Debbie Wasserman-Schultz: These new tax hikes on the rich are just the first step of “the balanced approach”

posted at 7:51 pm on January 2, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via Mediaite, “balanced approach” is Obama’s Orwellian term for selling tax hikes to the public as a condition of spending cuts even though there’s nothing remotely balanced about our fiscal problems. Spend 10 seconds looking at the graphs in Yuval Levin’s new post at the Corner. That’s the reality that the “balanced approach” pretends to address. As Levin said in another post today, “The fiscal trajectory of our welfare state is not sustainable, no matter how much taxes go up.”

But okay. The left’s new talking point, pushed by The One himself, is that they absolutely positively won’t negotiate over the debt ceiling. No one believes that, but fine. Supposedly, if the GOP wants spending cuts, the debt ceiling is off the table and the price will be additional revenue. One question: Where’s that new revenue coming from? I can’t figure it out. Neither can Megan McArdle:

For starters, there’s a matter of timing. President Obama just successfully raised taxes on the rich. Is he going to go back and do it again in a few months? I’m not sure about the optics here: while I think that a tax increase on the rich was popular and inevitable, I don’t think that Democrats will do well to position themselves as the party that does nothing but demand more tax increases, even on rich people. Moreover, each successive tax increase is likely to be less popular than the last, precisely because the most politically popular increases inevitably get passed first. A return to the Clinton-era tax levels on people who make more than $450,000 a year is, politically speaking, a no-brainer. A further hike will peel off a few voters who just wanted the rich to pay their “fair share” and now feel content. The third hike will be pushing rates close to 50%, if it is to raise any money at all. That seems to be pushing pretty far past most Americans’ ideas about what tax rates ought to be…

When you look at the actual proposals Democrats talk about, they’re trivial. Things like lengthening the depreciation schedule for corporate jets, which doesn’t raise much in the short term, and raises almost nothing in the long term, because while companies get a smaller depreciation and amortization deduction for the first few years, that just means they get a bigger one later. Or ending the immediate expensing of drilling costs, a deduction that the major oil companies lost years ago, so that you’re basically just pulling pennies out of wildcatters.

There are bolder things they could do in lieu of raising rates again, like eliminating deductions or enacting a VAT, but that gets them into squeezing the middle class and that’s not the way this game is played. Those would be viable options if this were about raising revenue, but revenue and deficit reduction have never been the core of Obama’s tax messaging. (The final deal ended up raising less revenue than Boehner offered O during their negotiations, in fact.) The core is “fairness” and the middle class are already paying their “fair share” per the Democrats’ acquiescence last night in making the Bush tax cuts permanent for everyone earning less than $450K. Tax hikes are for rich people — except for the huge hit you and I took yesterday on the payroll tax — so presumably the “balanced approach” that Debbie Downer’s talking about here vis-a-vis the debt ceiling will have to target the rich again. But how? Cancel the tax exemption for muni bonds and let local governments wither? Hike capital gains taxes while the economy continues to lurch along? The whole reason McConnell got Obama and Biden to agree to a $450,000 threshold for new tax hikes instead of the $250,000 one that O preferred is because the White House feared congressional Democrats would go wobbly if the GOP dug in and hammered them during a post-cliff standoff for being tax vampires. If Obama demands further taxes on the rich during the debt-ceiling negotiations, and then further taxes after that as part of the next fiscal clusterfark, how many Dems will stick with him as public perceptions start to sour? Realistically, the Democrats had more fiscal leverage over the past two months than they’re likely to have over the next two years and all they got from it was something like $60 billion a year in extra revenue when we’re running trillion-dollar deficits. If that’s their best showing even when everything’s breaking their way, what does O think he’s getting in March? Or am I giving him and Wasserman-Schultz too much credit in thinking they’re interested in anything deeper than the “balanced approach” soundbite here?


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

Yeah…we knew that.

Too bad the GOP didn’t seem to appreciate the proven, standard and effective battle strategy of going on the offensive instead of their action the past two days.

*sigh*

DWS is still in our life…..help me, Spock!

ProfShadow on January 2, 2013 at 7:54 PM

We are going to need more Millionaires before this ship gets balanced..

To bad we tax the shiite out of them..

Who wants to come here to start a business..

Electrongod on January 2, 2013 at 7:55 PM

Translation: We won.

