Krauthammer Scolds Shields for 'Moaning and Bitching' About the Tax Plan
Charles Krauthammer on Friday scolded Mark Shields and other liberals for "moaning and bitching" about the President's compromise tax plan after months of demanding the White House implement a second stimulus package.
After Shields on PBS's "Inside Washington" predictably criticized Obama for agreeing to extend the Bush tax cuts on the so-called rich, Krauthammer marvelously struck back (video follows with transcript and commentary):
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: You know, you liberals surprise me. You won one. You won a big one and you’re moaning and you’re bitching. I, I can’t believe it. I mean, you just got yourself the largest stimulus in galactic history without even asking for it. You’ve been begging for this. The Left has been demanding a stimulus, but knowing that the public climate was against it. You get it delivered by the President stealthily in the night, and now you are all upset that you weren’t consulted in the negotiations.
MARK SHIELDS: You don't, you don’t give up on inheritance tax and on the tax for the rich which have been the defining domestic point of his agenda when he ran for President.
And that's really the issue being exposed here: liberal media members like Shields obviously care far more about taxing the rich than stimulating the economy.
As Krauthammer wrote Friday, Obama's compromise plan would represent a far larger stimulus to the economy than what was approved in 2009.
For months as unemployment has remained high, you couldn't swing a dead cat in D.C. or New York without hitting a liberal press member calling for additional stimulus. Now that they've gotten it, most of them can't stand it because it includes benefits to the upper class.
As such, they've all been exposed as astonishing hypocrites for they are clearly more interested in soaking the so-called rich than stimulating the economy and helping regular Americans.
It really is sickening if you think about it: to Shields and his ilk, sticking it to the upper class, even it if hurts 98 percent of the country, is principled.
How pathetic.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Charles Krauthammer is
Submitted by GoldenEagle4444 on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 3:11pm.
a one man wrecking ball when it comes to face-to-face political debate. Shields couldn't carry Krauthammer's clipboard.
And Noel, your comments are spot on!
I asked this question
Submitted by bkeyser on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 3:12pm.
I asked this question yesterday to no avail: Why this issue? Why are liberals hanging their hats on this one issue - increasing the tax rate on individuals earning $200k or more by 4.6%? There's just so much disingenuous about it.
Campaign promise? Come on, where's DADT, Cap-N-Trade, DREAM, and closing GITMO stand? Liberals are going off the rails on taxing the "rich"?
Deficit reduction? Really?
If it's about either deficit reduction or the need to fund social programs, why stop at 39.6%? Why not make it 50%? 60% 70%? Didn't Sanders just ask "when is enough, enough?" ?
Frankly, they sound like a bunch of whiny children who've been placed in time out while others are out on the playground. I know we Conservatives took a beating in '06 and '08, but it seems that while the Democrats and the media pronounced us all dead, we licked our wounds and regrouped, and two years later we swamped the chosen one. I don't remember a great deal of whining -other than the fact that Republicans were left out of all of the negotiations for major legislative overhauls. Funny, isn't that what House Dems are saying about this deal?
The Left is apolectic
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 3:43pm.
The Left is apolectic ablout obama's tax plan because it is the ultimate betrayal of what the Left believes in. Namely that it is government that can direct finely tuned 'stimulus' and manage the economy better than the random but accumulative effect of millions of decisions by individuals. Obama has just switched sides arguing that tax cuts work. This is astounding. And.... he's leading the charge against what has been a seminal cry of Liberals for years (including obama) that they will end Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
The dems got knocked to the ground with the last election and now obama has just gone over and peed on them.
No, the pResident hasn't
Submitted by MikeB on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:20pm.
No, the pResident hasn't changed sides; he still believes that all the money in the country is the government's money and, therefore, his money. He still believes that he and his fellow marxist-socialists need to redistribute that money to the parasites that won't work. He still believes that he should be the arbiter of how much is enough, and who should get what. But, he also realizes that he and his Party got their asses handed to them at the last election, that his message and policies were repudiated by the electorate. So, he will say and do anything necessary to stay in power, and/or recoup the power lost, so he can try again. He doesn't believe that tax cuts work (and that is a false argument, no taxes will be cut, only taxes will not rise). The only things he believes in is what is good for Barry, and what can bring this country down to second- or third-world status as quickly as possible.
