Candidate Obama’s Class Warfare
Forget trying to govern. President Obama has gone all in on class warfare.
Don’t expect any of his stimulus or deficit-cutting ideas to pass Congress. They’re not designed to pass in a House controlled by Republicans. They’re designed to pit middle-class and poor voters against job creators and the Tea Party’s low-tax philosophy.
The President’s legislative plan to stimulate the economy is a miniature version of his failed stimulus plan. Congress won’t pass another expensive bailout of the states and giveaway to Big Labor wholly funded with higher taxes.
Obama’s submission to the Super Committee contains $3 trillion in gimmicks and tax increases over the next 10 years, which will purportedly slice $3 trillion off the national debt. He claims a “cut” of more than $1 trillion in connection to the planned wind-down of the conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama raises $1.5 trillion with most of that new revenue on the backs of individuals making more than $200,000 and families making in excess of $250,000.
President Obama declared that his latest plan is “not class warfare, it’s math.” Wrong. This is class warfare, and it is the type of math that would send a fourth-grader to summer school. The President is in reelection mode and setting up Congress to take the fall for the abysmal failure that is Obamanomics.
Government Shutdown Blame Game
Clearly, the President and liberal members of Congress are going for broke on the Blame-the-Tea-Party strategy—and that strategy is playing out in the debate over funding the government into next year.
Last week, House Speaker John Boehner rolled out two Continuing Resolutions to keep the government funded past Sept. 30 (the end of the fiscal year) to Nov. 18. The first measure failed 195 to 230, with 48 Republicans joining 182 Democrats in opposing the measure.
The bill contained a provision offsetting $1 billion in disaster aid with cuts to a failed green energy program. Conservative Republicans opposed the measure because they thought the spending was too high. They want the $1.043 trillion discretionary level to be lowered to the levels set by the Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) budget. Liberal Democrats opposed the measure because they don’t want disaster relief offset and are willing to shut down the government to protect a government loan program to promote expensive “green” cars.
The Senate tabled the bill on a 59-36 vote. Congress is expected to pass a funding measure by the end of this week with much expected blame to be leveled at the Tea Party for the delay.
This country is loaded with rich venture capitalists who put up the money necessary to fund volatile start-up companies in emerging markets in the U.S. and abroad. They now have some competition: President Obama and his piggy bank—loaded with your tax dollars and freshly printed money.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R.-S.C.) has termed President Barack Obama a “venture socialist” because of his penchant to risk the taxpayer dollar on doomed green energy companies.
Take the case of Solyndra. President Obama helped this company secure a $535 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy to produce expensive solar panels and employ more than 1,000 Americans. In May 2010, Obama took a tour of the California plant and declared, “Companies like Solyndra are leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future.”
Today, that company is in the midst of a federal investigation. It has fired all its employees and has declared bankruptcy. Last week, the Department of Energy announced that it has authorized $9.3 billion in new loans for some other risky green ventures. Has the President learned nothing from the Solyndra experiment? Only a venture socialist has the means to double-down on a failed investment strategy, risking billions in taxpayer monies on companies that are likely to fail.
Trade Adjustment Assistance
President Obama and congressional Democrats have made passage of Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) a precondition to action on trade deals with South Korea, Colombia and Panama. TAA is a welfare program created in the 1960s to give money to individuals claiming lost jobs from free trade. This program doles out benefits in addition to unemployment and is considered a slush fund for the Obama administration to promote the priorities of Big Labor.
It seems as if the administration won’t allow movement on free-trade agreements unless TAA passes. One might use Obama’s own words and argue that the President is holding “a gun against the heads” (Obama, July 2011) of the three free-trade agreements and holding them “hostage to the” TAA (Obama, December 2010). Expect those three free-trade agreements to die, unless congressional Republicans free up TAA to pass.