Schumer Loses Control As Abdul El-Sayed's Victory Deconstructs the Democrat Party
Elizabeth Warren Does a Rake Stomp While Complaining About 'Landlords Jacking Up the...
Amy Klobuchar Gets Absolutely Booed Off Stage for Border & Cop Lies —...
Jumpin' for Jihad: Chris Murphy Is 'All In' for Fake Doctor and Terrorist...
Tim Walz Might Want to Thank Fellow 'Manly Man' James Talarico for Eclipsing...
Mighty Big Threats From a Small Man: El-Sayed Warns Mike Rogers He Has...
NRSC Dares to Use Dem Candidate’s Actual Legal Name; Bulwark Writer Declares It...
NRSC Already Has an Ad Out About Abdul El-Sayed and It's BRUTAL (There...
'Stop Talking': Advice for Francesca Hong Reminiscent of Kamala Campaign
Hasan Piker Goes Nuclear After El-Sayed’s MI Primary Win: Calls Foes 'Islamophobic Pieces...
Mamdani Tries to Do a One-Eighty After Proof of Residency to Shop Comment...
BOOM! Hawaii Dem Congressional Candidate Gets an Instant FAFO With One Punch (and...
Outkick’s Clay Travis Challenges WNBA Team to Play HS Boys’ Basketball Team for...
The GOP Must Focus on the Cost of Living
Dem Pete Buttigieg Proposes ‘Normal’ Things Like Ending the Electoral College and Altering...

The Buffett Rule: Is there anything it can't do?

The Obama administration seems to think the Buffett Rule is the Swiss Army knife of policy proposals. It can do almost anything! Last year, when the President first proposed the rule that would slap an additional tax on the wealthiest 400 households in America, he claimed it would pay for his jobs bill and “stabilize” the debt for a decade. Last week, the White House brazenly claimed that no one ever said it would have a “significant” impact on the debt but that the rule was all about “tax fairness”.

Advertisement

Now, there’s a new spin on the President’s pet proposal. Yesterday, in his weekend address, the President claimed the Buffett Rule isn’t about “tax fairness” so much as it’s about economic growth. He reinforced the new claim while in Cartagena, Colombia today.

“That is not an argument about redistribution. That is an argument about growth,” Obama said in response to a reporter’s question at a news conference in Colombia. “In the history of the United States, we grow best when our growth is broad based.”

“This is not an argument about taking from A to give to B. This is not a redistributionist argument that we’re making. We’re making an argument about how do we grow the economy in a 21st century environment,” Obama said.

In reality, the President has not made an argument at all, but a claim. Like the other two rationales for the Buffett Rule, which is a textbook example of redistribution, there is nothing behind it but an army of strawmen and a sternly stated “Nuh uh!”

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement