For the record, reports of my demise have been slightly exaggerated. I have been up till recently suffering from a combined attack of employment, academia, and travel which has left me time sufficient only to pound the steering wheel or throw pillows at the television screen when I have been assaulted by The One’s endless speechifying. I’m beginning to think presidential addresses should come with a warning screen prior to the actual event.

Yesterday was Monday and thus the scene of yet another TelePrompTer show at the White House Rose Garden. Has anybody checked to see whether TOTUS now has a permanent pole mounted amongst the roses? I’m just curious.

But I digress. Where was I? Oh, yes. Roses.

There is a well used section of the liberal playbook entitled “Class Warfare”. This involves convincing the public that all of their problems can be traced back to some rotund Wall Street hedge fund manager who owns six houses, three stretch HUMMERS, and a fleet of private jets. This demographic, dear reader, doesn’t pay its “fair share” of taxes and that’s why the American economy is stuck clinging to the edges of the drain.

If only these rich fat cats paid their “fair share” there would be enough money for everyone. Underwater mortgages would instantly regain their lost value. Jobs would magically appear for anyone looking for one. Budget deficits would be erased and a sharp looking federal worker would show up at your front door with an ice cold bottle of Coca Cola and promise to teach you to sing in perfect harmony with the world. Rainbows would be seen in every organized community and the Dodgers would win the pennant.

Ok, maybe I made some of that up…especially the part about the Dodgers.

The One’s class warfare rhetoric is carefully chosen. He politely states:

If we’re going to make spending cuts, many of which we wouldn’t make if we weren’t facing such large budget deficits, then it’s only right that we ask everyone to pay their fair share. (Emphasis added)

See? He’s going to “ask” you to “willingly” part with more of his money. No, it’s not yours. It’s Barry’s money. If you’re nice and don’t complain, he’ll let you keep as much of it as he deems proper for your needs. Never mind the fact that when the government “asks” you for your money, it’s more of a formality. If you turn them down they have a nasty habit of kicking your door in and taking your money anyway – proverbially of course lest I violate the rules of the “new tone”.

And don’t be concerned about the term “fair share”. Where your money is concerned, Team Obama has settled on a percentage everyone can agree with. What’s the new rate? One word: More.

Here’s the dirty little secret The One doesn’t really know or care to know. The rich don’t have enough cash amongst them all to fill the budgetary hole left by a single year of Obamanomics. There’s simply not enough there to tax, confiscate, or otherwise steal. Don’t take my word for it. Take nine minutes of your time and check out this video. Simply put, the government could eat the rich and still not be satisfied.

Government does not have revenue problem. Government has a spending problem. Barry says we “can’t cut our way out of this crisis.” To that I simply respond with three words The One is no doubt familiar with: Yes, we can.

Comments

  • Rochelle

    The problem with a flat tax, is that it really does create disparity for the lower class. 9% of 20,000 a year means a whole lot more than 9% of 1,000,000. So if you could find a way to graduate the flat tax that would make more sense. I know it seems the most “fair” way, but I don’t think it actually is. I have been a fan of the flat tax until just recently, when I started really trying to apply the concept to a house-hold. I can’t come up with a way that it is fair. However, the exemptions could be removed from the current tax code, and the whole thing simplified.

    • Troy La Mana

      9% on income tax I agree with you, but 9% as a sales tax with no other taxes or deductions, aside from food and clothing, is more then fair.

  • Alaina

    I would like for Obama (or anyone really) to define “fair share” in a dollar figure or percentage of income. And why doesn’t anyone ever ask that question?

  • Joyce A (East of Eden)

    Good to see you back!

    Great post. The thing is, with BHO, “more” will never be enough. Did you all hear that Chuck Shumer is now suggesting that the “rich” be put on a sliding scale according to where you live? Because in his mind $250K is not the same in Manhattan as it is in Mississippi.

    • Alaina

      He’s right about the cost of living… $250k in Manhattan means you may not have to have roommates and live on PB&J sandwiches. $250k in Houston is a really nice life.

      • Joyce A (East of Eden)

        I agree with him on that. However, the Constitution (I know when has Up-Chuck ever read that!) says we should be taxed uniformly. I see big important states like New York with their big important people getting a lot more pull if that debate were ever to happen, than say a state like New Mexico where I live, even though life in the Atomic City and Santa Fe is very expensive. All the more reason to scrap the tax code and go with a flat tax. I think Herman Cain has it right, “If 10% is good enough for God, then 9% should be good enough for the government!”

        • Alaina

          Agreed… I just understand where he’s coming from… Taxes are a big reason that I’ve been resisting a move to NY… You have to pay federal, state and city taxes, which would be just over 50% of my income… Plus, it would cost $3,500+ a month for a decent apartment, not to mention how expensive everything else is… But yes, agreed about the tax code.

  • David Kaiser, Editor

    I guess we can un-schedule the deletion of your account…

  • Rochelle

    Brilliant!