Romney: The tax cuts deal is a bad bargain

posted at 8:43 pm on December 13, 2010 by Allahpundit

Says John Podhoretz of this piece, “And the Mitt Romney, Most Inauthentic Politician in America, Drive to the Presidency continues.” I know our resident Palinistas can’t wait to point out that she was leading on this issue while Mitt was holding back until the very day of the Senate vote, so go on. Gloat. You know you wanna.

The deal has several key features. It reduces payroll taxes, extends unemployment benefits and keeps current tax rates intact. So far, so good. But intermixed with the benefits are considerable costs of consequence. Given the unambiguous message that the American people sent to Washington in November, it is difficult to understand how our political leaders could have reached such a disappointing agreement. The new, more conservative Congress should reach a better solution…

For those without jobs, the tax compromise extends unemployment benefits for 13 months. A decent and humane society must have a strong safety net for the unemployed. I served for 15 years as a lay pastor in my church and saw the heartbreak of joblessness up close; a shattering loss of faith in oneself is but only one of many forms the suffering can take. Nonetheless, the vital necessity of providing for those without work should not be used as an excuse to ignore the very real problems of our unemployment system.

In this, as in so many other arenas of government policy, unemployment insurance has many unintended effects. The indisputable fact is that unemployment benefits, despite a web of regulations, actually serve to discourage some individuals from taking jobs, especially when the benefits extend across years…

To remedy such problems we need a very different model, perhaps establishing individual unemployment savings accounts over which employees would exercise direct control when they lose their jobs, or putting in place financial incentives for employers to hire and train the long-term unemployed. One thing is certain: While we cannot rebuild our flawed system overnight, we are surely not required to borrow the funds to pay for it. In spending $56.5 billion to extend benefits, the deal is sacrificing the bedrock Republican principle that new expenditures be paid for with offsetting budget cuts.

Thus did Mitt cover his ass ahead of the 2011 primaries, where support for the new porkier tax cuts compromise will no doubt be a litmus test for grassroots righties. Interestingly, at last check, Huckabee is still in favor of the deal, telling National Journal in an interview published this morning, “I think it’s the best anyone can hope for at this point,” before proceeding to dump all over Obama for his angry press conference last week. Huck’s been working hard over the past two years to try to repair the image of him as a “big government conservative,” backing hardcore tea party candidates and ripping every Obama spending program to come down the pike. I wonder if he’s simply been caught flat-footed on this or whether it’s a deliberate strategy to appeal to centrists. (Gingrich currently supports the compromise too.)

Here’s Obama’s statement this afternoon after the Senate voted for cloture on the bill, 83-15(!). As I write this, Politico is reporting that House Democrats want to incorporate a bill they passed earlier this year raising the estate tax rate to 45 percent into their version of the tax cuts bill; Blue Dogs probably won’t go for that, so we’ll see how Madam Soon-To-Be-Ex-Speaker plays it. Meanwhile, you’ll be pleased to know that your president is now going around telling people that the GOP might try to end the tax cuts for the middle class in two years. Consider that another sneak preview for 2012, one that’ll keep FactCheck.org busy for most of the campaign, I suspect.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Took a minute, didn’t it bud?

xax on December 13, 2010 at 8:45 PM

PalinDrones is the new term.

darwin-t on December 13, 2010 at 8:45 PM

NO Sh*t Sherlock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on December 13, 2010 at 8:45 PM

First Sentence is an insult to Romney from a quoted source. Reminds me of an MSM tactic.

Romney makes good points.

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 8:46 PM

Romney and Huck make my head hurt.

wheelgun on December 13, 2010 at 8:46 PM

I appreciate the sentiment Mitt but why are you always jumping on the bandwagon just as it leaves?

Rocks on December 13, 2010 at 8:47 PM

I don’t have a dog in this fight yet but I have to say that Gov. Romney tends to come late to all parties. It really is a regrettable habit and he is the only one who can change it.

Cindy Munford on December 13, 2010 at 8:47 PM

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 8:46 PM

Whatever. You know he’s right.

