Well, it’s been two weeks since the election. In that time, even though I voted for McCain, I have felt some enthusiasm with anticipation of a fresh start. To honest, I’m ready to be finished with the Bush years. But I just can’t bring myself to get excited about Obama. A few reasons keep a lid on it.
There was an episode of South Park where Cartman’s mom was lobbying, in her own special way, different public officials to legalize abortion all the way up to the (divide Cartman’s age by ¾)th trimester. It was a funny bit because the notion was outrageous. It might still have been at least a little funny if she’d have instead said 4th trimester. Why? Because in either case, the baby is already born and there’s no way imaginable someone could lobby for that, or even close to that. This presidential campaign proved that isn’t so far fetched when we learned of President-elect Obama’s opposition to a Born Alive Infants bill, which directed medical attention to babies who survived botched abortions (wouldn’t the 4th trimester theoretically start at birth?). When he says he doesn’t want his daughters “punished with a baby”, he really means it!
Even though he acknowledged in a debate that raising capital gains rates has proven, in the past, to bring about decreased federal tax receipts, he still wants to raise it in the name of “fairness”. Two things come to mind. One is the saying “Holding back the strong is no way to help the weak”, never mind that it’s a debatable point if the weak became so as a result of their own actions. It is this kind of stance that has convinced me that liberals sincerely do believe in equality of outcome, if they’re not downright hostile to those who succeed (especially without government help). How else to explain them depriving beloved government programs/ideas of funds when they know they’ll get more if they cut taxes on higher earners?? Second, if he means fairness is lacking because tax rates on income derived from labor are higher than those on income derived from investments (capital gains, dividend, rents, etc.), OK, but he’s only half way there. Why not bring down those top marginal rates in an effort to have them eventually meet capital gains, and dividend rates, somewhere in the middle?
If he has his way, and there’s little reason to doubt he will given expanded democratic majorities in congress, there will be fewer people pulling the American economic wagon and yet more riding. This was one of the areas I wish the McCain campaign would have hit earlier, harder and more frequently: if upwards of 40% of Americans pay no net taxes, how can Obama possibly cut taxes for 95% of us? Now there’s some fuzzy math! How is that anything other than more people going on the dole?? One could argue that there are already too many people who pay no taxes. If, however, they would like to trade their right to vote while they owe no taxes, fine by me. Otherwise, it could conceivably be viewed that they vote for a ‘pay raise’ every time they vote democrat, kinda like how they can count on increases in the minimum wage (why stop at $7.25?) or strengthening organized labor (nothing like getting paid 90% of your salary when there’s no work to do).
There are other things, like his declaration that we have to get “past the notion that we are better than everyone else”, even though many Americans, like myself, think we are indeed exceptional. I do hold out some hope that he will all-of-a-sudden value life more, that he will turn away from professed desire to “spread the wealth around”, that he will realize the markets are gyrating right now because they don’t know what Washington is going to do next and that he shouldn’t contribute to that uncertainty with “experimentation”. I do hold out hope, a sliver, that he will do a 180. But that’s hoping for a lot.
