Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Barbara Boxer Bows to the Tea Party

Much of the venom spewed by the left against the Tea Party people is coming back to bite them. Take, for example, Senator Barbara Boxer running for re-election in California. Monday evening President Obama went to that state to stump for her. The interesting part of the event occurred as Boxer and Obama both referenced the Tea Party activists to inspire enthusiasm for Boxer's campaign. Ironic.

Boxer pleaded with the audience to "go toe to toe" with the tea partiers. At least she didn't tell them to "get in their faces" as Obama did as a candidate in his race for President.

Obama was heckled by protesters at this event. Protesters from his own side of the political aisle. They were letting him know of their displeasure that the defense department's don't ask, don't tell policy is still in place. Obama was not pleased and that registered on his face immediately. He actually left the podium and walked over to Boxer, also on the stage, and returned. He said he was confirming with Boxer that she did not vote for don't ask, don't tell in the inception of the law, so he is sure she'll vote to repeal it. A bizarre move on his part, but he was clearly flummoxed over the display of the protesters.

He is not amused by opposition from either side of the aisle, as it turns out.

From Roger Simon at Pajamas Media:

Much has been made of Barack Obama’s claim to have been “amused” by the nationwide tea party demonstrations on Tax Day last week. Really, he told acolytes at a Democratic fundraiser (expected haul: $2.5 million), “they should be saying thank you.”

Applause. Cries of “Thank you.” Laugh track?

I believe that the editorialist for Investor’s Business Daily got it exactly right about the second part of Obama’s response to the rallies: “Thanks for What?” he asked.

Why should they [the tea partiers] be thankful? As the president himself said on his weekly radio address a week ago, “one thing we have not done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000; that’s another promise we kept.”

In fact, that wasn’t his promise at all.

Here’s what candidate Obama really said in September of 2008: “Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”

Got that? “Not any of your taxes.” The claim of no tax hikes on those below $250,000 as a result of the current administration’s policies is completely and utterly false.

A report from the House Ways & Means Committee’s GOP members notes that, since January 2009, Congress and the president have enacted $670 billion in tax increases. That’s $2,100 for each person in America. At least 14 of those tax hikes, the report says, break Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000. Roughly $316 billion of the tax hikes — 14 increases in all — hit middle-class families, the report says.

This comes in addition to recent data from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office showing U.S. spending and indebtedness growing at an alarming rate. Government spending now totals 25% of GDP, a quarter above its long-term average. By 2035, it will hit 34% of GDP at current trends — a 70% increase in the real size of government in just 25 years.

As is his practice, lowly as it is, Obama went on to name other politicians from the opposition party that have the nerve to do their job - oppose bad policy being pushed through by this aggressive new administration. Be berated Senate Minority Leader McConnell for meeting with Wall Street executives over the pending legislation of financial reform. Ironic statements again - Obama himself benefited mightily from Wall Street as he campaigned for President - over $1 million from Goldman Sachs employees alone. He wants to advance the talking point that it is only Republican politicians who receive money from 'fat cats' on Wall Street. Actually, in the last election, it was Democrats who received 77% of Wall Street campaign contributions.

Boxer is in a difficult re-election bid. She has three strong GOP challengers this time around and is running just about even with them. It is a statement of how difficult her race is proving to be that she asked Obama to campaign for her.

We can only hope Obama produces the same election result in California that he did in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts.

No comments: