Free Markets, Free People

Fantasy and reality: Obama says “80% of Americans ‘sold’ on tax increase”

That’s the “out of thin air” statistic President Obama tossed out at a presser yesterday.

President Obama on Friday kept up the pressure on Republicans to agree to revenue increases in a deal to raise the debt ceiling, claiming 80 percent of the public supports Democrats’ demand for tax increases.

"The American people are sold," Obama said. "The problem is members of Congress are dug in ideologically."

Throughout the press conference, Obama blasted Republicans for ignoring what he said is the will of the American people by rejecting tax increases that would balance out spending cuts in a debt package.

This is typical Obama – when he doesn’t get his way, he claims things which aren’t true and shoots at the other side with things like the Congress is “dug in ideologically”.   In fact the Republicans who won Congress are merely doing what they said they’d do.  But the point is that Obama uses his bully pulpit to, well, bully instead of talking like a statesman and and pushing for a compromise solution.  There is no one more “dug in” ideologically than the man accusing others of this supposed “sin”.

Oh, and as for the stat?  According to Gallup, Mr. Obama if fudging it:

Americans’ preferences for deficit reduction clearly favor spending cuts to tax increases, but most Americans favor a mix of the two approaches. Twenty percent favor an approach that relies only on spending cuts and 4% favor an approach that uses tax increases alone.

The mix?

  • Only/Mostly with spending cuts: 50%
  • Only/Mostly with tax increases: 11%

And, there’s more:

Two months ago, The Hill conducted its own poll that showed opposition to tax hikes  at 45%, with only 13% favoring an even split between tax hikes and spending cuts to solve the deficit problem, with another 11% supporting a 2/1 split for spending cuts to tax hikes, and 15% for a 3/1 split.  Even under the most liberal (pun intended) definition of “balanced,” only 39% in that poll opted for the idea.

So there certainly isn’t any 80% clamoring for tax increases.   In fact almost half want to see a huge reliance on spending cuts with few wanting it done with tax increases.    As we’ve noted here before, once the spending cuts are made – actually made, done and done – then it may be time to talk about tax increases.   Maybe.  But until the spending cuts have actually, positively been made, the “need” for increased taxes aren’t at all going to be something the American people are “sold” on.

Meanwhile in another sector of fantasyland, we have Representative Sheila Jackson Lee with a completely different take on the matter:

"I do not understand what I think is the maligning and maliciousness [toward] this president,” said Jackson Lee, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. “Why is he different? And in my community, that is the question that we raise. In the minority community that is question that is being raised. Why is this president being treated so disrespectfully? Why has the debt limit been raised 60 times? Why did the leader of the Senate continually talk about his job is to bring the president down to make sure he is unelected?”

Obviously Ms. Jackson Lee was in hibernation during the 8 years of the Bush administration when the word “incompetent” was almost used routinely with his name.   Of course the point Jackson Lee is making and something we’ve seen used time and again by the left when they are out of credible ammo is the race card.

"I am particularly sensitive to the fact that only this president — only this one, only this one — has received the kind of attacks and disagreement and inability to work, only this one," said Jackson Lee from the House floor.

"Read between the lines," she continued. "What is different about this president that should put him in a position that he should not receive the same kind of respectful treatment of when it is necessary to raise the debt limit in order to pay our bills, something required by both statute and the 14th amendment?"

Reading between the lines I only see cluelessness and the usual leftist tactics.


Twitter: @McQandO


20 Responses to Fantasy and reality: Obama says “80% of Americans ‘sold’ on tax increase”

  • Does she remember what Obama called Bush, when Obama was AGAINST raising the debt ceiling before he was FOR it?

    “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.” Senator Barack Obama, 2006, criticizing Bush for wanting to raise the debt limit
    Obama’s the ONLY President that got a hard time from Congress? You’re joking or just plain stupid Rep Jackson-Lee! You pick.

  • Of course, Obama was lying.  His lips were moving.
    But, assuming it to be true, PROBLEM SOLVED.  No need for a new law.  People can write those checks and get them in the mail!!!
    Post office glut in 4…3…2…

    • You doubt “The Won” ?

      Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Enron) on Friday strongly suggested that members of Congress are making it difficult for President Obama to raise the debt ceiling because of his race.

      Just connect the dots …

  • On behalf of my State and the area within it, I apologize for Jackson-Lee.
    Some more.
    Another time.

    • Hey, don’t apologize. She gives us priceless entertainment, and serves as a close-to-canonical example of a clueless leftist.

      After all, the proprietors of the blog don’t apologize for Erb. He fulfills the same basic function around here.

      • True, Billy.
        And foils are fun…!!!

