When I went to Phillies games as a kid, my dad would always remind me that if you want to know what's going on in the game, it's more important to watch the fielders than to watch the ball after the ball is hit. Watching the fielders like Von Hayes and Lenny Dykstra and how they reacted told you if the ball hit by Tim Raines or Ron Gant was going to be a foul, an out, a base hit or a homer.
It's sorta the same thing in politics -- if you want to know what a bill really does, it's more important to watch corporate lobbyists' reaction than to listen to the politicians pushing the bill. That's because whereas politicians have a vested interest in making themselves look good for purposes of reelection and party advancement, lobbyists jealously represent Big Money, without regard for partisanship or electoral maneuvering.
It's particularly important to keep this axiom in mind as President Obama now insists that his tax cut "deal" is a big win for average Americans. Because as much as we'd all like to believe the president, the real truth about who this bill serves is embedded in this story from Bloomberg, "Obama Tax Deal Wins Praise From Business-Lobby Critics":
"President Barack Obama won praise from business groups that have criticized his labor, health and financial regulatory policies after he agreed to extend (all Bush) tax cuts... "
Meanwhile, as corporate lobbyists celebrate their latest legislative conquest, the New York Times reports that many lower-income workers will see a regressive tax hike as a consequence of Obama's deal. In its report on how the tax proposal helps "especially (America's) highest earners," the Times notes:
[The Obama deal] will lead to higher tax bills for individuals with incomes below $20,000 and families that make less than $40,000. That is because their payroll tax savings are less than the $400 or $800 they will lose from the Making Work Pay credit."It will come to a few dollars a week," said Roberton Williams, an analyst at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, "but it is an increase."
To the wealthiest Americans, however, an assortment of breaks is available.
Perhaps this is why a new poll out this morning shows that the majority of Americans oppose the president's proposal. And maybe rather than throwing a temper tantrum and petulantly labeling that majority "sanctimonious purists" as he did yesterday, the president should quickly reverse course and dig in for the fight against the Bush tax cuts and the corporate lobbyists. That is, perhaps he should wage the fights on behalf of "real change" that he promised to wage as a candidate -- and that America wants him to wage now.
Follow David Sirota on Twitter: www.twitter.com/davidsirota
More combat troops in unnecessary combat at a cost of half a trillion a year at least... borrowed money.
when was the last time a news organization, even HP, reported on a combat death. It is not like they are not occurring. The country has gotten so acclimated to perpetual war in which the vast majority is not yet feeling it effect or has anyone at risk it no longer give much of a thought. Tax cuts in time of war. Could you imagine the indifference of the media and the death spiral economic policies during WWII, Korea, or even VN?
What got me going is Bloomberg's gripe about how the two parties' "bickering" is destroying the country. How is it possible to "bicker" when one side is demanding total catpitulation or NOTHING is going to get done at all? When one party's main agenda is the destruction of the other party's president? When this president is so desperate for respect from a party that is willing to call him a "socialist" and a "communist" (even after he gave away any chance for real health care reform by inviting CEOs of big health care profiteers into the White House and cutting a deal that allowed them to keep their crooked hands in the middle of the pie). So desperate for respect that he is willing to dump his base in order to cozy up with the crooks.
What if it was Obama's plan all along to extend the tax cuts? This president has been pretty consistent in following Bush's policies. He never really fought for the public option. He claims that the GOP were holding the unemployed hostage. But they also provided him with a shield or cover to look heroic. He stunned the dems by not even fully discussing the matter before he went to Boehner and McConnell. I think there's something very sneaky about this deal. It doesn't make sense! He had so many options. Why the quick capitulation? These tax cuts are a proven job killer. Why would you NOT try something different now? Why kick it right into the next Presidential election?
Obama made sure bankers were bailed out. The Treasury is still playing games with the Fed. Free trade with communist China is still ruining American communities. And Obama still allows Microsoft to use thousands of H-1b work visas which act as wage suppression.
A) Goldman
B) Citicorp
C) JP Morgan
D) RNC Headquarters?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a6bQVsZS2_18
Mr. Obama, you got humped by the Republicans, AGAIN! You are suppose to be our leader. You are not suppose get humped repeatedly by the political opposition.
Sir, do you have no shame?
That seems to be the thinking up there in the White House. How can we get the Chamber, and the Republicans, and the teabaggers to love us?