There he goes again. President Obama, on the campaign stump, rails against the "rich," saying our "wealth gap" shows a need for a "fairer approach."
Does he really believe our economic problems have been caused by insufficient taxes on the rich? Insufficient taxes overall? If not, then what can we conclude about his insistence on hammering this point rather than addressing the real causes and real solutions?
Obama's ceaseless attack on the "rich" and his effort to divide Americans on the basis of their income and wealth can best be seen as a diversion, an attempt to distract Americans' attention from his failure to address our interrelated economic malaise and fiscal crises.
Before we can solve our problems, we have to correctly identify them. For starters, we have catastrophic national debt; reckless deficits in excess of $1 trillion since Obama took office, with no end in sight; unsustainable entitlement programs, including Obamacare, which, contrary to Obama's assurances, will dramatically drive up the cost curve further; obscene levels of discretionary spending; administration-driven anti-business regulatory policies; and a depressed economy that is exacerbating our deficit and debt problems.
How about possible solutions? There's a consensus that increasing income taxes during hard economic times, especially on the major wealth producers, is economically suicidal. Everyone also understands that economic uncertainty and excessive regulations suppress economic growth. No one can rationally deny that our entitlement programs, as presently structured, will bankrupt themselves and the nation. And, undeniably, our discretionary spending is out of control.
So how has President Obama approached these problems so far? He was able to force through a massive stimulus package on the theory that government-generated spending of borrowed money would stimulate the economy. He didn't say, "It may or may not work, so we have to take the risk of dangerously increasing the already dangerous national debt, because we have no other options." Rather, he promised that unemployment would come down if we followed him over the cliff. Well, we didn't follow him, but his Democratic Congress did, and he got his stimulus bill passed. And it not only didn't alleviate the problem but also made it much worse; the economy is sicker than it was, and the national debt continues to explode.
Instead of restoring certainty to the economy, he has refused to allow the Bush tax cut rates on the highest incomes to become "permanent." He has substantially ramped up excessive anti-business regulations in pursuit of the environmental crusade of the week. He tried to pass cap and tax, which would have made things much worse, and when he couldn't get Congress to go along, he had his Environmental Protection Agency unlawfully impose unprecedented emission regulations. He continues to submit and deliver budget deficits in excess of $1 trillion as far as the eye can see. He has ignored most spending cut recommendations, even those of his own bipartisan deficit commission. And he's shamelessly scared the elderly to obstruct essential structural entitlement reform.
How is he approaching the problems going forward? Instead of accepting accountability for his failures and reversing course, he has continued to blame his failures on George W. Bush, the Japanese tsunami, the GOP Congress and the wealthy. Instead of tightening his belt in light of the failure of his stimulus plan, he is demanding yet more mind-blowingly enormous stimulus spending.
The blame-Bush meme doesn't pass the laugh test anymore, and the tsunami excuse is embarrassing and pathetic. His effort to blame Republicans is similarly absurd on its face because he did get his agenda through, Obamacare and all, except for cap and trade, which he couldn't get passed even with his Democratic-controlled Congress.
So, how about his continued assault on the rich -- his fail-safe scapegoating device, one that flies in the face of everything Obama has ever claimed about himself in terms of bipartisanship, unity, civility and fundamental honesty?
The rich are not under-taxed, as objective statistics and empirical data demonstrate. Not one of the problems plaguing the nation today has been or is being caused by the rich, and punishing them will make the economy and our debt problems worse.
Nevertheless, Obama is ramping up class warfare, trying to turn Americans against one another by stoking the flames of envy and greed. He's even encouraging civil unrest among the Occupy Wall Street protesters. Have we ever had any other president do such a thing?
Obama blames the rich for problems he's causing, despite the absence of causal relationship between the distribution of our national income and wealth and the economic and debt problems we face.
Why? Simply because that's what demagogic community-organizing, Marxist-leaning Alinsky disciples do -- and it's disgraceful.