Thursday, November 11, 2010

Which Dem for President in 2012?

Subsequent to this Post, President Obama has denied that he is caving to Republican demands that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest be extended.

Subsequent to that subsequent update, he caved.

It seems to me that anyone who claims to be fighting deficits and yet is in favor of tax cuts is really just interested in gutting our government.

Remember, those tax cuts were enacted when tax revenues were high enough to generate a surplus - and Republicans felt tax cuts were more important that paying down the deficit.

Dear President Obama.

You failure to fight for the reinstatement of the higher tax rate for the richest convinced me that my working for your election in 2008 - (knocking on doors, working the phone banks as a volunteer) and voting for you - were misguided. Your election has not resulted in any apparent concerted attempt to achieve the change I and so many others had hoped for and which you lead us to believe you represented.

This latest capitulation simply continues the trend of increasing disappointment.

Fight, darn it. Don't roll over and say "gee, this is the best we can do." You haven't even tried.

Are you really the president of the United States?

Sadly, I ask because your actions and inactions belie that alleged fact,

And sadly, I am pretty darned sure I actively campaign for _anyone_ who opposes you for the 2012 Democratic nomination.

With immeasurable disappointment


  1. Do you believe in the 14th Amendment's "equal protection under the law" clause? If so, how can you support a progressive income tax system where some pay more than others and some pay nothing? How is that equal protection?

    That is the major platform of both parties. They just disagree on the percentages.

  2. Austin, thanks for your comments.

    Equal protection means that all are afforded the same rights and processes - it doesn't mean that everyone is treated the same way.

    If that were the case, murders would have to be treated the same as jay-walkers.

    And Federal Transportation airport screeners would have to be paid the same thing as the President.

    FYI: the progressive nature of the income tax system was strongly supported by conservative Christians when the income tax was first adopted.

    They argued their Christian perspective: # Luke 12:48
    "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."

  3. I don't care about who supported the progressive tax system. I'm not worried about constituent groups. Alexander Hamilton supported a monarchy. Thank God he didn't win.

    Since we are all tax payers (to debunk your jay-walkers and murders example), we should be treated equally by the law. I'm against income tax all together since it deprives me of the fruits of my labor. While I understand there is an Amendment supporting taxes from any source, I don't have to morally agree w/it.

    And how can you say everyone should not be treated the same way? That makes no legal, moral, or ethical sense. Equal protection means all persons to have the same access to the law and courts and to be treated equally by the law and courts, both in procedures and in the substance of the law. Again, how can a progressive tax system be justified as equal treatment?