The article clearly says that this is an indirect conclusion
It later quotes their actual statements (which in no way resemble the claimed statement) but its inital statement, is the completely false - "A Republican talking point repeated ad nauseam during yesterday's debate pounded on the theme that they, and they alone, had the right to speak for "the will of the American people."
After the Democratic presidential candidate talked about fiscal responsibility. Which is the exact opposite of how he has operated as president.
What are you talking about.
Obama's actions as president. Most specifically his pushing of much greater federal spending, and new government entitlements.
nd he's passed a bill that pays for itself
Even if it was deficit neutral, that simply would not be "pays for itself". The spending doesn't cost a penny less if you also raise a tax to pay for it. The taxpayers will pay for it, it doesn't pay for itself.
And it isn't even deficit neutral. Over time it will greatly increase deficits. Also the ways to make it closer to neutral use up revenue options that could otherwise be used to bring the budget closer to balance.
unlike bush did with all of his programs...part D, 2wars, 2 tax cuts mostly benefiting rich folks..
All of which will cost less than, and last for a shorter period of time than Obamacare. A new entitlement of this size is more expensive than any war in our history, even WWII (the US part of it) wars end, entitlements go on an on. The tax cut was passed with a 10 year limit. And even if it was not, tax changes are essentially temporary anyway. Every president since Reagan has changed the tax rates, often more than once per presidency. And tax cuts aren't spending anything, they are just letting people keep more of their own money. While Obamacare on the other hand, not only spends a massive amount of federal government money, it also forces states to spend, and forces individuals to spend.
As for "mostly benefiting rich folks". The tax cut was a cut for essentially all taxpayers. Yes the dollar value saved by the wealthy was larger, but that's because the dollar value they pay in was larger. Tax rates go up and down. They pay a large share of almost all tax increases, if they didn't pay a large share of the cuts, they would soon face confiscatory taxation. |