Your refering to what he
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 9:58pm.
Your refering to what he believes. I was talking about what he is doing. This compromise plan is perceived as a double cross by his base. You know, like when we elect a 'conservative Republican' and then they go to Washington and work across the isle to help democrats create new spending.
Because we cannot afford the nanny state without it.
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:30pm.
The left knows we cannot afford that nanny state without pounding the rich. The middle class will soon find out we cannot afford the nanny state and will turn on the left unless money starts coming in soon. Their entire class warfare scheme will collapse unless they can start hammering the rich soon. They can go on TV with their talking heads making as much emotional pleas as they want. But once the middle class realizes we cannot pay for it, the game is up. It is why they are getting so desperate.
The amount of money by
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 10:06pm.
The amount of money by taxing the rich is actually not enough to make much of a difference. What is the motivation behind the Lefties is the belief that there shouldn't be rich people and poor people. One of their core beliefs is that income disparity is the root cause of tension across the world. It isn't just individual persons they want to strip of money but whole countries. That has been the basis of the Global Warming scam out of the UN. They want to take trillions from the rich countries to hand over to poor countries just to even things out. This they believe will usher in a more fair, just and peaceful world. Of course the end result would actually be a worldwide economic collapse much like we are seeing in the industrial countries now because too much money has been taken from the productive to be given to the unproductive.
It is just now fair to the
Submitted by d1carter on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 3:16pm.
It is just now fair to the four liberals on this show to have someone like Dr. K on the same show. He makes them all look like the kooky Progs that they are. What they need is more kooky Progs...
The only stimulus the liberals like is the...
Submitted by Gary Hall on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 3:50pm.
..French tickler.
Looks like it could be fun - but it doesn't do the trick by itself.
(;~/ gary
moaning....
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 3:57pm.
This just for fun because it's a weekend.
In tribute to Moaning here is Mississippi John Hurt
Moaning the Blues.
Even though I'm hundreds of miles upriver I love that old time Mississippi Delta Blues.
Ahhhh..........a fellow
Submitted by killa37 on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:13pm.
Ahhhh..........a fellow bluesman!!! A man of class and taste, obviously!!!
'The Hammer' can lay any ten of these delusional morons to waste without even breaking a sweat...........but they're usually too brain-washed to even know it!!
As to the 'plan'.........the more I find out about it, the more I'm against it..........and the linguini spined, wimpy assed Boy Blunder brought in der Schlickmeister to help decorate the Christmas tree, and got so outclassed (if I can even USE a word like that when Obama and Clinton are in the same room) that he, purportedly, had to LEAVE - and let the REAL 'orator' take over!!!
I thought we just 'won' an election........why do I feel like I'm still getting screwed??? Do you remember the Steely Dan album title - 'the Royal Scam'???
There was one point just
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:25pm.
There was one point just before obama turned the presser over to Clinton that he had the oddest look. For a few seconds obama had the pained expression of someone who wanted to be anywhere but where they were. I almost (almost) felt sorry for him. He has been put in a position he is not ready for and the country would never be ready for.
The only time I would EVER
Submitted by killa37 on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:32pm.
The only time I would EVER even entertain the idea of 'feeling sorry' for Boy Blunder is when I look at his wife!!!! But................hey..................he married her, so all bets are off - unless maybe he had to do it to get a green card or something!!!
I 'feel sorry' for our country.........I can tell you that much!!!
By the way, I went back and took a listen to Howlin' Wolf's 'Moanin' at Midnite'......which starts off with some ethereal and surreal three-octave moaning, and you KNOW that he was doing that 'live', since there weren't any studio tricks back in those days. But I like the line about 'I asked her for water...................she brought me gasoline'!!!! I could relate that to a lot of things that are happening these days!!!!
What does the military say about "first reports?"
Submitted by KC Mulville on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:12pm.
