Ah there's no joy in Libville tonight! Or so it would appear. Because of our old buddy Barry, those that make up his political base, as well as a majority of Congressional Democrats, seem to be in somewhat of a tizzy. And just what be causing this little hissy fit? Well it would seem to be his recent announcement of having come to an agreement, of sorts, with the Republicans, regarding the extending of the Bush tax cuts. Since the announcement he has very quickly found himself to be on the receiving end of some strenuous, and rather nasty, objections to the basics of the deal. So it is then that we now have more than a few very unhappy campers out there in Liberal Democrat land. Barry has now been inundated with any number of objections coming from his fellow Democrats focused primarily on the areas that they view as being where Barry made concessions to the Republicans, that many view as being excessive, this past Tuesday. Despite a rather spirited, albeit somewhat angry, argument put forth by Barry in his attempt to justify, and to defend, those concessions as being distinctly preferable to higher taxes for millions of Americans, he hasn't managed yet to convince very many of those who make up his hard core wacko base, of that fact. "I'm not here to play games with the American people or the health of the economy," Barry said of his deal, which is designed to avert a scheduled January 1 expiration of tax cuts at all income levels. While it seems that a majority of the Republicans have lined up, or are lining up, to support the package, many lawmakers in the president's own party have voiced some pretty strong opposition to it. Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders, has pledged to "do everything I can to defeat this," including a filibuster to prevent a final vote. The deal includes an extension of expiring Bush-era tax cuts for "all income levels" for two years, not just for lower and middle-income taxpayers, as the Democrats had wanted. It also contains yet one more renewal of jobless benefits due to expire in a few weeks, and a one-year cut in Social Security taxes paid by workers. Personally, I could have done without the extending of jobless benefits, there's just something inherently wrong with the government paying people not to work, or to even go out and look for work. But hey, what are ya going to do? Other elements of the deal would loosen the estate tax and provide breaks for businesses to spur hiring. Officials said that overall, the proposal could add $900 billion to the federal deficit over two years. Don't you just love all of these anonymous, and always faceless, officials whom we're all just supposed to blindly trust for no other reason than because they're from the government and are here to help us?
The loudest voices emanating from the Democratic opposition, of course, are driven by some perceived sense of betrayal now being felt and that results primarily from two parts of the deal that mark what is viewed by many as Barry’s making unwarranted concessions in an effort to, ouch, that dreaded c word, compromise with the Republicans. That would be the decision to let expiring tax cuts remain in effect for those people even in upper incomes, you know the small business owners who create the majority of jobs in this country, and a change in the estate tax which is something that the GOP has long sought. Why is it that when it come to compromise, at least as it is defined by the scumbag Democrats, it's always viewed as something where its the Republicans who must simply shut the Hell up and do what the Democrats say. Needles to say, there was no shortage of complaining coming from House Democrats with there being open hostility directed at this deal, most notably from some bonehead named Weiner from New York. Soon-to-be Ex-Speaker Nancy "Botox" Pelosi issued a statement in which she said she felt that the estate tax was simply "a bridge too far." And with the House having now said no to the deal, as presented by Barry, I guess she may well have been right. "Dingy" Harry has also singled out the estate tax provision for special criticism. Harry seemed displeased that it would allow $5 million per spouse to pass tax-free to heirs, and tax anything above that level at 35 percent. The compromise is "something that's not done yet," so says "Dingy" Harry Reid. "We're going to have to do some more work," he added after a closed door meeting with Vice President Joe "Bite Me" Biden and members of the Democratic rank-and-file. What driving this current discussion is the fact that what Republicans view as a spending problem, the Liberal Democrats insist in continuing to view as a revenue problem. The future is going to very much depend upon which of these two diametrically opposed viewpoints regarding the present situation, comes out on top. It just seems to me that the priorities of the Democrat Party as a whole are more than just a little skewed. At a time when if they were truly concerned about the unemployed there are any number of options available to them, but instead they seem to be more focused on making our situation worse in the hopes of being able to reap some sort of political benefit. The president has a decision to make here regarding whose priorities he is most concerned about, those of the American people or those of the congressional Democrats. He can either choose to lead or to be led, it’s really no more complicated than that. He’s the one who wanted to be president, the time has now come for him to act the part. For the last two years he’s had it relatively easy, with his party having substantial majorities in both the House and Senate. With the Democrats now having lost their majority in the House this past November, it has now come time for him to start learning the fine art of compromise. Something that is going to be very new to him, and I would guess more than a little difficult.
