From the AP:
Drawing clear battle lines for next year's elections, a combative President Barack Obama on Monday demanded that the richest Americans pay higher taxes to help cut soaring U.S. deficits by more than $3 trillion. He promised to veto any effort by congressional Republican to cut Medicare benefits for the elderly without raising taxes as well.Now if only President Obama and the Democrats hold the line on the taxes in the plan. And I want to know more about the details of the cuts to Medicare and Medicaid.
"This is not class warfare. It's math," Obama declared, anticipating Republican criticism, which was quick in coming.
The Republican reaction was swift and bluntly dismissive.If the Republicans want to call it class warfare to ask the very richest people in the country to pay their fair share in taxes, that's fine with me. Right now the poor and middle income folks are losing the class war, and it's time to fight back against the greedy people and their supporters in Congress. The president's plan won't make it through Congress, but - Damn! - the Democrats will have a decent issue to run on in the coming election.
"Veto threats, a massive tax hike, phantom savings and punting on entitlement reform is not a recipe for economic or job growth-or even meaningful deficit reduction," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell. "The good news is that the Joint Committee is taking this issue far more seriously than the White House."
Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) only has $400,000 left over after paying his expenses, so he says he can't afford higher taxes.
ReplyDeleteMy heart bleeds for him....
However does he manage to feed, clothe, and shelter his family? Oops! I see Fleming's children are grown. Perhaps that helps to ease the burden. From his website:
ReplyDeleteJohn Fleming's primary goal is to uphold America's constitution and he is working in Washington with the central purpose of representing the people as a servant leader.
One can't help but admire his noblesse oblige.
Still can't for the life of me see where Obama is seriously interested in doing the President's job as leader of the Executive Branch, as distinct from enjoying the percs & prestige that come with the state of being "the President". Being on a par with Queen of England - everyone's figurehead head of state, with all responsibility assigned to others - seems to be his ideal. Very little of Roosevelt (either of 'em), LBJ, or Bill Clinton in this one. Do you think Hilary would have sat on her butt for the last three years and that the Democratic Party would be where i now is had she been nominated and elected?
ReplyDeleteObama's dismal lack of drive and backbone is probably the single most significant reason the troglodyte base of the Republican party enjoys the clout and power it now does.
Lapin, I'm disappointed with Obama, but, to be honest, I don't know that Clinton would have been all that different. Both Clinton and Obama are right-leaning centrists. Of course, I can't say for sure what kind of president Clinton would have been. Perhaps she would have had a stiffer spine. Neither was my favorite, and I didn't really have a preference for one over the other as the Democratic candidate.
ReplyDeleteYou could be right, but the Clintons did know when to attack. Don't think this one does.
ReplyDeleteSomething completely different - the Gafcon primates, meeting in the religious freedom-loving Peoples' Republic of China, have just issued a communiqué crammed with praise of China's hyper-Erastian government.
What a stellar cast of signatories to the communiqué.
ReplyDeleteMost Rev Dr John Chew
Most Rev Henry Luke Orombi
Most Rev Dr Mouneer Hanna Anis
Most Rev Justice Ofei Akrofi
Most Rev Bernard Ntahoturi
Most Rev Nicholas Dikeriehi Okoh*
Most Rev Stephen Than Myint Oo
Most Rev Hector Zavala
Most Rev Eliud Wabukala
Most Rev Onesphore Rwaje
Most Rev Albert Chama
I'll read the text later.
Gafcon -- seriously creepy.
ReplyDeleteI'll continue to support Obama but the fact that it's not Pres. Hilary attests to the fact that even in racist areas, a man of any color is preferable to a woman of any color. She simply was/is more politically savy. But -- ooo -- how creepy -- no pr**k.
I will understand if you delete this.
susankay, did you see the picture of the GAFCON crew at Lapin's link?
ReplyDeleteOf course, I won't delete your comment. Why should I?
I didn't want the man of color nor the woman, because I don't agree with them on a good many issues. I'd have had the white man who could never be elected, Dennis Kucinich.
BTW, have you heard back about your biopsy.
To Republicans, the declaration "It's math" is ITSELF a Godless, Socialist Plot (Math gave us "Evolution" and "Global Warming", didn't it?)
ReplyDeleteSomeone at a site that will remain unlinked and nameless has just weighed the Chinese & British governments in the Religious Freedom Balance and has found that of the British wanting. "... the Chinese government is probably interfering less with their state church than the British Parliament is interfering with THEIR state church. At least the Chinese will not be appointing Nick Holtam to be the next ABoC."
ReplyDeleteRe the Nick Holtam reference, check (during the next four or five days, while the link is still good) the BBC's Sunday interview with Ruth Gledhill on the rumours that Rowan Williams will resign (she thinks that he will). HT to The Lead on this link. The Gledhill interview is first up on the link & quite short, so no waiting or wasted time. Check it out.
ps on the BBC link just posted. For some reason it kicks in seven minutes into the programme, immediately after the Gledhill interview. Use your mouse to pull the time elapsed bar (don't know correct name for this) at the top of the link, back to the beginning of the interview.
ReplyDeleteJust checked out +Nick Holtam. Isn't he a good guy? [I know, I know: that's what we said re Rowan...]
ReplyDeleteI personally think that if Hillary had been elected she would have come out swinging right away because she knew from experience exactly what the Republicans were made of. I suspect she would have kneed them in the collective foreheads right away as an opening move. It is true that neither she nor Obama is as left-wing as might have been wished, but it is also true she would have taken less shit and got more done. That's my own opinion, but of course I'm not "on the ground", so to speak.
ReplyDeleteOh, but Lapin, Obama does know when to fight . . .
ReplyDeleteJust when it's time for the next election.
Bleh.
You got it, Mark.
ReplyDeleteReaction on conservative sites to the Gafcon primates' communiqué, indicates that the primates have pee-ed of right and left equally with this one. One poster went so far as to suggest that it is the type of thing one would have expected from a pinko fellow-traveler (I paraphrase, just) like "Mrs Schori".
Just when it's time for the next election.
ReplyDeleteTrue, but Obama signed the repeal of DADT. McCain would not have.
I'm losing my grasp of who's who amongst the breakaway groups. There is membership overlap in many cases, and I can't keep the connections straight in my mind. Perhaps that's their intention: obfuscation. And I'm beginning to care less, although AMiE sparked my interest, because I predicted their emergence some years ago.
I think Obama and his timing for fighting are both welcome for a second term.
ReplyDeleteLeonardo/Len
Right, Len. We must consider the alternative.
ReplyDeleteIF the fighting is not a campaign promise, merely.
ReplyDeleteDon't believe it will happen just because he says it will. He's a politician; not someone actually held accountable for the job he's doing, but part of a market of speculation on what job he will do.
He promised a lot last time, remember?
Mark, I remember the promises, but I also think a good many Democrats, including me, projected onto Obama qualities he never had, but we wished he had. I knew better, but I did it anyway.
ReplyDelete