing to do.”
Obama’s wrong minded policy is hardly a rarity among Democrats who would generally prefer to rip the wealthy than help the poor!
A notable exception, however, is found in Peter Orszag, an economist formerly employed at the Obama White House.
Orszag penned the following words, in part in his new role as a columnist for the New York Times:
“In the face of the dueling deficits, the best approach is a compromise: extend the tax cuts for two years and then end them altogether. Ideally only the middle-class tax cuts would be continued for now. Getting a deal in Congress, though, may require keeping the high-income tax cuts, too. And that would still be worth it.
“Why does this combination make sense? The answer is that over the medium term, the tax cuts are simply not affordable. Yet no one wants to make an already stagnating jobs market worse over the next year or two, which is exactly what would happen if the cuts expire as planned.
“Higher taxes now would crimp consumer spending, further depressing the already inadequate demand for what firms are capable of producing at full tilt. And since financial markets don’t seem at the moment to view the budget deficit as a problem — take a look at the remarkably low 10-year Treasury bond yield — there is little reason not to extend the tax cuts temporarily.”
The problem with Orszag’s spiel is that, although it makes sense in terms of improving the economy, it fails to punish the rich for the heinous crime of being mostly white Republicans!
How would the Founding Fathers react to the fall of the constitutional republic and the rise of Barack Obama? Artist Jon McNaughton puts it on canvas. Watch the video (I especially appreciate the criticism of Obama’s predecessor implicit in the clip and painting. As I’ve observed many times, the Big Government Republican paved and pre-socialized the way for the Big Government Democrat.)
It’s actually not a “new” idea. It’s an old, recycled one borrowed from corruptocrat Democrat Sen. Chris Dodd, who sponsored a bill to create a federally-operated “infrastructure bank” in 2007. President Obama tried to get $5 billion in funding for one in his 2010 budget and $4 billion is proposed for one in his 2011 budget. Democrat Rep. Rosa De Lauro is pushing a House version — and her expansive, pipe-dream plans tell you all you need to know about what a disastrous, costly slush fund this thing would inevitably grow into:
Ms. DeLauro’s plan would create an infrastructure bank that would be part of the United States Treasury, where it would attract money from institutional investors, then channel the funds to projects selected by a panel. The program, which would make loans much like the World Bank, would finance projects with the potential to transform whole regions, or even the national economy, the way the interstate highway system and the first transcontinental railway once did.
The outside investors would expect a competitive return on their money, so many of the completed projects would have to charge fees, taxes or tolls. In an interview, Ms. DeLauro said she would be “looking at a broader base,” meaning the bank would finance not just roads and rails, but also telecommunications, water, drainage, green energy and other large-scale works.
But if the projects did not raise enough money, the Treasury might get stuck paying back the investors, a prospect that gave pause to so-called deficit hawks like Mr. Tiberi. In an e-mail last week, he said he agreed the nation’s road and communications networks needed to be improved but was concerned about creating another company like Fannie Mae that might need a bailout.
Inside the White House, the idea for a transportation initiative, and in particular an infrastructure bank, is one that the White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, has been promoting.
(Fun fact reminder: Rahm lived rent-free for five years in the D.C. basement of De Lauro and her Democratic pollster hubby Stanley Greenberg. But I digress.)
So, like Stimulus I, which was initially intended to put infrastructure spending first, but evolved into a multi-purpose slush fund that put infrastructure last, the “infrastructure bank” envisioned by progressives on Capitol Hill would be “looking at a broader base” to finance “green energy” and “other large-scale works” based on “social benefits” determined by a panel appointed by the president.
Moreover, this “bank” would be anything but a bank in the normal sense of the word. Ron Utt at Heritage exposed the farce in March:
This bank would be capitalized by federal appropriations to leverage a greater volume of debt borrowed under the full faith and credit of the federal government. In turn the bank would use these funds to finance eligible infrastructure projects. While these proposed entities—and similar ones that exist in the states from earlier legislation—are described as “banks,” they are no such thing.
On Labor day 2010 the Marxist and Socialist movements are calling for a push to orginize a new political party. The “Labor Party”. Joel Rogers of COWS and Apollo Alliance, ( Apollo authored Obama’s Stimulus package) started out setting up a 3rd party based on Marxist philosophy in the mid 1990s.
The “bus them in from out of state” Astor-Turf organizers like SEIU and AFL-CIO will no doubt be pushing Socialist candidates and if they cannot seat a Socialist candidate already on the Democrat ticket, they are libel to run one of their own extreme left candidates from the labor ranks themselves. America, Freedom is under attack from all fronts.
The likely hood of this new Labor Party being born is almost guaranteed. You have to understand that utopiatic Socialist have no room for moderation or views that are not their own. They will not stop until their collective thirst for power is satisfied. New York already suffers from a similar madness with the existence of the “Working Families Party” and how it is using Fusion Politics to elect 3rd party candidates and skewing the election by posting candidates of the WFP on both Democrat and Republican ballots.
