The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Editor’s reaction to the speech – Open letter to President Obama.

Posted by iusbvision on February 24, 2009

Mr. President,

It was a great speech you made to Congress as it contained goals that every American can get behind. Understanding that America is a center-right nation you even managed to couch your plans using conservative rhetoric.

The problem is the legislation that you and the Democrats are proposing/have proposed does not do enough to empower regular folks; rather it empowers government and special interest constituent groups that will kick back millions to the Democratic Party.

You have reneged on your repeated pledges of transparency (1, 2, 3, 4, 5,) and several other issues.

You bragged that your stimulus bill had no “earmarks” yet your own Senator Schumer has stated that the stimulus bill was filled with “porky amendments”. The AP, whose coverage was very sympathetic to your candidacy, has said that you are being deceptive.

To pay for some of that pork a much-needed tax break for home buyers was dropped from the bill. While there are some good things in the bill like the American Opportunity Tax Credit that is intended to give a tax break to working families who have a family member going back to college I am very concerned that for the expense, there is not enough good and too much of the old politics as usual.

You promised to put legislation up on the internet for 2-5 days before it is voted on. Starting with bill number one (HR1) that promise was broken. You promised a new era of bipartisanship and then locked Republicans out of the bill negotiations. The final version only came out a few hours before the vote, but your lobbyist special interest friends got copies of the “porky”, special interest lined stimulus bill before most members of Congress even saw the final version.

You talk about individual and government responsibility yet snuck in language to reverse the hugely successful welfare reform program to the stimulus without telling anyone.

Your wife Michelle criticized one of the Bush tax cuts because it returned $600 to the taxpayer. The tax cut (or more accurately stated “your tax deduction table modification” as the tax rate was never changed) you bragged about that was in the “porky” stimulus bill averages out to $13 a week, which totals $676.

According the analysts from Bloomberg, Fox, universities, and even NBC (1, 2, 3,),  who has been in the tank for you more than any other media outlet, your stimulus program does not do much to create jobs and will cost well over $200,000 per job it does create. Some of these same analysts say that your mortgage plan is wrong-headed, isn’t comprehensive, and mostly supports the few who are the least deserving of help.

You keep saying that Republicans want to do nothing when you know that every Republican in the Senate voted for an alternative bill that was so good when it was ran through the economic model that YOUR administration uses it created twice the jobs with half the money.

You talk about improving education, but not only did you pick a Secretary of Education who is not addressing the real issues in education, your party is proposing legislation to ban the school voucher program in Washington  DC which has been saving inner city kids from public schools that have failed them utterly. Apparently voucher programs aren’t very effective at tossing money to teachers unions, however, they are effective at giving inner city kids a fighting chance to succeed. That same bill has $410 billion in more big government spending with thousands of earmarks which we all learned from the campaign are a part of an appropriations process that is often corrupted and abused. Didn’t you say in the campaign that you would go through these kinds of bills line by line?

You hold a “Fiscal Responsibility Summit” and special interests were all over it. You have appointed lobbyists all over your administration after promising not to (1, 2, 3).

The tax hike idea that you brag “will only impact those who make over $250,000” will largely impact small to medium-sized business “S-Corporations” which will kill jobs, raise prices, and push more small to medium-sized domestic competition out of the competition. In the mean time the genuine super rich will hardly notice the difference.  The “super rich” like John Kerry and other mega millionaires/billionaires make money in many ways that are not considered “earned income” and enjoy countless favors in a tax-code making it so thick it is measured in feet. For example: John Kerry made $5,072,000 in 2003 and had a total federal tax burden of 12.34%. You know as well as I that those like the Kerry’s will NOT be paying a genuine 39.6% rate as you plan to force productive wage earners and small business to pay (see Norton’s First Law).

While the government is/and is about to send trillions of dollars to Wall Street (2), since 2005 you have taken more money from Wall Street, Fannie Mae and the defunct Lehman Brothers (2, 3) than anyone.

The word disappointed hardly covers it.

Chuck Norton
Editor, IUSB Vision Web Log

7 Responses to “Editor’s reaction to the speech – Open letter to President Obama.”

  1. Chelle said

    Very well said.

  2. Rey B said

    As usual Chuck you cut straight to the chase. Nicely done.

  3. Angelo said

    Thanks for your insight Chuck. I don’t know much about politics and economics like you apparently do. When I heard the words, ‘Yes we can’, I could only think of how that contradicts with the main them of Biblical law, which is, ‘Thou shalt not’, or, ‘You sould not’. So I expected lawlessness and rebellion against God. When I heard the word, ‘Change’, I would think about how seductive, popular, and controversial that Gospel of Judas was and how it (‘change’) seemed like Obama’s way of saying, as C. Clay/ M. Ali once had, “I am the greatest.” ‘Bipartisanship’ basically translated to ‘jogging’ and ‘pointing’ for me. You say ‘disappointed’ doesn’t cover it, but I wonder if you are, or were, surprised?

  4. Angelo said

    …’Peace’ is basically what happens when Obama gets his way. Once one understands the language there’s no need for insult, disappointment, or surprise- only faith- because that is what is on trial.

  5. Angelo said

    I guess I don’t look like a good translator either (if I’m translating, ‘Thou shalt not’ to ‘You should not’, when it is rather, ‘You shall not’); but I’m trying to show that, to me, the perceptible associations connected to Obama’s political campaign were not just subliminal but rather overt. I am not trying to put words in Obama’s mouth, yet associations and conditioning are often what drives the marketing of unethical and often undesirable items or services. For example, consider the marketing of abortion: freedom = happiness, abortion = freedom, therefore — abortion = happiness. By creating a recognizable connection between something pleasurable and dear to a nation (freedom) and abortion, abortion is made more palatable to people who are usually averse to it.

  6. Angelo said

    But, even if life is put up ‘for sale’, and people may ‘buy’ into abortion; faith may not be [a purchasable item], and if it were, who could afford it? Like Christ said, “If any [man] will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? (KJV)”
    So it was that I perceived Obama to be justifying his pending behavior to the crowd/voter (and to himself) thru the use of loose associations to the Gospel of Judas, perhaps/apparently always bearing in mind that it was Barabbas/Judas I., and not Christ that get the popular vote.
    It would then make sense that promoting betrayal, killing, and rebellion, (no matter how slyly, subliminally, or unethically done), would give one a competitive edge.
    I apologize to the reader(s) and the editor(s) if I have not been able to explain my reasoning or state my case without appearing more racist, sexist, anti-semitic, insane, etc., than I actually am.

  7. Judy said

    The News Media has all the answers to fix all the problems, just like the in laws!

    [Thanks for stopping by Judy :) – Editor]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: