GOP Rep Shares an Alarming Tweet About the Informant for the FBI's Biden...
They Want Them in Our Houses?!
CNN Can Only Be Saved by Destroying the Current CNN
Chuck Todd Meets Approval for Leaving MTP, and Kirsten Powers Never Read Her...
The Pride Flag Flies Proudly On The Chosen Set?
I Feel Better in Europe
Mike Rowe Is on a Mission to Reverse the 'Unspeakable Stupidity' of Devaluing...
Trump Never Changes
'What a Joke': CNN Political Analyst Got Something Very Wrong About Nikki Haley
Another COVID-19 Conspiracy Theory Is Coming True
IRGC Seeks to Evade Sanctions
Could Christians End the Foster Care System?
Deja Vu All Over Again and Again and Again
Here's What the Polls Out Since DeSantis' Announcement Show About the State of...
Does Joe Manchin Have Any Idea What He Is Doing for 2024?

Obama's On-Again, Off-Again Great Recession

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of

Mr. President, I have several very important questions. 

My first inquiry pertains to the fact that you want to extend the George W. Bush-era tax cuts for families earning less than $250,000.  Apparently, the dividing line to be considered wealthy is a cool quarter of a million. 

However, is that $250,000 net or $250,000 gross?  Just thought I’d ask. 

In addition, you keep referring to the middle-class, you know, the “folks…digging themselves out of the hole that was created by this great recession.” 

I noticed you called it “this great recession.” 

On the contrary, I thought you had led us out of the recession with all your economic hope and change. 

Maybe “this” doesn’t mean current, maybe it means something else, kind of like what “is” “is.” 

What troubles me is that an income of $250,000 and above is considered wealthy.  Yet, over one-half of Americans don’t pay taxes which must mean they are the low-class or no-class, obviously not the middle-class. 

So, exactly where is the dividing line, top and bottom, for this so-called middle-class? 

Next, I’d like to know when it stops being recognized as the George W. Bush-era tax cuts and just becomes identified as the “current tax brackets.” 

I believe every modern President, from Kennedy to Nixon and from Clinton to Bush, have tried to set tax policy. 

In fact, more than likely, every President since George Washington has also tried to do the same. 

I suppose it would be politically difficult to call it the Kennedy-era tax cuts or the Reagan-era tax cuts.  

In addition, it would not be politically smart to just simply announce that you want to raise taxes on the most productive people of our workforce, small business (gross-net).  On the other hand, since in your mind it’s still Bush’s war, Bush’s credit collapse, and Bush’s unemployment problem, I guess it’s easy enough to keep calling it the Bush-era tax cuts. 

Finally, Mr. President, who is the linguistic coach that inspired you to use the word “folks?” 

As a Harvard educated and well-schooled public speaker, the down home approach may play well for the Beltway, but for the majority it gets a little aggravating after a while.  But, maybe, just maybe, that’s the whole idea. 

Give tax breaks to a class of people that doesn’t exist, blame a President who’s no longer in office, and talk as though you’re a resident of Green Acres. 

That’s an interesting strategy. 

Mitt Romney, please take note. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Video