        • In fact, now that I think about it, I’d have to rate the professor as more clueless. Compare the following two statements:

          “Did the Mars Pathfinder take pictures of the flag the astronauts left there?” – Sheila Jackson Lee

          Markets do not automatically adjust themselves, there’s no reason to believe they do.” – imbecile political science professor

          I could imagine the first one simply being a slip of memory from someone who didn’t pay much attention in science class. But the second one is as out of touch with reality as asserting that the sun circles the earth, and comes from someone who is theoretically supposed to know something about economics.

  • hat’s the “out of thin air” statistic President Obama tossed out at a presser yesterday.

    >>>> Please just call it for the lie that it is?

    • Hey, but Dick Durbin told us today that Obama spent 12 hours of his time in meetings to avert a national default.
      Gee whiz, that must have cut into his golf time.

  • And the socialist democrat talking point is:
    “The only president to ever balance the budget?  Bill Clinton and he did it by way of his huge tax increases!
    The nasty mean ole Republicans had absolutely nothing to do with it!”
    Clinton did propose to balance the budget, but his initial proposals delayed the hard cuts and the actual balancing until he would have been out of office, in 2002.   Thank God the Gingrich led congress pushed him to do something.  There were annual surpluses for around three years or so, but none of them were large enough to actually reduce the national debt, only pay off a larger chunk of the annual interest. One large issue was that many of the cuts were to infrastructure related items, so things like highways, bridges, dams and such suffered some neglect as a result.

    In fact the year of the giant Clinton tax hike — was not the turning point in the deficit wars, either. In fact, in 1995, two years after that tax hike, the budget baseline submitted by the president’s own Office of Management and Budget and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicted $200 billion deficits for as far as the eye could see. The figure shows the Clinton deficit baseline. What changed this bleak outlook?
    Newt Gingrich and company — for all their faults — have received virtually no credit for balancing the budget. Yet today’s surplus is, in part, a byproduct of the GOP’s single-minded crusade to end 30 years of red ink. Arguably, Gingrich’s finest hour as Speaker came in March 1995 when he rallied the entire Republican House caucus behind the idea of eliminating the deficit within seven years.
    Skeptics said it could not be done in seven years. The GOP did it in four.
    Now let us contrast this with the Clinton fiscal record. Recall that it was the Clinton White House that fought Republicans every inch of the way in balancing the budget in 1995. When Republicans proposed their own balanced-budget plan, the White House waged a shameless Mediscare campaign to torpedo the plan — a campaign that the Washington Post slammed as “pure demagoguery.” It was Bill Clinton who, during the big budget fight in 1995, had to submit not one, not two, but five budgets until he begrudgingly matched the GOP’s balanced-budget plan. In fact, during the height of the budget wars in the summer of 1995, the Clinton administration admitted that “balancing the budget is not one of our top priorities.”


    • Annnnnd…those “surpluses” were ONLY the result of accounting slight of hand that would get you or I a long stretch in the Federal pen if we did it in the private sector.
      But, hey…

  • The Bullshitter in Chief

  • OK, then let him run on  the higher tax plan in 2012. The people want it. Lay it out in exquisite detail and run on it.
    Call his bluff. Submit a deal that brings the issue right back here in one year. Let’s see if he “wont’ sign the bill” and then cuts social security checks.

  • We don’t need another hero …

    Gilligan represents the triumph of the ordinary over the extraordinary … it had always bothered him that people criticized “Gilligan’s Island” for being silly; they didn’t understand it, he said. “Not a single critic got it, with the basic concept of democracy staring them right in the face.” He viewed my book as a vindication of his work: “I never thought I’d see the day when an English Professor of some note would use ‘Gilligan’s Island’ as one of four pillars on which rest the liberal democratic view of the recent past in America.

    • Huh-buh… WTF???

      I never thought I’d see the day when an English Professor of some note would use ‘Gilligan’s Island’ as one of four pillars on which rest the liberal democratic view of the recent past in America.

      Well, we agree: I also never would have imagined that ANYBODY would use ‘Gilligan’s Island’ for any serious purpose, much less as a pillar on which even libs would view the recent history of our country.  What are the other four pillars?  “I Dream of Jeannie”?*  “Mister Ed”?  “Petticoat Junction”?


      (*) On the other hand, Barbara Eden in the Jeannie costume… oooohhh yeah.  Even as a child, I thought that there was something seriously wrong with Major Nelson though I couldn’t quite put my finger on it.  Now that I’m older, I know what it was: “Dude, did you get brain damage during that splash down???  I’d be on her like white on rice, magical powers or no magical powers!”

  • Obama told reporters on Friday. Now, “It’s a matter of Congress doing the right thing .. because I’m too much of an asshole to get anything right.”

    OK.  I added that last part … but it’s true.