Desperately Seeking To Avoid the Real Issues

Mr. Obama has recently taken to talking about everything but what matters.

This is a “calculator” on the White House Web site that attempts to get us to focus on his millionaire tax obsession. (Update October 20, 2012: The “calculator” has been removed from the White House Web site, remarkable.)

It is outright laughable. Mr. Obama claims there are 55,000 millionaires that pay a lower effective tax rate than millions of middle-income Americans. And then asks, “How many millionaires paid a lower effective tax rate than you?”

My resentment runneth over! My envy is at a peak! My concept of “fairness” is so insulted by this outrage that I just might have to spend more time frothing than working. Better yet, I will become a “community organizer” and run for President.

Karl Rove has made clear the nonsense of the Buffet rule in the Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Obama offers his “calculator” as if it matters. As if the capital gains and dividends that resulted in a lower effective rate were not net of a 35% corporate tax rate on the earnings underlying the gains and funding the dividends. As if this income was not realized by taking real risk that created and supported jobs. As if these so called millionaires are the same people every year (they are not). As if these taxpaying millionaires did not represent only 1% of the 145,000,000 tax filers who did not already pay 21% of the taxes. Can you say, “canard?”

Isn’t it time the media and the public and the politicians call Mr. Obama out for playing dodge ball while failing to lead?

The obvious and important issues of the Presidential and Congressional campaigns are DEBT, SPENDING, and JOBS. DEBT, SPENDING, and JOBS. DEBT, SPENDING, and JOBS. DEBT, SPENDING, and JOBS.

Come on Mr. Obama. Get with the program.

Follow-up: The above in pictures can be found here.

An Messaging Opportunity

Mr. Obama and the DNC have been “messaging” their taxes, their bribes (and here), and their debt (and here) as “Reaganesque,” claiming they are just like Ronald Reagan and that Romney is a “radical” conservative. You have to be amazed at the audacity as well as the cooperation of the media in this carnival barking.

What do you say when your opponent is a effective orator with the most clever propagandists in the media and entertainment businesses working to get him re-elected? How about something something founded in truth?

“Rather than bribe you for a vote with free stuff that is not actually free, we are going to give you control and choice in your health care decisions and in your life.”
“We will give you the choice of taking money your employer spends on your health care and let you shop for insurance coverage and medical products and services.”
“We will give you a national and transparent market in health insurance and let you shop across state lines, rather than allow the Federal government to control health care from Washington, DC.”
“Instead of a 15 person Federal board to determine what medical products and services are covered by Medicare and Medicaid, and what the price will be, we will assure a transparent and competitive market in health care products and services exists in your area.”
“We will not increase taxes on success to pay for government run health care or with the pretense that such taxes will meaningfully change our unsustainable entitlement programs.”
“Rather than pursue control over your decisions and your life we will protect your freedoms.”
“Rather than further tax the most innovative and successful we will assure the incentives and freedoms they need to to pursue their dreams, so you will have opportunities to pursue yours.”
“Rather than divide our people based on envy and resentment we will bring Americans together based on the proven principles of freedom, responsibility, and opportunity.”

All other thoughts welcome. Now if we can just get Mr. Romney to listen …

Pete Weldon
americanstance.org

Politics of Division

Mr. Obama’s and the Democratic National Committee’s signature political methodology is to divide us. So much for the American character. Here are the details.

The Democratic National Committee has been sending mail pieces to women of child bearing age promoting all the “FREE” stuff they will receive under Obamacare. Here are three of them for your viewing pleasure:

DNC Mail Piece #1

DNC Mail Piece #2

DNC Mail Piece #3

Some favorite quotes from the above with commentary:

“Many insurance companies can no longer charge any out of pocket costs for many preventative services thanks to America’s New Health Care Law signed by President Obama on March 23, 2010.”

Who then is going to pay the cost of those services?

“Thanks to America’s New Health Care Law Can’t Cut Off You or Your Family.” “105 million Americans no longer face lifetime limits on their insurance plans.”

Did you happen to check your current health insurance and see if the premium you are paying (likely together with your employer) already includes unlimited service for your lifetime? Do you know what it costs to provide unlimited service? Do you know who is going to pay for it? Did you know that “America’s New Health Care Law” includes a centralized Independent Payment Advisory Board of 15 people appointed by the President who will determine Medicare reimbursement rates for procedures that will guide what your health insurance will cover and will reimburse?

“Thanks to America’s New Health Care Law, birth control for women like you will soon be available for FREE.”

What a deal! Not. The reality is that such services are not FREE at all. The women not paying co-pays will be paying the real cost of these services in the premiums they pay for health insurance, whether paid directly or through their employer. In fact, everyone will be paying as these mandates do not make things “FREE,” they make them SOCIALIZED.

Women of child bearing age receiving this DNC propaganda might well ask a few questions.

If preventative services for women of child bearing age have been socialized who is paying for preventive services for males and for females not of child bearing age?
What is it going to cost me (either directly or through my employer) to provide free services for other people?
What is the real cost of socializing health care, what will it cost me, and will I have any control over the cost and the services covered?
What if the annual cost currently paid by my employer to provide health care for me was $4,674 and for my family of four was $13,210?
What if I had the choice of receiving that health care cash currently paid by my employer and shop for health insurance that met my specific needs (just as I currently do with my automobile insurance)?
Why does the government presume they can meet my needs by socializing my health care and taking my choices away?

Finally, why does Mr. Obama and the DNC try to bribe me with fasle goodies instead of telling me the truth and giving me a real and clear choice?

