Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Obama, Taxes, and the Left

Some Leftists are livid that Obama struck a deal with Republicans on extending the Bush tax cuts.

President Barack Obama reached agreement Monday with Republican leaders in Congress on a broad tax package that would extend the Bush-era income tax cuts for two years, reduce worker payroll taxes for one year and give more favorable treatment to business investments.

Other elements of the deal include a temporary reinstatement of the estate tax at 35%—the level favored by most Republican lawmakers—as well as an extension of jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed.

"We have arrived at a framework for a bipartisan agreement,'' Mr. Obama said on Monday night, capping weeks of negotiations with leaders in Congress.

The outcome of the negotiations is vital, because the current tax levels signed into law by President George W. Bush expire on Dec. 31. Unless Congress acts, tax rates on virtually all Americans who pay income taxes will rise on Jan. 1. That could affect economic growth and even holiday sales.

In reaching the deal, whose details still need to be worked out, Mr. Obama brushed past the demands of many in his own party to curb tax cuts for the wealthy. Some liberal lawmakers and activists were left seething, particularly over last-minute concessions to Republicans on the estate tax. Democratic leaders didn't agree to the deal during meetings on Monday with Mr. Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, according to a House aide.

"I can tell you with certainty that legislative blackmail of this kind by the Republicans will be vehemently opposed by many, if not most, Democrats," said Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.).

In the Senate, Tom Harkin (D., Iowa) called it "an understatement" to say he was disappointed.

Yes, Dems are mad.

An example of liberal outrage over Obama's tax concessions can be found at Firedoglake, a far-Left website.

The title of this blog post shows the frustration of the Leftists with Obama. They're fit to be tied.



In case you didn’t know, George Bush is still the effective President of the United States. The title of the New York Times lead article inadvertently proclaims this truth:
Bush Tax Cut Deal with Jobless Aid Said to Be Near.

It’s as though George Bush is still President. And just consider what Bush redux is doing.

It seems our faux Democratic President, now in full moral and policy collapse, and with the mindset of what once passed for a moderate Republican, views his job as negotiating with the most radically conservative wing of his radically conservative party to give them what they want, while throwing a bone to the mantle of compassionate conservatism. Give the jobless benefits for another year at a cost of about $60 billion, but pay for it politically — deficit? what deficit? — with another bailout to the rich — an outright gift of $40 to $60 billions each year over two or three years that will surely grow to $700 billion in a decade and trillions more in those later decades when we’re supposed to be hysterical over a gap in Social Security.

So the jobless get a few hundred per month so they don’t have to live in their cars, unless they’re also losing their homes, and the rich get a cool hundred billion or two and trillions later. That’s damned expensive uemployment insurance, especially when you don’t have a meaningful program to put people back to work. Any morally sentient being would call this blackmail, extortion, and arrest the perps, but we don’t do that in America anymore...

Obama isn't just being abandoned by his fellow Leftists. He's being mercilessly pummeled, too.

Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned.

James K. Galbraith writes:


President Bush never really pretended to be a President for ordinary folks; President Obama did. Bush was who he was; Obama held out, fostered, and promoted vast hopes, mobilizing the American population behind his leadership on that basis. And he disappointed those hopes -- to use a very harsh word, one could say he has betrayed those hopes. How can one therefore blame the voters for acting as they have acted?

Obama chose to wage class warfare.

Now that's come back to bite him. Using his own terminology, he has signed on to tax cuts for the rich. There's no getting around it.


Obama promised to spread the wealth around. Alas, his socialist utopia isn't blossoming as he planned. His comrades trusted him to deliver but he failed.

Will the Leftists forgive him?

Is Russ Feingold waiting in the wings?

5 comments:

LL said...

I'm no fan of Obama, but I think that realpolitik dictated his decision - and everyone knows it.

Mark Collin said...

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Hey Stephen, I bet you voted for the guy who is in the White House right now trying to destroy our country all by himself. What happened to his promise to end the war? Huh? Instead, he sent more troops. Oh, and by the way, Billy Goat is not their real name. I thought maybe somebody should enlighten you because it sounds like you just did pull your head out your ass. Oh also, it is shows, not shoes. Only Ed Sullivan sounded funny when he said it.

Mike Dawson said...

Mark: you have your facts twisted...President Obama vowed to end the Iraq War - he was a supporter of fighting terrorists in Afghanistan. (I'm not.) Regarding the bigger piece of unsubstantiated trash you mentioned about the guy trying to 'destroy our country'. What is that all about? (And seriously, you believe that to be true? If so may I suggest counseling or therapy may be in order?)

Mike Dawson said...

"Obama promised to spread the wealth around. Alas, his socialist utopia isn't blossoming as he planned. His comrades trusted him to deliver but he failed." Oh c'mon, Mary. From what I've read on your blog you seem like a bright person - you really can't believe that line of BS?! Spread wealth around the globe? What the heck is that all about? Were you not just the other day being critical of the lack of AIDS support & funding (which is largely spent in foreign lands)? Socialist utopia? Doesn't it get a bit old repeating Dick Armey's throw-away rabble-rousing rhetoric?

Besides the Democrats you mention being upset by the "deal" this independent, former Republican is upset at both parties - in particular, I blame President Obama for caving into the GOP, but I also blame members of both sides of the aisle for not getting these things done without all the back room, arm-twisting. The growing deficit is too big a problem to just kick it down the road for someone else to resolve. The Nuke Treaty should have been ratified, DADT should have been repealed, the tax cuts should have been allowed to expire with minor tweaks altering the estate tax. (Forcing families to sell family farms, family businesses and large real estate holdings isn't American and are my concern w/ the estate tax.) If any deal on the Bush Tax Cuts was to have been struck, the most they would have gotten out of me woulda' been letting tax cuts expire for everyone except income beyond $1 million. That sort of compromise would have been enough.

Susan said...

The government isn't going to be GIVING anybody anything! The government is just not going to be TAKING more than it already is. But that was Obama's line, how he would be handing money to the "rich" instead of to his indoctrinated slaves on the government plantation. Well now he has to live with his deception and the divisive anger he has stirred in their hearts against other Americans.. productive hard working Americans. Someone’s chickens are coming home to roost.