OccamsRazor on January 2, 2013 at 7:55 PM

Give the new medical excise tax and the payroll tax a few months to sink in.

I don’t think “fair share” will work on the next go round.

gophergirl on January 2, 2013 at 7:56 PM

Thanks again GOP!

Mr. Arrogant on January 2, 2013 at 7:59 PM

Tax hikes are for rich people — except for the huge hit you and I took yesterday on the payroll tax

Au contraire. Look at your receipts…

Pic of the Day: It’s 2013! Welcome To Obamacare!

Resist We Much on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

“The fiscal trajectory of our welfare state is not sustainable, no matter how much taxes go up.”

Why is no one stating this fact 24/7/365…?

Seven Percent Solution on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz: These new tax hikes on the rich are just the first step of “the balanced approach”

…HA HA!

KOOLAID2 on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

And I am sure the Gelded Old Party will go along and raise them too!If you are walking around the Capitol grounds be careful not to slip on all those GOP balls lying around.

redware on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Workers will pay more into the payroll tax: The deal does not extend the payroll tax holiday, which means the federal government will take 6.2 percent from paychecks, as opposed to the 4.2 percent rate in 2012…

And Obama said he wouldn’t raise taxes on the middle class… pfffffft…
MFLA…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Someone, please ask this skank exactly what my “fair share” is?

50% of my earnings? 60%? Can she give us a ceiling at which she thinks tax rates would be “unfair”?

LASue on January 2, 2013 at 8:01 PM

The GOP is already behind the eightball. Obama set the table while they were shaking hands on a deal and how does the GOP respond? Nada..Silence.

Get the hell out there….today….and punch back twice as hard like Obama likes to do.

For starters: A couple three Trill of spending cuts AND budget passed by both houses and signed by Obama.

Don’t let them set the freaking narrative.

WisRich on January 2, 2013 at 8:01 PM

Workers will pay more into the payroll tax: The deal does not extend the payroll tax holiday, which means the federal government will take 6.2 percent from paychecks, as opposed to the 4.2 percent rate in 2012…

And Obama said he wouldn’t raise taxes on the middle class… pfffffft…
MFLA…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Mine hit on this paycheck.

I still don’t know how much my medical is going up.

But hey people get free phones and EBT cards to buy ciggies.

gophergirl on January 2, 2013 at 8:03 PM

No matter what happens the LAM will give cover for everything the dems and obama do hence forth…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:03 PM

Those would be viable options if this were about raising revenue, but revenue and deficit reduction have never been the core of Obama’s tax messaging. (The final deal ended up raising less revenue than Boehner offered O during their negotiations, in fact.)

The main purpose IMO is to push socialism in one form or another, and to create that same expectation in the mind of the American people. The Democrats aren’t as stupid as they appear. They are playing the long game and the Republicans are playing whatever game the Democrats tell them to play and by whatever rules the Democrats choose. Calvinball comes to mind.

sharrukin on January 2, 2013 at 8:03 PM

The left’s new talking point, pushed by The One himself, is that they absolutely positively won’t negotiate over the debt ceiling.

I believe it. The argument hasn’t changed. Geithner comes above ground and makes rounds, saying that not raising the debt ceiling is irresponsible and childish and will cause us to default and collapse. We must raise the debt ceiling so we can sell new debt and pay our existing debts.

Done and done. Unless something’s changed from last time.

Axe on January 2, 2013 at 8:03 PM

Today Obama sent an email touting his agreement

to ask the wealthiest Americans to begin to pay their fair share to reduce the deficit.”

Key word: Begin.

Obama won’t be satisfied until we’re France.

LASue on January 2, 2013 at 8:04 PM

Get rid of the Hollywood tax breaks as well as wind farm tax credits.

rbj on January 2, 2013 at 8:04 PM

ugh. still with the hair. oy.

ctmom on January 2, 2013 at 8:04 PM

gophergirl on January 2, 2013 at 8:03 PM

As did everyones GG…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz: These new tax hikes on the rich are just the first step of “the balanced approach”

Dumber than a bucket of used camel snot and as evil as Saul Alinski himself.

John Boehner calls it quits.

SWalker on January 2, 2013 at 8:05 PM

SWalker on January 2, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Bravo!!

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Yeah yeah, we know.

Why do I get the feeling that the “balanced approach” will include gun control.

Bishop on January 2, 2013 at 8:06 PM

gophergirl on January 2, 2013 at 8:03 PM

As did everyones GG…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Oh I know but some people won’t get their paycheck until the 15th.

My company gets the good news on Friday. Boy are some people going to be surprised.

gophergirl on January 2, 2013 at 8:06 PM

I wonder how many of our working trolls will comment on the hit they took in their paychecks hmmmm?

I suspect

Crickets….

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:08 PM

Someone, please ask this skank exactly what my “fair share” is?

50% of my earnings? 60%? Can she give us a ceiling at which she thinks tax rates would be “unfair”?

LASue on January 2, 2013 at 8:01 PM

Shut yer trap, bigot, and get on the train. We will TELL YOU when enough is enough.

Bishop on January 2, 2013 at 8:09 PM

Definition of the decline of America being screwed: DWS is in congress and Allen West is not.

Dingbat63 on January 2, 2013 at 8:10 PM

Workers earning the national average salary of $41,000 will receive $32 less on every biweekly paycheck.

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:10 PM

Obama:

I gave the middle class a tax break back in 2010…

Sic…..

Electrongod on January 2, 2013 at 8:12 PM

Next comes the wall to prevent us from leaving to nations without high taxes, call it an exit tax or simply a requirement to have “American” assets remain in Country and taxable for a period after the serf leaves.

Civil War III

Bulletchaser on January 2, 2013 at 8:12 PM

It is already burning..!

d1carter on January 2, 2013 at 8:13 PM

This just in from the “Pre-crime” unit……Feb 15, 2013.

[Speaker]: If you want the debt limit raised, you need to show me the money.

[Prez]: Let me be clear…we need a balanced approach..You raise taxes another $1T, and I’ll match with cuts in the generous amount of $.02 on the dollar. Oh, and you’ll be happy about it.

[Speaker]: What the..? I’ve already given you $630B in taxes just 45 days ago! What do we get for that?

[Prez]:
Nothing. I got that for free. Now leave before I taunt you for a second time.

WisRich on January 2, 2013 at 8:14 PM

******************** NUTS ***************************!

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:15 PM

Obozo is sitting in Hawaii laughing hiz azz off at the idiots who voted him back in…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:16 PM

The “Progs” have been pushing the idea of income disparity for some time. Their idea of “the balanced approach” is to even out incomes except for their own as the elite enlightened ones. Remember that Obysmal had said that there are times “when you have made enough,” and he intends to set the limit on what “enough” is.

onlineanalyst on January 2, 2013 at 8:18 PM

MeanWhile,……

WSJFiscalCliff@WSJFiscalCliff

Goldman awarded 10 top executives shares worth about $65m a month early, ahead of 2013′s higher tax rates. http://t.co/zO9MqYUh #cliff

http://stream.wsj.com/story/the-fiscal-cliff/SS-2-87944/

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:18 PM

Bulletchaser on January 2, 2013 at 8:12 PM

You laugh. Some cornball Democrat in the Maine Senate last year proposed a tax on those who move out of the state and then try to move back in.

It failed, but not for his trying.

Cleombrotus on January 2, 2013 at 8:20 PM

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:18 PM

Oh just peachy…

War on the rich my azz…

How did america ever come to this? Hatin’ on rich people eh?

onlineanalyst on January 2, 2013 at 8:18 PM

I believe you are spot on…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:21 PM

Obozo is sitting in Hawaii laughing hiz azz off at the idiots who voted him back in…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:16 PM

A new Nobel Peace Prize?

Electrongod on January 2, 2013 at 8:22 PM

Electrongod on January 2, 2013 at 8:22 PM

Yeah, ‘n’ here it comes…

I am gonna hate inaugeration day… think I’ll stay in bed…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:23 PM

We’re going to need a lot fewer Marxicrats, before this ship can get righted.

rayra on January 2, 2013 at 8:23 PM

HAL E LOU YA,Boehner finally see’s the Treachery of Snake Handling!
(snark)

Boehner tells GOP he’s through with one-on-one Obama talks
By Russell Berman – 01/02/13 05:04 PM ET
****************************************

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is signaling that at least one thing will change about his leadership during the 113th Congress: he’s telling Republicans he is done with private, one-on-one negotiations with President Obama.

