A long time ago President Bush lowered the marginal federal tax rate. However, he was only able to do it through reconciliation. This meant, of course, that they were not permanent; they would have to expire. Since then we’ve been engaged in class warfare as the Left screams to reset the rate for the richest 1%. As Republicans work to prevent the tax increase, all the rage from the Democrats was that this wasn’t a tax hike, it was simply allowing the tax to go back to where it previously was.
Now, in an admittedly bizarre twist of fate, we have the Democrats bemoaning the fact if the the House doesn’t pass the most recent tax bill, it would be a tax hike on the middle class:
“The bipartisan compromise passed in the Senate yesterday received 89 votes, including 39 Republican votes, and Speaker Boehner himself just yesterday called it a ‘good deal’ and a ‘victory,’ ” the White House communications director, Dan Pfeiffer, said in a statement.
“If House Republicans refuse to pass this bipartisan bill to extend the payroll tax cut,” Mr. Pfeiffer said, “there will be a significant tax increase on 160 million hard-working Americans in 13 days that would damage the economy and job growth.”
As I mentioned, this is bizarro world and I happen to agree with the Democrats. If the bill fails and the payroll taxes are reset, it would represent a tax hike on America.
I’m just glad that the Democrats finally agree with me.
As a fellow Tar Heel and even Blue Devil (grad school), I came across your blog (not sure how 😉 and was intrigued. After skimming a broad range of complaints you make about tribalism and the polar/scorched earth attitude in DC, I was nodding vigorously; then, reading more, I found myself surprised to learn that the general theme of your blog is just as polar, slamming and bent on positioning “the other guy” as the beast, often times based on some random sound byte or rabid generalization. I see a strong mind, bold mouthpiece and a will to move the discussion about realizing our country’s best interests and I frankly think you can do a lot more to make that last point happen if you’d try.
Now hear me out: I’m just as disgusted with DC. I would hope that you’d agree with me that it’s time we Americans did something about it collectively. The level of impasse is deafening and only we citizens can alter this course (yes, the truest American values underpinning how our government is supposed to work ARE at risk, no matter one’s perspective!) We all need congress to go to work for us and come to thoughtful, carefully dissected and smartly orchestrated decisions based on COMPROMISE and fine dissection of the middle ground in order to solve the needs of our 311,000,000+ citizens (we should let that # sink in–three HUNDRED MILLION people); we need them to STOP sitting with arms crossed sneering at each other, holding some wedge issue up like a torch to rally us into a frenzy of hate for each other, no matter how impractical it is to assume resolution far to any side would behoove all Americans, using it to bully the other side into looking like the ogre. All while secretly composing legislation that unfairly advantages only their contributors. This pretty much describes most all of DC these days, do you agree?
I don’t have the magical answer, sorry; but I can’t help but think a good start would be to ask people like you, with a strong mind, a mouthpiece, an apparent interest in pragmatic solutions and a lot he apparently reads and studies, to try to angle your blog to analyze WHERE Congress/DC can compromise, HOW to avoid the disgusting political rhetoric, and WHO or what methods are really focused on work toward a pragmatic, positive solution that works for common citizens. I feel that people like you (ok, and me, but I am as yet blog-free) have to start to reverse this flow before our country is torn apart for good…to filter out the fabricated outrage and temptations to be infected by the rabid view; to instead focus carefully on what we can do to get legislation passed that is truly in our best interests. DC and the media aren’t going to stop driving their vicious cycle on their own, their rhetoric focusing us on hating each other, right? Why would they want to stop when we’re in such a great habit of refilling their coffers–political and media revenue-based??.
NET: I’d love to ask you to spend some time reflecting on this, at least to see if it can affect your tone and intent in writing your blog. Framed locally, I’m sure that, if you put your best effort into getting it done, I’m sure you and the person next door to you who belongs to a different party (both lovely people with devout interests in your lives, families, communities and even in helping mankind)–could do a lot together if you sat at your kitchen tables and forced yourselves to hash out a practical plan (maybe over a few beers to relax the angst–lots of ways to skin that); but the fact that you may never be able to see that because you’re letting the veil of negativity blind you both is a travesty. A new take on words, thoughts, without it all being about $, is it possible? I’m no PollyAnna (actually a real pragmatist) but I think it’s worth the effort to see if you can. Let me know.