F/U March 30, 2012 – This story confirms that the DNC propaganda works. It would seem our political discourse is meaningless. All that is needed to acquire power is enough cleverness and money to mislead people.

Freedom or Serfdom?

This recent article in The Wall Street Journal addresses the failure of European “social justice” policy. The European realities foreshadow the fate of a similarly “progressive” America.

Mr. Obama’s speech on April 13, 2011 at Georgetown University offers a clear understanding of his “progressive” agenda. Listen carefully to Mr. Obama, watch his mannerisms, question his assertions with care, and you will understand.

In this speech Mr. Obama states, “Indeed, to those in my own party, I say that if we truly believe in a progressive vision of our society, we have the obligation to prove that we can afford our commitments. If we believe that government can make a difference in people’s lives, we have the obligation to prove that it works – by making government smarter, leaner and more effective.”

Has anyone ever seen a central government be “smarter, leaner, and more effective?”
Does any American believe it is the role of government to “make a difference in people’s lives” other than to protect the freedoms guaranteed to the people in the Constitution? In what ways? How much of a difference? At whose expense? Why?
What role do religious institutions and charities play when the government sees itself as both moral authority and funding source?
What limits can citizens place on such a government when it has the unlimited capacity to borrow against our future earnings and those of our children and grand children to fund its adventures?
What limits can citizens place on such a government when unlimited borrowing capacity is used to increase dependency of the very citizens it expects to pay off the debt it undertakes?
What moral authority can such a government have when its ability to “make a difference in people’s lives” is based on cash and “security” exchanged for votes?

Mr. Obama and those who have worked with him to gain control of the US government do not believe in freedom from over reaching government, they believe in exercising their will over all citizens as the righteous arbiters of policy, payment, and debt. This aim is fundamentally antithetic to American principles and values at the core of our national and individual success.

American needs to move away from centralized dictates of progressive conceit if we are to secure a future of freedom and opportunity.

Obama’s Annual Fiscal Failure

Mr. Obama confirmed his role as Demagogue-in-Chief on April 13, 2011, at George Washington University. In this speech Mr. Obama:

Accurately points out the unsustainable nature of the current entitlement state and uses the example of the annual interest on our debt increasing to as much as $1,000,000,000,000 in coming years. (Our current annual Federal revenue is about $2,500,000,000,000.)
Excoriates the then recently passed House budget that proposed moving Medicare to a voucher system without mentioning that the extent and value of vouchers is determined by each Congress and President. What Mr. Obama objects to is the individual, rather than the government, taking responsibility for seeking out the best health insurance coverage for their circumstances in a competitive market.
Talks about a $4 trillion dollar reduction in the deficit over ten years but never offers details of spending cuts.
Says we must uphold our commitments to social security and health care for all citizens while making these promises affordable without offering any specifics (but wait, I just noted he excoriates the specifics in the House budget), even though every actuary in the government has run the numbers and knows the current commitments are unsustainable (didn’t Mr. Obama note that earlier in this speech?).
Plays the populist fiddle about “rich people” paying their fair share without acknowledging that the social security and health care entitlement liabilities cannot be resolved with tax increases on “the rich.”
Talks about the 1% of “rich” Americans who are better off than they were ten years ago but fails to mention that his plan increases taxes on singles making over $200,000 per year in income and couples making over $250,000 (millions of these people are specifically not the 1% straw men).
Fails to mention the nearly 50% of American’s who pay no income taxes and the 30% who actually receive checks through refundable tax credits.
Fails to mention that the Bush tax changes he believes unfair and which he blames for our current out of control debt and deficits also included increases in earned income tax credits that took somewhere between 6 to 10 million Americans OFF the tax rolls.

So, rather than work together to restructure our tax and entitlement programs to put both on a sustainable course that would support economic growth, Mr. Obama decided to play ideological political chicken with our country’s future in hope of eventually getting his way, that being – take more tax dollars from people earning over $200,000 a year and redistributing it to everyone else while leaving our unsustainable entitlement liabilities basically intact.

Mr. Obama released his 2013 budget proposal in February 2012. So, what leadership has been demonstrated since his April 13, 2011 speech? None. His 2013 budget seeks even more tax increases on the “rich” than proposed earlier while claiming trillions in spending cuts that still result in trillion dollar annual deficits. The “cuts” are either illusory (claiming credit for money not spent in the future on the occupation of Iraq because our military forces have withdrawn -really!) or result from projected reductions in the rate of growth in existing programs (not actual cuts in spending). If we follow Mr. Obama we will be taxing success at extraordinary levels while continuing to spend money we don’t have. The private economy will not grow fast enough to finance further deficit spending because money available for investment will be reduced by tax increases.

What, you ask, is the solution? We need to fundamentally restructure social security, medicare, and medicaid so that each generation pays their own way. (Remember, my daughter gets it and is not too happy.) We need to reduce the role and leverage of the Federal government in health care, housing, environmental policy, energy, and the financial industry so the focus is on enforcement rather than government participation, open markets rather than government mandates. We need to empower the States to compete among themselves for employment and opportunity. We need to change the tax code so it does not favor any types of expenditures (neither crony capitalism nor crony unionism) and removes the burden on double and triple taxation on dividend and non-US income. More simply put, we need a Federal government committed to empowering the individual.

We need to fill the United States Congress and the Presidency with citizens committed to limiting the role of the Federal government to the protection of our freedoms, rather than one rapaciously claiming those freedoms for its own purposes.