You’re right. Romney always makes good points… after everyone else has already made them.

xax on December 13, 2010 at 8:48 PM

PalinDrones is the new term.

darwin-t on December 13, 2010 at 8:45 PM

**snorts**

Knucklehead on December 13, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Sincerely hope Romney’s moistened finger didn’t get chapped during the time he had it held up in the wind.

FlameWarrior on December 13, 2010 at 8:50 PM

USA Today editorial is a good way to be late. I guess the Palinistas can gloat about her being first with tweets for the rest of their lives. FIRST ELEVETY!!!11

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 8:52 PM

I’m kind of stunned. Mitt’s supposed to be a smart guy, but doesn’t he or someone on his staff understand the optics?

That sheepish half-raised hand in the 2008 debates is Mitt Romney in one frame.

INC on December 13, 2010 at 8:53 PM

I know our resident Palinistas can’t wait to point out that she was leading on this issue while Mitt was holding back until the very day of the Senate vote, so go on. Gloat. You know you wanna.

Nah, not really. If he’s right, he’s right. I wouldn’t turn away any help in achieving the desired result.

ddrintn on December 13, 2010 at 8:54 PM

now they’re (the lapdance media) making it official…..

….Boehner has “an emotional problem”.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/video/barbara-walters-things-john-boehner-emotional-problems-12383363

PappyD61 on December 13, 2010 at 8:54 PM

The only one I’ve kicked to the curb so far is Huck. However I do notice my foot twitching more and more lately when Mitt shares his wisdom.

Limerick on December 13, 2010 at 8:56 PM

USA Today editorial is a good way to be late. I guess the Palinistas can gloat about her being first with tweets for the rest of their lives. FIRST ELEVETY!!!11

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 8:52 PM

Hmmmmm. Cutting edge, new media- or dying newspaper business?

xax on December 13, 2010 at 8:58 PM

Palin does a book tour, visits Haiti, and still has time to do an analysis of the bill before Romney does.

huckleberryfriend on December 13, 2010 at 8:58 PM

I don’t have to gloat all that much.

The evidence speaks for itself.

powerpro on December 13, 2010 at 8:59 PM

the question did Mitt get this out before or after the vote?

unseen on December 13, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Hmmmmm. Cutting edge, new media- or dying newspaper business?

xax on December 13, 2010 at 8:58 PM

Hmmm 140 characters or an editorial with actual thought out points.

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 9:00 PM

“ahead of the 2011 primaries”

Please, AP, don’t give people the idea they should be earlier than they already are.

Dusty on December 13, 2010 at 9:01 PM

The Boehner “emotional problems” theme beginning to blossom today is yet another example to those that whine about how Palin is “damaged goods” and “unelectable” because the media has painted her as a nut/quitter/etc.

LISTEN UP:

The Lapdance media (CNN/Reuters/NYT/WPO/HUFFPO/CBS/etc) are going to DEMONIZE ANY REPUBLICAN…….AND CONSERVATIVES ESPECIALLY. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Mittens, or Reverend RainMan Huckleberry, TPaw, Pence, etc.

Here is what the Lapdancers in the Media (Barbara Walters/Joyless Behar/ Dana Milbank, etc.) think of:

GOP = spawn of Satan

CONSERVATIVES = Satan

PappyD61 on December 13, 2010 at 9:03 PM

Quit picking on Mitt. He can’t help that his blue-bood slows down his response time…

Gohawgs on December 13, 2010 at 9:03 PM

Breaking News. Mitt comes out supporting the JFK moon missions…..

unseen on December 13, 2010 at 9:03 PM

He’s the guy who always brings “rolls” or “bread” to a potluck.

SouthernGent on December 13, 2010 at 9:03 PM

USA Today editorial is a good way to be late. I guess the Palinistas can gloat about her being first with tweets for the rest of their lives. FIRST ELEVETY!!!11

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 8:52 PM

The medium doesn’t matter. Impact does.

ddrintn on December 13, 2010 at 9:04 PM

Hmmm 140 characters or an editorial with actual thought out points.

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 9:00 PM

140 characters that are quickly disseminated by 140 different news organizations…

Gohawgs on December 13, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Only 45%, why not just make it 100% because you know they want to; might as well go out kicking the American people in the teeth as hard as possible.

