President Obama is right. There is a lot of unfairness in America. And he is the source of much of it.
Last time I heard so much talk about fairness -- as in the plaintive "that's not fair" -- was when my children were toddlers. But Obama seems to think that the word will have some spellbinding effect when wielded against the wealthy Mitt Romney.
Barack Obama has ditched the "hope and change" slogan of his 2008 campaign and is now peddling "fairness" as his mantra. He promises he will make life "fair" for Americans. He launched his strategy when he called up the spirit of Teddy Roosevelt in Kansas back in December. It is redolent, too, of the come from behind victory of Harry Truman who preached a "Fair Deal" for Americans.
Obama followed it up by trying to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act -- a law supposedly designed to help women sue business for gender-based wage discrimination. Even the Washington Post thought it was deeply flawed, and it was struck down in the Democratic-controlled Senate. But it has played into the "fairness" and "Republican War on Women" campaign talking points.
Before that there was talk of resurrecting the "Fairness Doctrine" to kill off talk radio.
Then the Buffett Rule was supposed to ensure the "rich" paid their fair share of taxes and that too was a "fairness fiction" that nevertheless played a supporting role in President Obama's Class War (the only war he supports other than the war against the GOP -- in his mind, a redundancy).
But does Obama himself pass a "fairness test"?
Can the Romney campaign use political jujitsu against Barack Obama and remind Americans of just how unfair Barack Obama's presidency has been for so many Americans?
Obama's latest fairness gambit was his proposal to allow taxes to rise for high earners -- for families, anyone earning more than $250,000 annually -- while keeping the Bush tax cuts for those below that figure. The disparate treatment was justified in the interests of "fairness." Of course, the net effect would be harmful since so many job creators earn more than $250,000 per year. The fuel that drives job creation would be sucked into Washington, D.C., already among the economically healthiest areas of the nation. Is that fair to workers looking for jobs?
Obama signaled his desire to take money away from the "rich" very early in his career -- even going back to his community organizing days. Most Americans only became aware of his agenda in 2008 when he touted that he wanted to "spread the wealth" but there was also a time before this when the self-declared master poker play showed his hand. He told Charles Gibson that he wanted to raise capital gain taxes even if government revenues would fall -- all in the interest- again, that magical word"fairness." Imagine -- the biggest spending President in American history would rather take money away from people than increase the amount the government takes in every year.
However, Obama's presidency fails the fairness test in many more ways.
Is it fair that one half of all Americans pay no federal income tax? They have an interest in extracting as much money from the government -- that is, taxpayers -- as they can. Coincidentally or not, that seems to be the same level of rock solid support for Obama.
Barack Obama has helped create this permanent dependency-not just by his anti-growth policies-but by subtly and stealthily changing the definition of the "poverty level" in ways that triggers, literally, a never-ending redistribution of income. Once this poverty level is met, a range of welfare benefits become available.
On top of that bureaucratic tactic, the administration recently (and quietly) invited -- in a possibly illegal act -- states to apply for waivers to the work requirement that was a centerpiece of welfare reform and was one of the most successful anti-poverty measures in American history.
Stanley Kurtz characterized Barack Obama as Senator Stealth, based on the secretive ways he fiddled with legislation when he served in the Illinois Senate -- far from the public eye and media scrutiny. Now he has become President Stealth-and this from a man who promised the most transparent administration in history.
Is it fair that so few people in the media informed the public of these changes -- ones that redefine the concept of welfare, gut welfare reform, and that will massively expand the welfare rolls?....
Read more:
No, it isn't fair that the media never tells the whole story on any politician, but obama in particular. Do a Google search on "The Obama Files; Obama and ACORN" to learn a lot that wasn't in the media.
And obama has never done anything wrong; see ACORN
Quoting _Kissy_:
Vote Robme in and you'll never see your money with his casino capitalism and ponzi schemes
I don't see a difference between the two of them. They are puppets. All of them. They will do as they are told. The last president who stood up to the power behind the throne had his brains shot out.
Quoting gsprofval:And obama has never done anything wrong; see ACORN
Quoting _Kissy_:
Vote Robme in and you'll never see your money with his casino capitalism and ponzi schemes
Quoting resipsa:
They could pass a budget but Reid won't even try
Because it would "cost" too much. LOL
I havre to admit, I do admire the republicans ability to tow the party line, stay on message, and not break ranks, even as I despise about everything else about them. It's time for the democrats to take a page from their book. I am tired of these wishy washy blue dogs etc. the democrats ned to do like the republicans do, break ranks and we will primary you.
Lois Lerner, IRS Official, On Leave Of Absence: Reports
- imamomzilla
on Jul. 16, 2012 at 8:35 PM