OK, so we've heard from Obama concerning the debt ceiling. But what did we hear? Did we hear leadership? Did we hear common-sense objectives to address the spending crisis? The answer to those questions is no. What we did heard is Obama's same old blame and obfuscation game, covered in a veneer of feigned willingness to work with Republicans.
Obama has not shown the least interest in working with Republicans in budget or debt concerns – yet now, after we have demanded Republicans show financial propriety/restraint and after our making very clear our steadfast refusal to continue to foot the bill for government financial irresponsibility, Obama pretends to have been on top of things the entire time.
The debt ceiling did not tip toe up on Congress or Obama. Democrats have yet to pass a budget this year, and the new budget Obama submitted was more like the Christmas list of a child with no fiscal constraints. Yet Obama continues to send the not-so-veiled message that it's his way or no way.
Advertisement - story continues below
We need leadership at this moment from both sides of the aisle. We cannot continue to spend and raise taxes as a method to reduce debt and create prosperity. He is responsible for trillions of dollars in debt, yet his only solution is to raise taxes, while offering pretentious spending cuts as a faux display of fiscal restraint.
We know he is listening to us – that's why he gave another press conference yesterday, even if it was intended to bully Republicans. I personally know he is very much aware of my columns and your supportive following. He specifically mentioned his personal tax deductions, something I have been very critical of him over. But here again (as my Facebook friend John points out) he is dishonest. Obama, while once again engaging in class warfare, referenced corporate jets, etc. He referenced the tax breaks available to him as a rich taxpayer, for the first time I can remember. But as John said and I agree, he was intentionally dishonest.
First of all, why did he take advantage of available tax deductions if he is so appalled by the rich not paying their fare share? As my friend John points out, Obama is in the 36.9 percent tax bracket, but he only paid 22.6 percent due to the deductions, itemizations and exemptions he legitimately took advantage of. In so doing, he saved $283,000 last year, while earning $1.7 million. Why, did he not just pay his "fair share," a phrase he is always intoning? If he is so disturbed by the rich not paying their fair share, why doesn't he lead by example? Wouldn't he have more credibility if he were able to say that he could have taken advantage of legitimate tax brakes but didn't and that he is calling on others to follow suit?
Advertisement - story continues below
Congress and Obama are lining up to stick it to us. I was particularly insulted when Obama referenced all of us ignoramuses apparently unable to understand the debt ceiling. And that is exactly what he did when he said only professional politicians can understand it, and that we should just pay attention to going to work and watching television – that we should let the pros handle the economy, because it was beyond our ability to understand.
We once again see Obama's pompous arrogance, as he effectively told us to just shut up and let them handle things under his dictates. He called our voices high-minded pronouncements – that's some way for the president to treat the people footing the bills.
Well, I tell you what, "Mr. Best-selling Author," as you referenced yourself during the press conference – I agree that we should let the professionals handle the debt. But keep in mind that rules you out, because you are obviously lacking and absent of even the most basic financial principles. How dare you speak of saving jobs when millions and millions of people have lost their jobs directly because of your mishandling and interference in the economy.
Honest economists all agree that the Depression of 1929 lasted three to four years longer than it should have, specifically because of Roosevelt's governmental interference and attempts to micro-manage us out of the Depression. My question is: How long will the economic malaise we are now in be extended because of your mismanagement and failed economic policies?
As for John Boehner saying the disagreements with the president over the debt talks aren't personal – I disagree. It's always personal when the government takes our money by constraint and then we have the president tell us to be quiet and let the pros handle things. Specific to that point, letting them handle things is what got us into this mess to begin with.