Bishop on December 13, 2010 at 9:06 PM

Mitt waited until he knew he would have no impact on the outcome and thus the bill would pass but he would get credit for appearing to not support it. shameless.

Mitt is a definition of everything wrong with politicans…

unseen on December 13, 2010 at 9:07 PM

To remedy such problems we need a very different model, perhaps establishing individual unemployment savings accounts over which employees would exercise direct control when they lose their jobs, or putting in place financial incentives for employers to hire and train the long-term unemployed.

Yes, more regulation!

More things to keep track of!

More government ‘help’!

The answer to being taxed is to salt money away in an account that has lots of regulation to it so you can ‘own’ your own insurance…

Say, Mitt, howzabout just cutting the tax rate and letting people figure out how to save their own money without lots of regulation? You can cut the size of government, cut overhead, not make people jump through hoops and maybe, just maybe, they might be able to figure out how not to spend as much if the government wasn’t there to ‘help’ them when they got unemployed. I know, a really radical idea this cutting government’s size, regulations, authoritarianism, and cost, while letting people keep what they earn and learn they have to take care of themselves.

I think a country might have been founded on those ideals. Might want to see which one, Mitt.

ajacksonian on December 13, 2010 at 9:11 PM

At the bottom of the USA piece it says, Posted 4h 3m ago.

It went up a little after 5 pm today.

INC on December 13, 2010 at 9:14 PM

I think The Democrats will lard this up so much in the House, it won’t pass. Making Mitt’s position moot. The Republicans won’t vote for the Larded up version or they didn’t learn anything from the midterm elections.

The President signs an order that leaves the tax rate the same and the Republicans bring up their bill aft January 5th.

Right now the Democrats and Republicans are playing “Chicken” Mitt is lousy at “Chicken”

He can’t really lose with the position he has taken because he’s not an office holder presently who has a vote.

Dr Evil on December 13, 2010 at 9:14 PM

140 characters that are quickly disseminated by 140 different news organizations…

Gohawgs on December 13, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Thats true more people follow their favorite celbrities on twitter.

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Hmmm 140 characters or an editorial with actual thought out points.

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 9:00 PM

Again, thought out points that other people have already made. He does this on purpose.

Ideas for Mitt Romney’s campaign slogan:

“Better late, than never.”

“Eh. At least I showed up.”

“The Journey is the Destination… but we’re still trying to figure out if Journey or Destination polls better.”

xax on December 13, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Thats true more people follow their favorite celbrities on twitter.

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 9:14 PM

So why can’t Mitt or Huck manage to get celebrity status?

ddrintn on December 13, 2010 at 9:16 PM

Perfectly timed by romneycare–speaks up after the decision is taken.

james23 on December 13, 2010 at 9:19 PM

….Boehner has “an emotional problem”.

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/video/barbara-walters-things-john-boehner-emotional-problems-12383363

PappyD61 on December 13, 2010 at 8:54 PM

PappyD61:So Boehner has a few tears,whip-D-Do,and the MSM
tried the “ANGER” Narration Set-Up with McCain in
2008!:)

canopfor on December 13, 2010 at 9:19 PM

“Me too, Mitt”.

Anyway, Huck the new ‘slick’ one is positioning himself with the “mods” is my instinct too, AP. Especially when he said he’d support Jeb if he runs. He must be reading HA and realizes conservatives hate him with a passion reserved for lefties, which Huck is.

I thought the Bushes hated Huck? That’s what he said just last week wasn’t it? Now Huck is sucking up to them. What a POS. To hear Huck talk in that NJ article, he’s so popular with the ladies and everyone else below the Mason-Dixon line, why would he step aside if Jeb decides to run? There isn’t a principled bone in him. I guess he secretly wants to be part of the NE Blue Blood clique. Forget it Huck. No matter what you do, they’ll never accept a squirrel eating, former preacher from the South.