At his rather hastily put together news conference, more of a scripted temper tantrum really, to announce what had gone down, Barry bristled a bit at times, and insisted in casting himself in the unfamiliar role of compromiser-in-chief and as the one having the best interests of the economy and the American people in mind. "This isn't an abstract debate. This is real money, it will make a real difference in the lives of people who sent us here," Barry said, and with a straight face no less. The presidential news conference was part of a full-scale defense of the agreement, which the White House said would pump billions into the economy at a time when it is recovering from the worst recession in eight decades and unemployment stands at 9.8 percent, with a real unemployment rate that is much closer to 17 percent and with over 42 million people on food stamps. The president was critical of Democrats and Republicans alike, saying that if purely partisan attitudes rule, compromise would be impossible. At one point, getting a little carried away with himself and his rhetoric, he chose to liken Republican lawmakers who were insisting on tax cuts for the wealthy to terrorists. "I think it's tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers, unless the hostage gets harmed. In this case the hostage is the American people and I was not willing to see them get harmed," he said. But he also rejected criticism from fellow Democrats. "I know there are some who would have preferred a protracted political fight," he said. But he added he had decided that compromise was preferable to letting taxes rise on January 1. So because of Barry "Almighty," our knight in shining armor, our taxes may not be going up after all. Thank you, Barry. And was that some kind of offhanded admission that tax cuts are, in fact, beneficial to the economy? That really has the potential to work up some of his wackier supporters into a froth. That whole concept is nothing short of pure blasphemy to these loons.
So it is then, that current events have now left Democratic leaders in somewhat a conundrum and more than a little conflicted. On one hand they wish to avoid any kind of a major fight with the president, but they are also hoping to complete work on several measures they deem as being "important" before Republicans take control of the House in January. You know, those really important issues like the Dream Act and the getting rid of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, you know those critical things. Also another prominent agenda item is that Barry wants the Senate to ratify a new arms control treaty with Russia. Senator Joe Lieberman, not really a Democrat but not really a independent either, urged support for the Barry's tax plan. "This tentative agreement is an example of Washington working across party lines to confront the challenges facing our nation," he said. But of course, it goes without saying that organized labor, the liberal groups such as MoveOn.org and others have come out strongly criticizing the deal as it presently exists. In public as well as in private, many Democrats expressed anger that Barry had bowed to Republican demands to extend the expiring tax cuts on the wealthy and make additional concessions to the GOP on estate tax relief. Some Democrats who met with Joe "Bite Me" quoted him as saying the deal was the best the White House could obtain from Republicans, who had staunchly blocked legislation over the weekend to extend tax cuts only on incomes below $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. Senator Tom "Dipstick" Harkin, D-Iowa, said he intended to oppose the new proposal barring what he sees as being some much needed changes. "It didn't wind up in a good end. The deal as struck is not the best deal for our country," he said. According to who, Tom? "If we don't vote for this, what happens — not politically, but economically? If we do vote for it, how sure can we be sure that it will, in effect, spawn jobs pump the economy?" said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. Will somebody please ask this moron, what certainty it was that she was provided with when she decided it would be such a stellar idea to vote for Barry's very bogus "stimulus" package that has yet to produce a single solitary job?
Besides holding current tax rates in place for all those who actually pay taxes, the proposal, at least as it presently exists, would also extend unemployment benefits and reduce payroll taxes for a year, avoiding a threatened cutoff in checks to the two million recipients over the holidays and as many as another five million next year. My only argument with this deal is that if you're going to have unemployment "benefits" they should be available for a very finite period of time. Because human nature being what it is, if there is no incentive to go job hunting, then no job hunting will be done. The proposed Social Security tax cut would apply to virtually every working American. For one year they would pay 4.2 percent of their income, instead of 6.2 percent, to the government retirement program, fattening U.S. paychecks by $120 billion in 2011. So essentially someone earning $40,000 a year would receive a $800 benefit, and a $70,000 earner would save $1,400, officials said. More than three-fourths of all Americans pay more in these so-called payroll taxes than they pay in federal income taxes. The White House said money from other sources would be shifted so the Social Security trust fund loses no revenue. Question here, how exactly is it that something which is already nonexistent, such as the Social Security trust fund, can lose anything, let alone revenue? Any way, Barry said that he reluctantly made another concession to Republicans, in the form of a reduced estate tax. It would tax estates worth more than $5 million at a rate of 35 percent, a GOP goal. Democrats favored a $3.5 million threshold, with a 45 percent tax on anything higher. Cannot someone explain to me why is there still a death tax anyway? Why is the government entitled to any percentage of what I have worked to acquire throughout my lifetime and wish to pass on to my family? Now mind you, that's income that has already been taxed once. And how many family businesses, and family farms, have had to be sold over the years for no other reason that to cover this cockamamie tax bill to our beloved government?