During both 2011 and 2012, the Speaker spent weeks shuttling between the Capitol and the White House for meetings with the president in the hopes of striking a grand bargain on the deficit.

Those efforts ended in failure, leaving Boehner feeling burned by Obama and, at times, isolated within his conference.

In closed-door meetings since leaving the “fiscal cliff” talks two weeks ago, lawmakers and aides say the Speaker has indicated he is abandoning that approach for good and will return fully to the normal legislative process in 2013 — seeking to pass bills through the House that can then be adopted, amended or reconciled by the Senate. (More…..)
===================

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/275295-boehner-tells-gop-hes-done-with-one-on-one-obama-talks

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:24 PM

rayra on January 2, 2013 at 8:23 PM

The whole kit ‘n’ kaboodle needs cleaning out…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:25 PM

Boehner tells GOP he’s through with one-on-one Obama talks

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Well, it was just rude of Obama not to bring any Vaseline.

sharrukin on January 2, 2013 at 8:26 PM

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz:

…and that’s where I stopped reading.

Tim_CA on January 2, 2013 at 8:26 PM

We’re going to need a lot fewer Marxicrats, before this ship can get righted.

rayra on January 2, 2013 at 8:23 PM

At least order them not to hang over the rail when Obama floats by..

*flashing cameras..throwing their bras…asking for autographs.*

Electrongod on January 2, 2013 at 8:27 PM

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Too little thought and it’s too damn late now to go crying in his hot milk!

SW and others predict Boehner isn’t gonna be the speaker…

Who might be tho?

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:27 PM

And about 80 fewer RINO morons in the House, too.

rayra on January 2, 2013 at 8:28 PM

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:18 PM

Oh just peachy…

War on the rich my azz…

How did america ever come to this? Hatin’ on rich people eh?

onlineanalyst on January 2, 2013 at 8:18 PM

I believe you are spot on…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:21 PM

Scrumpy:)

Look back,at Obama calling for the reduction in CEO Bonus’s,and
bused in Goons to the CEO Propertys,er,Homes,and THREATENED Family
members!

Thats Where It Started!

Or,Argue with your neighbours,Git in there Faces…-Barack Obama!!

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Boehner tells GOP he’s through with one-on-one Obama talks

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Hard for Boehner to talk with his mouth full.

Electrongod on January 2, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Who’s the lady in the pic? Debbie Whatshername-Schultz doesn’t look at all like that

LOL – I wonder how many hours that team of graphic artists put in to fix everything?

Fallon on January 2, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Who’s the lady in the pic? Debbie Whatshername-Schultz doesn’t look at all like that…

Fallon on January 2, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Wow!!!

Too bad she hates America…

No bag can hide that..

Electrongod on January 2, 2013 at 8:31 PM

Someone, please ask this skank exactly what my “fair share” is?

50% of my earnings? 60%? Can she give us a ceiling at which she thinks tax rates would be “unfair”?

LASue on January 2, 2013 at 8:01 PM

I believe now that Democrats would tax us at 100% and give us an allowance on which to live. If they could get away with it. For now, they can’t. “Now” being the optimum word there…

The fact of the matter is this, me with my $30k job and (if he ever finds work) my husband would make about $50-60k/year. We have a nice, but modest home and one minivan. Democrats will one day see that as wealthy because we have more than, say, the welfare mom living on $12k/year with 6 kids. It will be “unfair” that we have these things when she doesn’t.

So in the future, $50k income will be the next “millionaire” just like $250k/$400k was in this deal.

englishqueen01 on January 2, 2013 at 8:31 PM

I believe you are spot on…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:21 PM

Sure I am. I’ve heard enough of the “Progs” simplistic rhetoric to understand that their definition of “social justice” is equality of outcomes.

They dislike the idea of capitalism that people will pay for a good or service whatever they think that it is worth. For the “Progs” your salary or ration card (the equalization of the outcome) will be worth what you are worth to the State.

onlineanalyst on January 2, 2013 at 8:32 PM

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Well, it was just rude of Obama not to bring any Vaseline.

sharrukin on January 2, 2013 at 8:26 PM

sharrukin:

Boehner is making the mistake,(ahem still)of playing by the rules!

Obama and DemGoons,are using Fallujah Iraq Insurgency Tactics to
get what they want!!