JimP on December 13, 2010 at 9:21 PM

140 characters that are quickly disseminated by 140 different news organizations…
Gohawgs on December 13, 2010 at 9:05 PM

+1

Romney has it right to weigh all factors and make the right decision. I want a president who considers all viewpoints, not who only values his/her own (and that of a small group of people). A true leader listens to their constituents. Call it what you will, but Romney actually listens and acts based on what is BEST for the people he serves.

jdoubleu on December 13, 2010 at 9:21 PM

He won’t have anything in the sack until he proposes a Reaganesque 28% tax rate for both high income and corporations…

phreshone on December 13, 2010 at 9:23 PM

I think The Democrats will lard this up so much in the House, it won’t pass.
Dr Evil on December 13, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Color me skeptic, but I don’t have a lot of faith in the House right now. Only 5 R senators voted against this pork barrel, including the conservative triad of DeMint, Sessions and Coburn.

TxAnn56 on December 13, 2010 at 9:25 PM

**snorts**
Knucklehead on December 13, 2010 at 8:49 PM

One of your more insightful posts. Newsletter?

james23 on December 13, 2010 at 9:29 PM

I have a hard time with even considering Romney as a candidate. He is just slightly less trustworthy than der Schlickmeister. I think if I was ever forced to talk to him in person I would feel dirty afterward. I realize I’m being subtle but I just loathe this liar.

Mormon Doc on December 13, 2010 at 9:42 PM

Call it what you will, but Romney actually listens and acts based on what is BEST for the people he serves.

jdoubleu on December 13, 2010 at 9:21 PM

LOL … yeah … and I’ll call it ROMNEYCARE thank you!

Looks like Mitt’s finger registered a wind direction – and he’s come out with a position on something finally.

Sad.

HondaV65 on December 13, 2010 at 9:46 PM

A true leader listens to their constituents. Call it what you will, but Romney actually listens and acts based on what is BEST for the people he serves.

jdoubleu on December 13, 2010 at 9:21 PM

Is that why he’s so unpopular in Massachusetts? Are the people there better off with Romneycare than they were?

In December 2002, as Romney prepared to step into office, Massachusetts unemployment rate stood at 5.6 percent, slightly lower than the national unemployment rate of 6 percent.

By December 2006 — Romney’s last full month in office — national unemployment had fallen to just 4.5 percent while Massachusetts unemployment numbers had inched down to 5.2 percent.

sharrukin on December 13, 2010 at 9:51 PM

Flip Flopney will be FOR this tax deal in 6 months, so who cares?

General Mitt leads from the Rear, yet again.

portlandon on December 13, 2010 at 9:58 PM

Perfectly timed by romneycare–speaks up after the decision is taken.

james23 on December 13, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Good point. Romney probably wouldn’t have taken a position on the bill at all but for wanting to change the conversation about him.

FloatingRock on December 13, 2010 at 9:58 PM

Call it what you will, but Romney actually listens and acts based on what is BEST for the people he serves.

jdoubleu on December 13, 2010 at 9:21 PM

Too bad he’s always a day late and a dollar short.

tinkerthinker on December 13, 2010 at 10:04 PM

Palin does a book tour, visits Haiti, and still has time to do an analysis of the bill before Romney does.

huckleberryfriend on December 13, 2010 at 8:58 PM

Winner

Palin hears both sides of an arguement and makes a decision, Rommey sticks his finger in the wind, to judge which way the wind is blowing, then releases a statement.

F15Mech on December 13, 2010 at 10:09 PM

HondaV65 on December 13, 2010 at 9:46 PM

Sorry I did not mean to steal your thunder about Mittens

F15Mech on December 13, 2010 at 10:11 PM

Huckabee posted on his Huckpac website his thoughts on Extending the Bush Tax Cuts and Eliminating Earmarks way back on December 4th. He was also on the Willis Report talking about them.

In the National Journal interview Huckabee stated

I think it’s the best anyone can hope for at this point. Obviously, it’s a much better deal than letting there be complete limbo about the tax rates. It’s good news for those who were wondering what the tax code was actually going to be. I wish it had been longer than two years. Politically, I was shocked it was going to be two not three, because it puts this whole thing in the very center, the bull’s-eye of the 2012 presidential election. It doesn’t have it resolved. But it does allow people to forecast for the next couple of years, and it’ll make a big difference in people making some decisions about expansion and hiring. It means more money in the hands of the private sector and less in the hands of government. So those are all very, very good things.