It is interesting how a Google search on working falmilies party shows he organizations website in the company of Communist Party USA and Socialist Party USA websits. Is Google profiling? Or using Common Sense in managing to group these orginizations together? A look a bit further down will even show Democrat Party as a close search result set. These “Big Labor” political based unions may claim to be For the American Working Family, but Google shows they are nothing more than socialist Communist orginizations.
We already know and see how these far left activist are with indoctrination and propaganda. They will say or do anything to obtain the ends to an agenda.
Are these really the people you want teaching your children and running our country? Most of the Unionized Americans do not know that when they pay union dues that money goes to support these leftist leaders and their agendas . Do you think Patriotic American Union Members would continue to pay these Socialist promotion fees Union Dues if they understood the ramifications of the total destruction of Capitalism and the Free Markets is funded by doing so?
Offer the candidate if you want to but stop disguising what you are if you want to have any respect at all. At least be publicly honest about the Marxist agenda. The only place you find the truth about what is behind these unions is on the Marxist websites themselves. The Unions websites will not advertise the outright Communist ideologies on the Union main site as that of “Communism”. It will not be where the day to day union members may see outright what they are supporting and paying for with union dues. The death of America.
As previously noted, Democrats have been posing as Tea Party members to get people on the ballot to take votes away from Republicans (see also this). Their effort to do something similar in Michigan has failed.
A shadowy group calling itself “The Tea Party” won’t be allowed on the state’s November ballot after a Friday order from the Michigan Supreme Court.
The high court’s 5-2 vote lets stand a ruling earlier this week from the Michigan Court of Appeals that keeps “The Tea Party” off the ballot because it didn’t comply with some technical requirements in state law.
Republicans and tea party activists consider “The Tea Party” a Democrat-supported fake aimed at siphoning away votes from conservative candidates. The effort has connections to a former Oakland County Democratic Party official.
The appeals court ruled earlier this week “The Tea Party” could not be on the ballot because of an irregularity on its petitions circulated to make the ballot. The word “the” in “The Tea Party” title was not in 24-point bold face type on its petitions as required by law. . . .
A message was left seeking comment after Friday’s ruling with Michael Hodge, an attorney representing “The Tea Party.” . . .
Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Marilyn Kelly and Justice Diane Hathaway, both nominated by Democrats, would have granted “The Tea Party” request to appeal and further contest the case.
The majority was formed by three Republican-nominated justices and two Democratic-nominated justices, including Alton Thomas Davis, who was appointed to the Supreme Court by Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm last week.
I mean, seriously, if this is some kind of sign of the times we might be in the midst of the most important de-realignment in the post-1964 party era. I’ll have more on this later, but check NYT:
FORT COLLINS, Colo. — The college vote is up for grabs this year — to an extent that would have seemed unlikely two years ago, when a generation of young people seemed to swoon over Barack Obama.
Though many students are liberals on social issues, the economic reality of a weak job market has taken a toll on their loyalties: far fewer 18- to 29-year-olds now identify themselves as Democrats compared with 2008.
“Is the recession, which is hitting young people very hard, doing lasting or permanent damage to what looked like a good Democratic advantage with this age group?” asked Scott Keeter, the director of survey research at the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan group. “The jury is still out.”
How and whether millions of college students vote will help determine if Republicans win enough seats to retake the House or Senate, overturning the balance of power on Capitol Hill, and with it, Mr. Obama’s agenda. If students tune out and stay home it will also carry a profound message for American society about a generation that seemed so ready, so recently, to grab national politics by the lapels and shake.
All those questions are in play here in Larimer County, about an hour north of Denver, for the more than 25,000 students at Colorado State University.
Larimer, like much of Colorado, was once solidly Republican but went Democratic in the last few elections and is now contested by both sides. It is seen as a signal beacon for an increasingly unpredictable state.
Kristin Johnson, 23, like many other students interviewed here in recent days, said that a vote for Democrats in 2008, however passionate it was, did not a Democrat make. But she bristles just as much at the idea of being called a Republican.
“It’s like picking a team when you really don’t want to root for either team,” said Ms. Johnson, a communication studies major, who said she was undecided about parties and politics going into the general election campaign.
She is not the only one. Because the university draws about 80 percent of its enrollment from within Colorado — mostly from Denver and its suburbs — it is also a sort of mirror within a mirror for Colorado’s political culture. Moderate and conservative views are common; a campus monoculture of liberalism is not.
Leah Rosen, a history major from Denver, still vividly remembers witnessing a fistfight outside her dormitory room on election night in 2008 between Obama supporters and McCain supporters. National exit polls back then gave Mr. Obama a 66 percent edge among young people, to 32 percent for Senator John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee.
I’ve figured it out… we’ve got this all wrong. There have been 3.5 million new and saved jobs since Obama took office. We know ’cause they told us so.
The problem is, it’s not the truth. It’s not even close to the truth. The truth is that the American people aren’t buying the story lines any more. The spin scarcely has time to get started before we tear it apart and subject it to the ‘new media review’. By the time we unravel it, there’s not much spin.