Lisa Chorebanian said:
Lisa,
First, thank you for taking the time to craft what is clearly a well thought out comment. I can only take you at your urging a reflect.
As a fellow Tar Heel
I must confess, I’m a Gopher. But I got here just as quick as I could.
I found myself surprised to learn that the general theme of your blog is just as polar, slamming and bent on positioning “the other guy” as the beast, often times based on some random sound byte or rabid generalization.
Alas, I am unable to dispute this point. I DO engage in bombastic generalizations. In some cases, it is tongue in cheek “obtrusiveness” meant to convey the point that such and such a a position is untenable. In other cases, the attacks are meant to inflame and create a definite we/they atmosphere. I can see where that becomes unattractive. Especially to what would otherwise be “innocent independents”.
I see a strong mind, bold mouthpiece and a will to move the discussion about realizing our country’s best interests
Why, thank you.
I would hope that you’d agree with me that it’s time we Americans did something about it collectively.
I do agree; yes.
We all need congress to go to work for us and come to thoughtful, carefully dissected and smartly orchestrated decisions based on COMPROMISE and fine dissection of the middle ground
We do indeed.
I don’t have the magical answer, sorry; but I can’t help but think a good start would be to ask people like you, with a strong mind, a mouthpiece, an apparent interest in pragmatic solutions and a lot he apparently reads and studies, to try to angle your blog to analyze WHERE Congress/DC can compromise, HOW to avoid the disgusting political rhetoric, and WHO or what methods are really focused on work toward a pragmatic, positive solution that works for common citizens.
I am not sure that I am going to be able to demonstrate where and how Congress can compromise; that task may be far too insurmountable to aspire to. However, the aspect of determining the methods that work, THAT we can do. I to be frank, is what I really should be focusing on.
I feel that people like you (ok, and me, but I am as yet blog-free) have to start to reverse this flow before our country is torn apart for good…to filter out the fabricated outrage and temptations to be infected by the rabid view; to instead focus carefully on what we can do to get legislation passed that is truly in our best interests.
This is why I am so excited by and “rejoice” in the most recent movements; Tea and Occupy. While I suspect both movements have elements, or significant parts of, that are long time party insiders, the idea that each has been able to draw in the “everyman” is refreshing. And hope giving.
I object to Occupy’s fascination with the wealthy and the corporate while ignoring the fact that the system seems to generally work. On the other hand, I object to the Tea Party focusing on social issues while ignoring the fiscal abuses in the Republican party.
I’d love to ask you to spend some time reflecting on this, at least to see if it can affect your tone and intent in writing your blog.
I did reflect, thanks for the nudge. Though, I have recognized the need for more data driven analysis and less mud for several months now. It’s been my hope and goal to to adjust. However, you noticing and then taking the time you have, reinforces that need and desire. It is my earnest hope that you stop by and add to the dialogue.
Framed locally, I’m sure that, if you put your best effort into getting it done, I’m sure you and the person next door to you who belongs to a different party (both lovely people with devout interests in your lives, families, communities and even in helping mankind)–could do a lot together if you sat at your kitchen tables and forced yourselves to hash out a practical plan (maybe over a few beers to relax the angst–lots of ways to skin that); but the fact that you may never be able to see that because you’re letting the veil of negativity blind you both is a travesty.
I suspect that while I live in a Republican section of Raleigh, my street is overwhelming Democrat. We rarely interact politically but you are right, if we did, it would never occur to me to speak so….irreverently.
I’m no PollyAnna (actually a real pragmatist) but I think it’s worth the effort to see if you can. Let me know.
I can’t begin to think that a small little blog in Raleigh would impact much of anyone; I couldn’t win a primary in my own house! But it’s kinda fun to think a guy can impact someone somewhere.
We’ll see.
Thanks for stopping by.