A little late for the Perception of Boeehners handling of this,but
I think,he finally knows,that even a POTUSA is a LIAR/UnTrustWorthy
to deal with!!:)

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:33 PM

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Hard for Boehner to talk with his mouth full.

Electrongod on January 2, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Electrongod:Ahem,Austin Powers Movie Scene:)

Maiden name:Swallows

Married Name:Spitts!
(snark)

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:35 PM

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Right on I know where it started and with his rhetoric my friend.

Obozo the Great Divider!!

Rules for us and none for them…

They will keep hauling in the cash and printing it to fill their elitist coffers whilst we penny pinch to stay afloat…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:35 PM

the welfare mom living on $12k/year with 6 kids. It will be “unfair” that we have these things when she doesn’t.

englishqueen01 on January 2, 2013 at 8:31 PM

Living on 12k a year with 6 kids? where you at eh? lol…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:37 PM

A little late for the Perception of Boeehners handling of this,but
I think,he finally knows,that even a POTUSA is a LIAR/UnTrustWorthy
to deal with!!:)

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:33 PM

You are more optimistic than I am. Guys like Boehner never get it. Obama and the Democrats don’t want whatever petty thing they are currently negotiating for…they want the whole ballgame.

sharrukin on January 2, 2013 at 8:38 PM

“The fiscal trajectory of our welfare state is not sustainable, no matter how much taxes go up.”

Why is no one stating this fact 24/7/365…?

Seven Percent Solution on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Who would report it if they did?

BallisticBob on January 2, 2013 at 8:39 PM

onlineanalyst on January 2, 2013 at 8:32 PM

I was be facetious OLY… sorry…

Then I would be considered worthless to them, no card for me!!

Obamacare will make sure I won’t last long…

Scrumpy on January 2, 2013 at 8:39 PM

We told you they are socialists, and we are correct.

Philly on January 2, 2013 at 8:47 PM

Via Mediaite, “balanced approach” is Obama’s Orwellian term for selling tax hikes to the public as a condition of spending cuts even though there’s nothing remotely balanced about our fiscal problems.

and if you’re part of the “in crowd” you don’t pay any taxes.

They’re all looking after themselves. They’re making money off of all this and it’s both parties. It’s not about ideology-that’s just the vehicle to get more $ into their pockets.

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 2, 2013 at 8:59 PM

I was calling him a socialist when socialism wasn’t cool…

rgranger on January 2, 2013 at 9:00 PM

God was not merciful with her.

Schadenfreude on January 2, 2013 at 9:07 PM

“The fiscal trajectory of our welfare state is not sustainable, no matter how much taxes go up.”

Why is no one stating this fact 24/7/365…?

Seven Percent Solution on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Seven Percent Solution:Ummmmmm:)

@djfxtrader tweeted:
djfxtrader
S&P: Cliff agreement “does little to place the US’s medium-term public finances on a more sustainable footing”

3 hours ago from twitter.com by editor

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 9:08 PM

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 8:33 PM

You are more optimistic than I am. Guys like Boehner never get it. Obama and the Democrats don’t want whatever petty thing they are currently negotiating for…they want the whole ballgame.

sharrukin on January 2, 2013 at 8:38 PM

sharrukin:You got that right:)

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 9:11 PM

Why is no one stating this fact 24/7/365…?

Seven Percent Solution on January 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Who would report it if they did?

BallisticBob on January 2, 2013 at 8:39 PM

They talk in a loop. It’s group-think. The conversation is formed of repeating sentence fragments, pre-structured questions, and pre-determined answers. Even guest heads are seated to fill expected holes in the conversation.

Your topic sentence is not in the loop.

I mean this literally and yes I think the national conversation is really that vacuous.

Axe on January 2, 2013 at 9:12 PM

America Could Still Go Over The Cliff — And Take The Rest Of Us With It

M2RB: Megadeth

Resist We Much on January 2, 2013 at 9:09 PM

lol

– doesn’t even need to be any particular song, either. :)

Axe on January 2, 2013 at 9:14 PM

“Balanced approach”——-Chinese style Communism where are rulers pick the winners and losers.

We DEFINITELY NEED a gop that goes along with this.

All hail our American god!!!