The most bizarre part of the whole process was watching President Obama self-destruct at the podium yesterday. I was just stunned–I really couldn’t believe that a man that was elected president was as amateurish as he was, and essentially launched from the podium at some of his own, taking aim and mowing down everybody in D.C. and walking away having not understood that he just lost a lot of people.

I don’t think we have to worry about Huckabee doing a Romney and coming late to the party to make a point. Huckabee uses his show each week to discuss relevant policy decisions being made by congress.

texasconserv on December 13, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Call it what you will, but Romney actually listens and acts based on what is BEST for the people he serves.

jdoubleu on December 13, 2010 at 9:21 PM

Leaders lead. Romney is not a leader.

FloatingRock on December 13, 2010 at 10:19 PM

Hey Mitt….Better late than never is what the bumper sticker will read..

hawkman on December 13, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Palin does a book tour, visits Haiti, and still has time to do an analysis of the bill before Romney does.

huckleberryfriend on December 13, 2010 at 8:58 PM

+100

bw222 on December 13, 2010 at 10:23 PM

The deal has several key features. It reduces payroll taxes, extends unemployment benefits and keeps current tax rates intact. So far, so good.

Already Mittens has failed. Extending the 99-week regime of unemployment benefits is already a bad deal, even before we get to the pork.

steveegg on December 13, 2010 at 10:25 PM

I’d vote for the deal. When I think back two years it’s practically miraculous. In January incoming Republicans can focus on better spending habits without risking blame for torpedoing the economy.

Seth Halpern on December 13, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Palin does a book tour, visits Haiti, and still has time to do an analysis of the bill before Romney does.

huckleberryfriend on December 13, 2010 at 8:58 PM

It was just a few characters on twitter right? What time did she spend analyzing it?

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 10:37 PM

Ill I can see is her agreeing with Demint on her twitter. What a leader! Agree right away with Demint and your fans will find you the leader for 2012

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 10:47 PM

Mitt reminds me of the High Sheriff of Nottingham (played by Melville Cooper) from “The Adventures of Robin Hood” (the 1938 version). The scene is the archery contest between Robin Hood (in disguise) and one of the archers from the royal army.

Anyway, in the finals, the archer shoots a bulls-eye to which the Sheriff says something like, “Nobody can match that shot! I bet [some amount of money] on [the archer's name]!” To which everyone on the dais looks at him reproachfully. Of course Robin Hood shoots and splits the archer’s arrow, and the Sheriff would have lost his wager. But it’s the betting on a “sure thing” that amuses me about Romney.

Left Coast Right Mind on December 13, 2010 at 10:49 PM

And don’t forget, Palin also did a WSJ OpEd endorsing Paul Ryan’s Roadmap …

hrh40 on December 13, 2010 at 11:04 PM

Mitt reminds me of the High Sheriff of Nottingham (played by Melville Cooper) from “The Adventures of Robin Hood” (the 1938 version).
Left Coast Right Mind on December 13, 2010 at 10:49 PM

Excellent!

rrpjr on December 13, 2010 at 11:19 PM

Palin nailed this piece of s**t almost immediately and she explained why in detail. Mitt comes out one minute after the vote in the Senate and is against it. My God, anyone but corn producing states like Iowa know that ethanol is a dead issue. It is so illogical to use one and a half gallons of petroleum to produce one gallon of ethanol which produces only 85% of the BTU of a gallon of gas. And wind f**king mills? Are you kidding? They will NEVER break even unless they are subsidised by the gov. So for $900 billion in spending we got $250 billion in tax rate stability and an extension of the unemployment insurance for thirteen months at $54 billion! Do these asswipes remember Nov 2nd 2010? Do they understand what the Tea Party means?

inspectorudy on December 13, 2010 at 11:58 PM

Yep, that’s our Mittens, leading from the rear as always!

(And after the battle’s already over.)

Yeah…he sooooo the guy to clean up the aftermath of The Obama Event./

SuperCool on December 14, 2010 at 12:45 AM

I thought another commenter on another thread was joking when he said Romney came out with a position on this today after the vote!

CCRWM on December 14, 2010 at 1:07 AM

It was just a few characters on twitter right? What time did she spend analyzing it?

