When I was in school, my dad was a superintendent at a local rock quarry, and my math teacher's dad was one of my daddy's employees. For reasons that had nothing to do with political correctness, everything to do with her personal philosophy that valued everybody and their contributions, and maybe more than a little bit to do with her concern for my math grade, my mother made me say that my math teacher's dad worked "with" my dad. Not "for" him but "with" him.
Maybe that's why I abhor class warfare. (N)Obama's campaign, like so many Democratic campaigns before it, feasts on class warfare: championing the "little people" and maligning the "top 10%" (though things may have changed because lately I've heard 5% instead of 10%). Pitting the "rich" from the "poor" is a standard tactic, the Democrats' native language. (We'll enjoy a philosophical discussion about the various - and perhaps more meaningful - definitions of "rich" and "poor" another day.)
Over and over and over again we hear how (N)Obama proposes no tax cuts for those making $250,000 or more, but what we don't hear is the details of his plan and how this is going to snatch all of us from the jaws of a depression.
There are many, many people - small business owners - who make $250,000, at least on paper. And while it looks good on paper and sounds real good on the ear, the truth is that most of that money actually goes to salaries of the people they hire and purchasing materials for things they need and buying equipment and paying rent, utilities, and taxes. The business owners I know who make $250,000 on paper are the people who work the longest hours and take home the smallest salaries in their business.
Enter Joe, a plumber in Ohio who dares to want to talk to (N)Obama about how the (N)Obama tax cut proposal would affect him when he is able to complete the purchase of his plumbing business. (N)Obama responds that he wants to give a tax cut to the people like Joe used to be: the people who now (or will soon) work for Joe.
Say what?
Seems a reasonable thing for Joe to want to talk to Obama about, since we have no specifics other than (N)Obama plans to give tax cuts to those who allegedly need and deserve it. Joe asked a question that the news media won't ask . . .at least they won't ask (N)Obama. Palin? They'll ask her anything and drill her relentlessly about what magazines she reads, but I haven't heard them ask (N)Obama many pertinent questions requiring specific answers.
(N)Obama, tax-paying minds want to know: how will your tax plan actually HELP our country and its citizens? If the people who make $250,000 (on paper or otherwise) have to close their doors because they can not carry the increased tax burden, how does that help? I just don't understand. Guess I need a new calculator.
Joe and his crews may be the absolute best at fixing a leak under the sink or replacing pipes with small holes that allow escape to an unbelievably large amount of water, but they can't fix the flood that will inevitably be caused by (N)Obama's tax proposals. Joe and all his competitors and colleagues alike aren't enough to do that.
And while we're talking about Joe, I wish the (N)Obama people would leave him alone. (N)Obama is running for President of this great country, which means it's his job to answer questions from voters. And when a voter like Joe asks a question that (N)Obama and his people don't like, it is absolutely, positively unacceptable for them to wreck the man's life by retaliating, jeering at him, invading his privacy and derailing his life. That is a totally unacceptable response. Just answer the question, (N)Obama. And be quick about it 'cause Joe's got work to do.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment