Mark Halperin was Right

Townhall.com ^ | July 14, 2011 | Rich Galen

[Kaslin]

About a week ago Time Magazine writer (and long-term Mullpal) Mark Halperin got thrown off the air for calling President Barack Obama a bad name on the MSNBC program, "Morning Joe."

After watching the President for the past 26 months I have determined he has two negotiating positions: Arrogant and petulant.

When he had majorities in both the House and Senate he was arrogant. Shortly after having been inaugurated Obama held a meeting with Congressional leaders on the subject of the stimulus package. According to a piece in the Wall Street Journal's Washington Wire from January 23, 2009 - a full three days into his term:

"Challenged by Senate Republican whip John Kyl (R-Az) over the contents of the package, the new president, according to participants, replied: 'I won.'"

That's the Presidential equivalent of "nanny-nanny-boo-boo."

Since his policies caused the voting public to rise up in electoral revolt last November tossing Nancy Pelosi out of the Speaker's chair and reducing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's majority to a tissue paper thin 53-47, Obama has taken a new tack: Petulance.

During the press conference to which Halperin was referring, Obama compared the Congressional Republicans to grammar school students - specifically his daughters - who leave their homework to the last minute.

Earlier this week he repeated his childish attempts to diminish House and Senate Republicans by telling them to "tear off the Band-Aid" and "eat our peas" in their discussions over increasing the debt limit.

Warren Buffett wheeled onto the business channels to help out his pal Obama by saying, about 12 times, "We raised the debt ceiling seven times during the Bush Administration," but now, according to CNBC "the Republican-controlled Congress is 'trying to use the incentive now that we're going to blow your brains out, America, in terms of your debt worthiness over time.'"

This is known in the finger-pointing-name-calling business as sophistry.

It would be like someone having said, in 1865, that Lincoln was wrong because "Fifteen previous Presidents have put up with slavery, but suddenly it's a cause to go to war."

I understand that Warren Buffet is one of the richest men in the world while I am the richest person in my car when I'm driving alone, but that doesn't alter the fact he is a Democrat and has been an Obama guy from the start which is rarely pointed out by the fawning business reporters who sit, awestruck, at his feet.

On both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue the parties are wasting time arguing over spending and taxes because they are attempting to treat the symptoms, not the cause.

Everyone is talking about jobs and tax rates; government spending and entitlements. All symptoms. No one is talking about the cause of the problem: The economy is creaking along barely above water, businesses are frightened, and Americans are uncomfortable buying things because they aren't sure they will have a job next month.

Jim Glassman, who is the executive director of the George W. Bush Institute, got it right the other day when he made the case that growing the economy would significantly reduce unemployment (and unemployment benefits) thus increasing tax revenues without increasing tax rates.

Glassman told me that if the U.S. economy grows by just four percent per year starting in 2017 then within five years the debt will be reduced by $3.7 trillion, using Congressional Budget Office data.

That $3.7 trillion seems within shouting distance of the $4 trillion number Speaker Boehner and President Obama were talking about over this past weekend.

Rather than chiding the Congress and going for cheap laughs among a press corps held hostage in the briefing room (you don't laugh at the Presidential jokes, you don't get called on next time), President Obama should be showing some leadership by utilizing the millions of very smart people in the Executive Branch to figure out how to get this economy moving again.

Otherwise, Halperin will have been correct: The President is acting, not like a Barack, but like a Richard.

[maddog55]

Barack Obama is a DICK.. nothong wrong with telling the truth.

[scooby321]

Warren Buffett wheeled onto the business channels to help out his pal Obama by saying, about 12 times, "We raised the debt ceiling seven times during the Bush Administration," but now, according to CNBC "the Republican-controlled Congress is 'trying to use the incentive now that we're going to blow your brains out, America, in terms of your debt worthiness over time.'"

Your an asshole Warren.

[Kaslin]

Nope, there is nothing wrong with it all, but he is more then just a DICK

[Red Badger]

I think you mean the other genitalia.................

[TheOldLady]

Click the Birdie and Smile!

When a New Monthly Donor Signs Up
A Sponsoring FReeper Will Contribute $10

Sign up today

[samtheman]

Halperin misspoke. Obama isn’t a dick, he’s a dick-head.

[madinmadtown]

For “journalists” like Halperin ideology trumps all as a reporter. Following the narrative, guiding people into the “right thinking” path has taken precedent over of the old-fashioned who, what, when, where and why questions of factual reporting.
And even though, ideology trumps all, even some of the reporters must be getting a little miffed that the guy they touted as so intelligent now seems very tarnished and not nearly as smart as advertised. (In fact, he seems painfully dumb a lot of the time.) Yet, they are wedded to his ideology and cannot deviate from the “right-thinking” narrative even though this charlatan, con-man has them kowtowing to him and disrespects them at every opportunity. He uses his authority to diminish them and they are like his little lap dogs, wielding to his every whim and forced to twist his head-shaking statements to sound like sanity.

[sinanju]

More accurately, Warren is a starf***er. He has more money than God, so now he amuses himself whooping it up in the halls of power, playing the revered sage and presidential guru.

He just needs the attention.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Your an asshole Warren.

In more ways than you may know. He favors the high Estate Tax because he owns life insurance companies (He is called The Oracle of Omaha, does he own Mutual of Omaha?) and life insurance proceeds are not taxed. That makes it easier to sell life insurance. He also likes the estate tax because it often forces heirs to sell successful businesses in order to pay the taxes. He then buys the ones he considers real bargains.

He also likes to say that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does so taxes on the rich like himself should be raised. He says that because he knows that he and the other wealthy pay very little income tax. They have most of their money in investments and pay capital gains taxes, if any, and the cap gains tax is 15% versus the income tax rate of his secretary which is probably 29%. He is also most likely, like the other wealthy people, has a lot of his money in trusts and foundations which are non-taxable.

He knows that because of that the "taxes on the wealthy" will start at a low enough number to include upper middle class business owners and professionals while not touching the truly wealthy. Those people will bear the brunt of the taxes and many will stop what they are doing when they realize the harder they work and the more successful they become, the less the reward. The winner from their work is the federal government, not them.

Buffet is an evil Leftists. Of course that is the only kind of leftist.