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 10:37 PM

Rent-free.

What is it like seeing Palin everywhere? Tell me how it feels.

Inanemergencydial on December 14, 2010 at 2:12 AM

I know our resident Palinistas can’t wait to point out that she was leading on this issue while Mitt was holding back until the very day of the Senate vote, so go on. Gloat. You know you wanna.

He thinks until the last moment to make a decision. In other words he waits for everybody else to chime in, see the responses of voters and then dish out the crap.

Go away Mitt. Go away.

antisocial on December 14, 2010 at 2:12 AM

Mitt Romney.

Bold leadership!

Kensington on December 14, 2010 at 2:27 AM

PrezHussein on December 13, 2010 at 10:37 PM

Dream on… Mitt’s been such a blatant coward on every issue that he’s made himself a punch line. He couldn’t get a Tea Party vote if he put on camos, grabbed his squirrel gun and set forth into the frontier. He’s been hunting his whole life, dontcha know?

It would do my heart good to see the ass drop another $50,000,000 in a fruitless attempt to convince us great unwashed he isn’t a two-faced elitist phoney.

rcl on December 14, 2010 at 2:59 AM

Well, I briefly knew the Mittster as a child. And I must say I’m a little ashamed of him here. It does not extend unemployment benefits that have already run out. All it does is keep the program running another 13 months. That means more people will run out closer to 99 weeks. But, nobody collects benefits the entire time. They all end at 99 weeks.

Now, there is a good reason for ending the program right away. IMAO it encourages unemployment. Sadly, with Democrats running the show unemployment benefits are needed simply to keep people from dying. There’s no chance of finding a job.

{o.o}

herself on December 14, 2010 at 5:52 AM

After reading Hot Air for quite some time now, I’ve made some observations about articles like this. Some of you people with the derogatory comments right now are the same people that support every new potential candidate that says something funny or blunt on TV.

Chris Christie: “Unions can kiss my #@*!”

HA blogger: “Oh! I’d vote him for POTUS!”

Next day;

Gov. Jindal: The leftover oil down here in the gulf makes great French fries!

HA blogger: “Oh! I’d vote him for POTUS!”

Next day;

Fred Thompson: “I may or may not someday want to run for POTUS again if I feel like it, and I don’t get bored.”

HA blogger: “Oh! I’d vote him for POTUS!”

I get tired of caring what you have to say bad about Romney or Palin because it ends up being so petty.

scotash on December 14, 2010 at 6:03 AM

This whole process has been a false flag operation on both sides of the aisle, prior to the tea party candiates arrival in January.

GOP cutting a back room spending deal with Obummer…. they have not learned.

bloviator on December 14, 2010 at 8:14 AM

To remedy such problems we need a very different model, perhaps establishing individual unemployment savings accounts over which employees would exercise direct control when they lose their jobs, or putting in place financial incentives for employers to hire and train the long-term unemployed.

Am I the only one who gets a bad feeling when a politician starts talking about creating a “savings account” for the American people? I am so sick of a politician pulling that carrot out to use as a tool to try to lure or keep people on the plantation. They can’t handle the money we’re forced to turn over now; what makes them think they can manage an individual savings account? Why do we need another bureaucratic department? The last thing we need is another bureaucratic department telling us how to “save” our money.

mizflame98 on December 14, 2010 at 8:38 AM

Well, at least ole Mitt’s on board now. Who knows? We may make a conservative of him yet!

JSGreg3 on December 14, 2010 at 8:41 AM

Mitt, perfect for this season…a Monday morning quarterback.

right2bright on December 14, 2010 at 9:28 AM

I get tired of caring what you have to say bad about Romney or Palin because it ends up being so petty.

scotash on December 14, 2010 at 6:03 AM

So tired of caring that you actually keep track of the statement and quotes…I guess you are so tired that you don’t often recognize sarcasm and humor.

scotash: “I get tired of caring what you have to say bad about Romney or Palin because it ends up being so petty.”

HA blogger: “Oh! I’d vote him for POTUS!”

right2bright on December 14, 2010 at 9:32 AM

Just as surely as the sun comes up in the morning, Allahpundit never misses an opportunity to trash Mitt Romney.