I guess we’re all sort of stunned out here, watching this administration self destruct. It’s not just that Barack Obama and that pack of amateurs he has in his government are wrong in their approach to governing and economic policy for this country. It’s that they have been, and are, wrong about every single thing they’ve done since taking office.
With the November 2 elections right around the corner, the desperation in some corners of the Democrat establishment is palpable. With the clock running out, so are the options for incumbent Democrats, some of whom have already fallen by the wayside in primaries across the nation… with many more to come.
If the mood of the nation remains as ugly as it is today, it will become a historical event.
It can’t come soon enough. Clock watching is hard work.
In late August 2009, as lawmakers faced citizen revolts at health care town halls nationwide, the Colorado Democratic Party decried a vandalism attack at its Denver headquarters. A hammer-wielding thug smashed 11 windows and caused $11,000 in property damage. The perpetrator, Maurice Schwenkler, turned out to be a far Left nutball/transgender activist/single-payer anarchist who had worked for a SEIU-tied 527 group and canvassed for a Democrat candidate. Nevertheless, State Democrat Party chair Pat Waak continued to blame “people opposed to health care” for the attack.
I was reminded of this far Left hoax incident — unjustly blamed on the Tea Party — when I read today about what really happened at Democrat Rep. Russ Carnahan’s office in Missouri.
Last Tuesday August 17, 2010, Rep. Russ Carnahan’s office was reportedly vandalized and “firebombed” at 2 AM in the morning. Hours later police arrested a suspect for the crime and held him for several hours.
Of course, when the “firebombing” was reported local leftists blamed the tea party activists.
Then things got really weird. The police released the suspect and the Carnahan camp went silent. Carnahan employees were seen dumping documents into a dumpster but refused to to talk to reporters. There was a complete blackout on information.
Now we know why.
The suspect was reportedly a disgruntled progressive activist employed by Russ Carnahan. An unnamed source familiar with the case released the information. Suspect Chris Powers reportedly was upset because he did not get paid so he firebombed the Carnahan finance offices at 2 in the morning…
Here’s what one of the lefty newspapers said last week in insinuating that a conservative was responsible:
Police aren’t releasing the man’s name until charges are officially filed. No motive was given for the attack, though one could suspect that the perpetrator is not a fan of the congressman. Given what we know of him — 50, white, angry — he certainly fits the demographics of a Tea Party member.
Perhaps, he joined his fellow “patriots” earlier this year when they burned Carnahan’s photo in effigy or placed a coffin on the sidewalk outside his home.
Dana Loesch blasts the smear merchants who rushed to judgment:
Did the Carnahan camp know this possible truth and consent by silence to the media’s attempt to trump this up as a tea party incident? If this is true, doesn’t this make the fourth incident in which people associated with the Carnahan campaign have run afoul of the law and have engaged in illegal behavior? Why didn’t the Russ Carnahan campaign correct the narrative of the local alternative weekly and Jake Wagman’s subtle suggestion that it was a tea partier? Because he’s in the campaign of his life and is desperate for anything, even the sympathy vote?
Of all the Democrats who are keeping President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid at a mile-long arm’s length heading into the November election, nobody is running away faster than two-term Indiana Rep. Joe Donnelly.
In Donnelly’s latest ad seen below, he proudly claims that he voted against Nancy Pelosi’s energy tax. In a previous ad, Donnelly reminded viewers that he doesn’t “run with the Washington crowd” while a picture of Obama, Pelosi and Boehner appeared on screen.
Donnelly’s opponent says the ads are a joke because Donnelly voted with Pelosi 88 percent of the time and with Obama 85 percent of the time, but now he’s running from them 100 percent of the time. From the ads it isn’t even obvious that Donnelly is a Democrat — even the caption on this video says “Independent.”
Hey, remember when the White House launched a “fact check” propaganda site to call out all the supposed misinformation about its massive government takeover of health care? “Facts are stubborn things,” they lectured.
Yes, indeed they are. And now, the White House is getting schooled on its stimulus propaganda by a local Ohio Democrat official who set the record straight about Obama’s claims.
A local project that President Barack Obama cited during a visit Wednesday to Columbus as an example of how the federal stimulus package has worked isn’t actually being funded with stimulus dollars.
The president spoke at the North Side home of architect Joe Weithman, and both Obama’s comments and information from the White House touted Weithman’s work on a project that the president said was being at least partially funded by the $787 billion stimulus bill passed last year.
“What we’ve been trying to do is to build infrastructure that puts people back to work but also improves the quality of life in communities like Columbus,” Obama said in his remarks. “So Joe is an architect, and he’s now working on a new police station that was funded in part with Recovery Act funds.”
But although federal money is being used for the project in question, there are no stimulus dollars involved, said Columbus Finance Director Paul Rakosky, a Democrat.
Make sure to click on the link to see the White House spin, spin, spin. “We apologize for the error” is not in the Team Obama vocabulary.