And so it is with everything said and done, what we saw was Barry, our "Supreme Leader" coming out with his standard blather which was really nothing more than an attempt to deflect criticism by once again focusing on the blowing of his own horn. He quickly set about the making the accusations that it was because of those mean old Republicans being so obstinate in their determination to do nothing more than to hold middle-class tax cuts hostage in an effort to keep the current tax cuts in place for their friends, all of those evil rich people. Saying that it was all for the sake of those poor tax hostages that he finally felt he needed to choose to side with extending the Bush era tax cuts for all taxpayers. He went further in using the analogy of the public option that was initially included as part of his healthcare/insurance "reform" debacle. He made the comment that just as he could not then allow one part of what was a signature piece of legislation, as well as being something that Democrats had been trying to get passed for 100 years, to scuttle the entire attempt, he could not, this time around, allow a protracted fight with those evil Republicans in the effort to hold middleclass Americans hostage. By the way, it is that same healthcare "reform" legislation which he still maintains will lower costs for approximately 100 million Americans while insuring the 30 million uninsured in this country. Something that is already proving to be a fallacy. And in his bringing up his signature catastrophe, he went to say that what was most important to him was the avoiding here of what would equate to another public option debate. Now as it was then, he said that it made no sense to allow a public option that he maintains would have only effected roughly 2 million Americans, to become something that could have been used by those nasty Republicans, in their attempt to scuttle and entire piece legislation that will ultimately save America by making health care more affordable, a point that Barry bragged about in justifying his agreement with Republicans to extend all the Bush era tax cuts.
Just a brief note here about that brilliance of that piece of signature legislation, so fondly referred to as Obamacare. It would seem that the list of companies and unions who are now being given the green light to ‘opt out’ is growing by what can only be described as being, leaps and bounds. And nearly by the hour. Since the last wave of ObamaCare waivers was released a few weeks ago, the number of unions and companies that have received ObamaCare waivers has doubled to 222 is very rapidly closing in on 50.
So far, here is the list of union inductees to the Do As We Say, Not As We Do Club:
1. Bricklayers Local 1 of MD, VA and DC
2. International Brotherhood of Trade Unions Health and Welfare Fund - Local 713
3. Local 1102 Amalgamated Welfare Fund
4. Local 1102 Health & Benefit Fund
5. Local 1102 Welfare Fund– Lerner Employees
6. Local 338 Affiliated Benefit Funds
7. Operating Engineers Local 835 Health and Welfare Fund
8. Retail, Wholesale & Dept. Store Union Local 1034 Welfare Fund
9. United Food and Commercial Workers Union in Mount Laurel, New Jersey
10. Indiana Teamsters Health Benefits Fund
11. Service Employees International Union Local 1 Cleveland Welfare Fund
12. Southern CA Pipe Trades Trust Fund
13. Teamsters Local 522 Welfare Fund Roofers Division
14. Texas Carpenters and Millwrights Health and Welfare Fund
15. United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1445 New Hampshire
16. Amalgamated National Health Fund
17. Plumbers and Pipefitters Local No. 630 Welfare Fund
18. United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1000
19. 1199SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund
20. Cleveland Bakers Teamsters
21. DC Cement Masons Welfare Fund
22. Indiana Teamsters Health Benefits Fund
23. Laundry and Dry Cleaning Workers Local No. 52
24. Social Service Employees Union Local 371
25. United Food and Commercial Workers Union (Mount Laurel, NJ)
26. United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1459
27. United Food and Commercial Workers and Participating Employers Interstate Health and Welfare Fund
28. Laborers’ International Union of North America Local Union No. 616 Health and Welfare Plan
29. Service Employees Benefit Fund
30. UFCW Allied Trade Health & Welfare Trust
31. United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1995
32. IBEW No.915
33. Asbestos Workers Local 53 Welfare Fund
34. Florida Trowel Trades
35. Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 123 Welfare Fund
36. UFCW Local 227
37. UFCW Maximus Local 455
38. Local 25 SEIU
39. UFCW Local 1262
40. Local 802 Musicians Health Fund
41. Greater Metropolitan Hotel
42. Local 17 Hospitality Benefit Fund
43. GS-ILA
44. Health and Welfare Benefit System
45. I.U.P.A.T.
46. Transport Workers
47. UFT Welfare Fund
48. PMPS-ILA
49. PS-ILA
What a mess we have gotten ourselves into and after only a short 24 months of this guy being in charge. Although we have had a Congress that has been controlled by a rather corrupt bunch Democrats for 4 years whose focus seems to have been everywhere but where it should have been. When these tax cuts now being debated today were first enacted, they began what would become a trend where we saw 52 consecutive months of job growth. Upon the Democrats taking control of Congress in 2007 what has occurred is that we have lost jobs every single month since. That fact alone should be sufficient to repudiate all that this pathetic political party stands for. Why is it that these people continue to instill any level of confidence in rational thinking people, of any political persuasion? I mean I still see polls where respondents have said that the trust the Democrats more when it comes to the handling of the economy. Why? What in God's name to they base that screwed up opinion on? Or, are they just flat out stupid? Granted the Loony Leftwing Fringe doesn't care about any of this, but has a significant percentage of our population become so certifiably screwy as to still be willing to vote for any of these imbecilic Democrats? I guess only time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment