Posted on 11/22/2012 9:58:20 AM PST by SeekAndFind
After his party’s devastating setback in the 2010 midterm elections, Barack Obama was reelected earlier this month by painting his Republican opponents as heartless in favoring lower taxes for the rich. They were portrayed as nativists for opposing the DREAM Act amnesty for illegal immigrants, and as callous in battling the federal takeover of health care.
Republicans countered with arguments that higher taxes on the employer class hurt the economy in general. They assumed most voters knew that amnesties are euphemisms for undermining federal law and in the past have had the effect of promoting more illegal immigration. They tried to point out that there is no such thing as free universal health care, since Obamacare will only shift responsibility from health-care practitioners and patients to inefficient government bureaucracies and hide the true costs with higher taxes.
And they utterly failed to convince the American people of any of that.
Why doesn’t the Republican-controlled House of Representatives give both voters and President Obama what they wished for?
The current battle over the budget hinges on whether to return to the Clinton-era income-tax rates, at least for those who make more than $250,000 a year. Allowing federal income rates to climb to near 40 percent on that cohort would bring in only about $80 billion in revenue a year — a drop in the bucket when set against the $1.3 trillion annual deficit that grew almost entirely from out-of-control spending since 2009.
Instead, why not agree to hike federal-income-tax rates only on the true “millionaires and billionaires,” “fat cats,” and “corporate jet owners” whom Obama has so constantly demonized? In other words, skip over the tire-store owner or dentist, and tax those, for example, who make $1 million or more in annual income. Eight out of the ten wealthiest counties in the United States voted for Obama. Corporate lawyers and the affluent in Hollywood and on Wall Street should all not mind “paying their fair share.”
Upping federal tax rates to well over 40 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year would also offer a compromise: shielding most of the small businesspeople Republicans wish to protect while allowing Obama to tax the 1-percenters whom he believes have so far escaped paying what they owe, and then putting responsibility on the president to keep his part of the bargain in making needed cuts in spending.
Likewise, instead of hiking death taxes on small businesspeople, why not close loopholes for billion-dollar estates by taxing their gargantuan bequests to pet foundations that avoid estate taxes? Why should a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates act as if he built his own business and can solely determine how his fat-cat fortune is spent for the next century — meanwhile robbing the government of billions of dollars in lost estate taxes along with any federal say in how such fortunes are put to public use?
The president flipped in an election year on the DREAM Act. Suddenly, in 2012, Obama decided that he indeed did have the executive power to order amnesty without congressional approval for those who came illegally as children, stayed in school or joined the military, avoided arrest and thus deserved citizenship. In response, Republicans supposedly lost Latino support by insisting that federal immigration law be enforced across the board, regardless of race, class, gender, or national origin.
But why not make the president’s DREAM Act part of the envisioned grand bargain on immigration? Once it is agreed upon that we have the ability to distinguish those foreign nationals deserving of amnesty, then surely we also have the ability to determine who does not meet those agreed-upon criteria.
Why, then, cannot conservatives allow a pathway to citizenship for the play-by-the-rules millions who qualify, while regrettably enforcing an un-DREAM Act for others who just recently arrived illegally; enrolled in, and have remained on, public assistance; or have been convicted of a crime? Who could object to that fair compromise?
Finally, Obamacare will be imposed on all Americans by 2014. But so far the Obama administration has granted more than 1,200 exemptions to favored corporations and unions, covering about 4 million Americans. Shouldn’t Republicans seek to end all exemptions rather than tackle the improbable task of overturning Obamacare itself? Their motto should be: “Equality for all; special treatment for no one!”
One of the brilliant themes of the 2012 Obama campaign was forcing Republicans, on principle, to systematically oppose most of the things that the administration wanted them to oppose — thereby shielding itself from the unwelcome consequences of its own ideology while winning political points. Now, in defeat, Republicans should agree to let the chips lie where they fall: Tax only the truly rich; reward only the truly deserving illegal immigrants; and exempt no one from Obamacare.
Nothing could be fairer or more equal than that.
— Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author, most recently, of The End of Sparta.
[ (A)-Barack Obama was reelected earlier this month by painting his Republican opponents as heartless in favoring lower taxes for the rich. ]
-OR-
(B)-by massive in your face voter fraud.. probably BOTH...
“B’ is for sure.. “A” maybe happened maybe not..
I especially want the obamacare exemptions done away with in their entirety. The people getting the exemptions were some of the most virulent supporters of this monstrosity. Let them feel the full weight of the policies they are forcing on the rest of us, including, even especially, Congress. It is particularly despicable and disgusting that those members of Congress who shoved this through without one thought of the Constitution, exempted themselves from it. We need to flood their offices with faxes, calls, and letters demanding that they live by the same rules they’ve subjected us to. They won’t of course, but I want them to know that their blatant hypocrisy doesn’t go unnoticed.
If the current open season on whites doesn’t change their minds, I suspect they’re lost. They will be crying for forgiveness just before their throats are cut , after watching their daughters be gang-raped and their young male children doused with gasoline and set on fire. I hear of too many of the parents of white kids murdered by blacks nod their heads in agreement while the usual suspects all rush to the microphones to make sure we all know “race had nothing to do with it” even as the murderers shouted such things as “die white girl”.
Fine. I will be watching from behind my door with my family (all armed of course), and will laugh in their faces when the mob chases them to my door. They can die by the principles they tried to force us all to “live” by before things reached their natural conclusion.
Ya, tax Hollywood and the Political class, lets make this about class after all. Tax those who supported Obama and demonized the business class... why the hell can’t we play that game...
BTTT
Yeah, I'd start blaming them for the current situation too, since it's only the truth.
It might be a comforting thought, but I haven't seen much evidence.
Democrats have edge, but presidency still in play (Michael Barone)Obama earned the downgrade. His final vote total will be 4 to 5 percent smaller than in 2008—marking the first time in American history a president has won his first bid for reelection with fewer voters and with fewer electoral votes than in his initial run. (By contrast, Mitt Romney’s final total surpassed that of his Republican predecessor in 2008.)
I'm talking about the fact that the large majority of states voted just a little bit more Democratic in 2012 than they did in 2004.The Party’s Problem
Romney was not a drag on the Republican party. The Republican party was a drag on him. Aaron Blake pointed out in the Washington Post that Romney ran ahead of most of the Republican Senate candidates: He did better than Connie Mack in Florida, George Allen in Virginia, Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin, Denny Rehberg in Montana, Jeff Flake in Arizona, Pete Hoekstra in Michigan, Deb Fischer in Nebraska, Rick Berg in North Dakota, Josh Mandel in Ohio, and of course Todd Akin in Missouri and Richard Mourdock in Indiana. In some cases Romney did a lot better. (He also did slightly better than Ted Cruz in Texas, a race Blake for some reason ignored.)
[ It might be a comforting thought, but I haven’t seen much evidence. ]
Obama Lost in states with photo ID, Won in states withOUT photo id..
The lack of evidence in most cases is because OF NOT searching for any evidence..
However Obama may have basically won in some places BUT MASSIVELY WON because of fraud..
There could be a whole range of possibility’s..
I doubt republicans STAYED HOME.. but their votes were “converted” or “LOST”.. or other options..
Not only in the presidential elections but in the republican primarys as well.. could be in State and Local elections too..
The differences between 2010 elections and 2012 elections screams something fishy is going on..
Going on in ALL ELECTIONS...
What Zero’s corporate sponsors really want is taxes on small business pwners with their massive tax shelters, er, “charitable foundations” untouched.
He has worked really hard to destroy one industry after another. He has declared war on the Catholic Church.
He has done everything possible to destroy foundation institutions.
He has employed racists and misogynists as czars and cabinet leaders.
He has precided over the Party of Death for years.
All this and more got him handily reelected.
Why would Obama not be Obama, and what can he possibly do being Obama that can help the United Staes in any way?
There seems to be a great deal of delusion among people who think Obama can do ANYTHING to turn away others who think what he has done is simply the best of all possible worlds.
The question is: How long before the collapse that the majority are so in favor of? Then, how long before the Republicans accept the blame for that collapse so Obama can be even more popular?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.