Like every other potential presidential candidate, Romney has his imperfections, but at least he understands the Constitution, the economy, foreign policy, and how to be an executive a million times better than the current White House occupant.

Eichendorff on December 14, 2010 at 9:36 AM

mizflame98 on December 14, 2010 at 8:38 AM

My comment above is with you on this!

Whenever government comes to ‘help’ by letting us ‘save’ our money, we seem to get much more overhead and then politicians angling for a way to get at our ‘savings’ before we can use it or otherwise tax it… again. Setting up a system with ‘health savings accounts’ means you are trying to save money FROM the ‘system’ so as to spend it wisely without having government burden it.

The idea of people investing and not taxing the growth of those investments, nor letting already taxed money grow without trying to tax it again, is beyond the scope of those wishing to take power from us.

Americans contribute to charity to help the poor and sick, that is our pledge to each other as a people to come to a more perfect Union with each other. We don’t need government ‘help’ to do that: we require government to keep our Nation safe from our enemies foreign and domestic so that we may make a better life for ourselves using our positive liberties without the burden of government trying to do it for us with its negative liberties. One grows society, the other impoverishes it… yet we keep sending those wishing to impoverish us to power, and that must end.

ajacksonian on December 14, 2010 at 9:37 AM

I have to say this is a fairly lame response. First of all, he makes no mention of the pernicious Estate Tax (probably because he is at risk of being attacked as his family would be a beneficiary of lower estate taxes). Secondly, while I don’t have a problem with unemployment savings accounts (presumably they would be tax free, which normal savings accounts are not), the job training idea is the same old, same old. Beyond the bureaucracy this would entail, as soon as one group (the long term unemployed) get a benefit, it hurts the employability of those who aren’t in that group as there is no tax benefit attached to their hire. Ultimately, instead of complicating our tax system, we should be throwing the whole damned “progressive” system out the window, and I would much prefer to see him advocate a flat tax.

That being said, for those who criticize Mitt for not showing leadership, this is a silly charge, and RomneyCare (which you all hate) is one example of his leadership abilities. While you are free to criticize the results, it is unarguable that he lead on this issue, devising a plan which had never been tried before.

Buy Danish on December 14, 2010 at 10:32 AM

Given the unambiguous message that the American people sent to Washington in November, it is difficult to understand how our political leaders could have reached such a disappointing agreement. The new, more conservative Congress should reach a better solution…

Has Romney forgotten about little things called TIMING and the Constitution? If Congress doesn’t vote to extend the tax cuts by Christmas, EVERYBODY’S taxes go up on January 1, and the “new conservative Congress” doesn’t take office until later in the month. Which will not really be a conservative Congress, but a conservative House and a divided Senate still led by the not-very-conservative Harry Reid.

If the current (lame-duck, Democrat-controlled) Congress approves the entire “compromise” package proposed by Obama, businesses which may have been putting off hiring due to worries about tax hikes could start hiring early next year, which would REDUCE THE COST of unemployment benefits if there are fewer unemployed people.

There are two political factors tending to discourage hiring right now–the fear of tax hikes on January 1, and fear of the regulatory burdens of ObamaCare and other anti-business regulations pushed by the Obama Administration. Let’s accept the “tax cut compromise” for now, with the possibility that it will stimulate some hiring, then the “new conservative” House can concentrate on removing the OTHER barriers to hiring, such as ObamaCare, the oil-drilling moratorium, and EPA “rules” not voted by Congress.

Steve Z on December 14, 2010 at 10:34 AM

Way to lead from the front Mittey! Maybe you should have waited until the President signs it before coming out against it, then you would really have been safe.

motionview on December 14, 2010 at 10:40 AM

I’m sure that it’s been said.

I’m a day late and a dollar short.

But surely, this pandering jackenape Romney is as transparent as glass.

Yet, somehow, he’s considered a “front runner”. We’ve learned nothing

bongo on December 14, 2010 at 11:39 AM

Steve Z on December 14, 2010 at 10:34 AM

I agree with you, but as I read it, Mitt isn’t saying not to pass it, just that it’s a bad deal with negative long term consequences.

Buy Danish on December 14, 2010 at 12:41 PM