When I first heard that they had negotiated a deal to keep the Bush cuts in place, I thought it was a good deal, even if it meant subsidizing the unemployment benefits.
Now I'm not so sure. In fact, count me as officially on the fence. Every day, I keep hearing about spending that's built into this, that wasn't reported in the first reports. The military says that first reports are always wrong, and I believe that firmly.
You know, my friends, there's a reason why legislation was intended to be deliberated and debated. In the rush to pass TARP, we overlooked a lot of stuff that turned out, later on, to be pretty bad. But what if, while debating, we allow the cuts to expire? Hell, if they can "reconciliation" the healthcare bill, let them pass a resolution that keeps those rates in place until a budget deal is passed. If the Democrats won't do it now, let them pass that resolution after the turn of the year.
I want to talk about this ... (well, actually, I want people who know more about tax policy than me to do the talking. I want to hear what they have to say.)
I can't help but wonder
Submitted by TerryWest on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:21pm.
I can't help but wonder if some of this sniveling isnt more about a desperate and weak attempt to clean up at least some of Obama's mess on the backs of the so considered wealthy, so that these town cryers who foolishly paraded this President in don't look and no doubt feel (and right fully so) so incompetent. Sad to say that ship sailed long ago however if that is some of the reasoning, There just is no more face to save, it's all rear end now.
I think they're afraid to mention the real fret: Obama-care
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 12/12/2010 - 8:26pm.
Remember that the CBO's calculations on Obama-care included the assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire for all taxpayers on 31 Dec.
By extending the cuts for two years, Obama-care really skews the Federla spending, and gives the Republicans more ammo for repealing it.
Charles Krauthammer
Submitted by sargex1 on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:24pm.
Charles Krauthammer is right about : why the hell are the liberal democrates acting like women with two setsof lips bitching and moaning at the same time. The real point of his remarks should worry the hell out of the Republican Party and their leaders. What the hell were they thinking when they gave away the farm. Warning to them... You are on your way out of office... Taxed Enough Already Party dosen't forget.
Two sets of lips?
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:33pm.
What does that mean?
I don't know
Submitted by killa37 on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 4:42pm.
I don't know either.........but it sounds kinda intriguing!!!
Bilipsual
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 5:52pm.
Try and keep up with the hip kids ;)
Ooh. A double
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 11:02pm.
Ooh. A double entendre.
Someone's getting their game on for the Sunday NYTime's crossword puzzle.
I wonder if it's Scrabble-acceptable. I'm going to try it sometime. ;-)
Don't all women...
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sun, 12/12/2010 - 12:37am.
Have two sets of lips?
He's right.
Submitted by Phryj1 on Sat, 12/11/2010 - 5:23pm.
Liberals should be overjoyed right now. After all, they love universal programs. Universal government funded retirement, universal health care, universal everything. So, why do they whine and complain about UNIVERSAL tax relief? You'd think they'd be thrilled.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
Right as usual
Submitted by caiobabe on Sun, 12/12/2010 - 3:18am.
I fight to get home in time to see the KRAUT, hammer the left on Bret Baier's report on FOX.
Ultra intelligent man.
Noel... Is it your
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 12/12/2010 - 4:30am.
Noel...
Is it your position that retaining the existing tax rates for everyone except those earning in excess of one million dollars per year--which the Democrats proposed and the Republicans rejected--would "hurt 98% of the country"? If so, according to what calculus do you reach that conclusion?
Jer
I say deal with it next year
Submitted by Model850 on Sun, 12/12/2010 - 3:50pm.
If you ask me it was the Republicans who sold out on this deal. I say let the tax rates go up January 1 and let the new Republican majority in the House deal with rolling them back.
Sure it will be messy, and there is the danger that it won't get done due to resistance in the Senate. But a lot of those senators are facing re-election in 2012 and likely would be loath to have to campaign on having raised taxes in a recession.
Too much additional junk was included in the original compromise and now the House just keeps larding on more pork. To hell with it. The Republicans in the House should all vote against the bill and deal with the issue in January when Nancy P has to sit "in the back of the bus" and just shut up.
My opinion. Your mileage may vary.