PostHeaderIcon The Tax “Compromise”

In what I see as a hint of things to come, the GOP is being conned into a so-called “compromise” on extending the Bush tax rates. Why do I think this? Let me explain…

First, consider the run-up to this sham compromise: the dems make a big show of trying to pass a bifurcated version of a tax code extension (that is, an extension for incomes under a certain threshold, initially $250,000, and expiration for incomes over that threshold). Of course they were unable to get this passed due to those nasty republicans who are “holding the American people hostage”.

Wait a minute here! Yes, the GOP won enough seats to retake control of the House but these folks are not seated until January, 2011. In the meantime, isn’t the current Congress virtually the same as the one that shoved Obama-care down our collective throats just a few months ago?? They could do that, over the protest of a clear majority of Americans, but they could not pass a partial tax code extension that could possibly have gotten majority support if presented properly? Give me a break. The dems did not pass the partial extension because THEY DID NOT WANT TO!

Why would they not want to? Consider this: letting the current tax rates expire would surely have further damaged the economy; but, there is no reason whatever to think that extending them will help the economy for the simple reason that these are the rates that were in effect during the economic downturn. So, letting the entire package be extended simply maintains the status quo, nothing more, nothing less. Ergo, allowing an extension of current rates should not give the GOP any long-term benefits to help them in 2012. After all, nobody can run an effective campaign against something that did not happen (such as the tax increases and subsequent damage)

But they do give Obama something to run against in 2012. I can already see the campaign ads… “I wanted to raise taxes on the rich in 2010 but the mean GOP would not let me – instead they held the country hostage… give me 4 more years and a democrat congress and we will get it done!”

In the meantime, do the dems get anything else out of this “compromise”? You bet they do. 13 more months of “unemployment insurance”, another giant leap toward something the progressives have lusted after since the crime that was the FDR administration – a national minimum INCOME, guaranteed by our government.

For sure, Obama seems to be crying crocodile tears over what the nasty GOP is about to “force” him to do. Before eating this crap, remember the consummate actor he was during the campaign. He may not know how to run a government but he sure knows how to serve up BS in a package that looks like filet mignon to the gullible.

Again, I hope I am wrong. It remains to be seen.

Troy L Robinson

4 Responses to “The Tax “Compromise””

  • Daedalus says:

    Also Troy,
    The temporary cut in Payroll tax with no equal cut in spending. This justs accelerates the time of default for the SS program.

  • ◄Dave► says:

    Now we are finding significant pork in it too… As far as I am concerned, any Republican who votes for it needs to go to the top of the TEA Party list of must-remove incumbrepublocrats in 2012. What the hell is it going to take to convince these fools that we are serious about stopping their !@#$%^&* spending? ◄Dave►

  • As reality unfolds, it seems I was far too mild in my critique. Already we have members of the GOP leadership inserting earmarks in the new pork-wagon bill. For instance, Senator McConnell, whose excuse is that he inserted his before taking the pledge. Isn’t this like going to an AA meeting and continuing to drink from the bottle you bought before you took the AA pledge? If McConnell (and others) were sincere, they would retract those pre-pledge earmarks as a gesture of good faith.

    Too many of them also are trying to reconcile support for the tax “compromise” with the notion that morphing temporary unemployment help into a permanent new entitlement is somehow worth the cost.

    How about letting the lefties have their tax increase, sans additional idleness payments, let them take the grief for it, then let the incoming GOP House reverse the whole thing in February with a retroactive tax cut, without the additional spending in the current “compromise”? Would this not play better in Peoria?

    In fact, I suggest that many (most?) Americans would tolerate a mild tax INCREASE in the upper brackets in exchange for massive spending cuts. After all, is it not spending, and the debt it incurs, that are destroying our Republic?

    Once again, these bums think that what made you angry in November will be forgotten by Christmas and business can go on as usual. Don’t prove them correct!

    Troy L Robinson

    • ◄Dave► says:

      Looks like the R’s got the message and withdrew any support for the omnibus. Dirty Harry had to drop it entirely because he didn’t have enough votes for cloture. I reckon the GOP dodged a serious bullet in the process.

      I would have to give McConnell a bit more credit than you, because he seems to have gotten the message loud and clear. As I understand it, the earmarks he and others are charged with putting in the omnibus bill didn’t quite happen the way you suggest. Back in the spring, when the various committees were working on their budget responsibilities, which should have resulted in 13 separate spending bills passed before Oct. 1st, the idea of an earmark ban wasn’t being seriously contemplated.

      Naturally, all those who regarded it their job to reclaim their constituent’s share of wasted federal taxes, had submitted their pork projects as was custom. It is worth noting that even Ron Paul, who always votes against them, still submits requests for his districts share of the pork. He reckons his constituents deserve their share if they pass. There is logic in that.

      For election purposes, the D’s chose not to meet their budget deadline with the 13 bills, and simply didn’t pass a budget at all this year. Now, somewhat out of the blue – at least to the public – the Senate D’s unilaterally dumped all the various committee’s work product into a single omnibus bill that contained some of the R’s earlier pork requests.

      The R’s had now sworn to a pork ban, but they weren’t even allowed to withdraw these obsolete pork requests that they had already abandoned. The surprise omnibus was being brought up as an up or down vote as is, because there was no time left for amending it before the government would have to shut down.

      This lame duck is a nightmare, but I am willing to wait until after January 4th to evaluate whether the GOP, and those D’s up for reelection in ’12, are taking us seriously. More importantly, I will be watching to see if the TEA Party folks stay engaged, paying attention, and continuously holding their feet to the fire. The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance, and I sure hope enough of us stay at our post. ◄Dave►

Leave a Reply

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Political Spectrum
Political Circle
Archives
Blogroll
Internal Links