PappyD61 on January 2, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Oops,somebody is getting annoyed………

Foreign Policy ‏@ForeignPolicy

Shen Dingli on America’s fiscal dysfunction: “Frankly, China is fed up with the performance of U.S. democracy” http://atfp.co/TIfchM

Is This Any Way to Treat Your Banker?
China recoils in horror at America’s fiscal dysfunction.
BY SHEN DINGLI | JANUARY 2, 2013
********************************

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/01/02/is_this_any_way_to_treat_your_banker

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 9:29 PM

lol

– doesn’t even need to be any particular song, either. :)

Axe on January 2, 2013 at 9:14 PM

You take a mortal man,
And put him in control
Watch him become a god
Watch peoples heads a’roll
A’roll…

Just like the Pied Piper
Led rats through the streets
We dance like marionettes
Swaying to the Symphony …
Of Destruction

:-)

Resist We Much on January 2, 2013 at 9:30 PM

Wait’ll da’ gubmint sees how much less tax revenue they bring in compared to what they were expecting. They might get $60 billion from the rich this year, but they’ll get far less next year bcuz the rich won’t have as much to tax. There will also be fewer investments so not as much capital gains taxes. And even though payroll taxes went back to levels from a few years ago, even that won’t produce as much revenue due to way fewer people with jobs on payrolls to be taxed. For all the heat the Repubs are taking, this fiscal cliff deal was voted for by 221 Dems v. only 125 Repubs, so I’m making the Dems own it and anyone who complains to be about their paychecks being smaller will get quoted those vote totals and be reminded about the ObamaScare/RobertsTax.

stukinIL4now on January 2, 2013 at 9:37 PM

The “balanced approach” will put a lot more people on extended unemployment, which was part of the plan.

Philly on January 2, 2013 at 9:46 PM

January 2, 2013, 6:33 p.m. ET

Fred Barnes: The President Who Wants It All
The essence of bipartisan deals is win-win: Both sides are satisfied.

Obama’s approach is he alone wins.
**********************************

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324374004578217433510552350.html?mod=wsj_streaming_stream

canopfor on January 2, 2013 at 9:47 PM

“I’m a moron,” said the moron.

John the Libertarian on January 2, 2013 at 9:50 PM

As much as the deal sucked and will be harmful to the economy the fact is Obama played his tax the rich card. Taxes are a dead issue and Debbie is just out trying to spin against reality. Balance means spending cuts and the gop has the strong hand now. I heard a gop congressman talking today and I think the gop is just waiting for the right time to remind everyone how their taxes have increased.

Its anecdotal, but there were blank looks and disbelief on the low information Obama voters faces in my office when I told them they just took a tax hike from Obama. I just smiled and told them we will see on Friday. I also reminded them it is just the beginning and to wait until they have to go buy healthcare without any employer match.

Ellis on January 2, 2013 at 9:51 PM

I just smiled and told them we will see on Friday. I also reminded them it is just the beginning and to wait until they have to go buy healthcare without any employer match.

Ellis on January 2, 2013 at 9:51 PM

Or wait until the Dems push through taxing your employer paid health insurance. That would raise more revenue. Or phase out our itemized deductions at an even lower income level. Again, sticking it to us fools who work for a living.

HoosierStateofMind on January 2, 2013 at 11:06 PM

‘A Balanced Approach’ – you know, where you unwashed Hoi Polloi revenue earners keep working to fork it over to us enlightened ruling class types. If you have something, we want it; that’s balanced right? You know, “Spread the wealth around!” Now get busy, wagyu beef and flights back and forth from Hawaii aren’t cheap.

ghostwalker1 on January 3, 2013 at 12:36 AM

A balanced approach LOL !! Debbie you’ve got a flat spot in one of the bearings that whirls around in your head. It hits that spot, you say something stupid and moronic, and we all wonder did she really say that. Balance from one of the most unbalanced persons to ever be in the Congress, you are a piece of work.

stormridercx4 on January 3, 2013 at 4:30 AM

Yep, even though the paycheck is for work I did through the end of last year (and not a day beyond), the paycheck I got today is about 2% lighter.

GWB on January 3, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Elsewhere in this interview she talks about how these tax cuts are good while the Bush tax cuts were evil, because those were not “paid for”.

… how are these changes in the rate “paid for”?

The Schaef on January 3, 2013 at 12:17 PM