President Obama in his deficit and tax policy speech yesterday fired this shot across the bow of Republicans:
The tax cuts I’m proposing we get rid of are tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, tax breaks for oil companies and hedge fund managers and corporate jet owner. . . . Before we ask our seniors to pay more for health care, before we cut our children’s education, before we sacrifice our commitment to the research and innovation that will help create more jobs in the economy, I think it’s only fair to ask an oil company or a corporate jet owner that has done so well to give up that tax break that no other business enjoys.
Here comes Paul Caron explaining why this charge is, to put it mildly, hypocritical:
Two years ago, President Obama’s stimulus package included a provision to shorten the depreciation period of corporate jets from seven years to five years to stimulate the purchase of American-made jets. At yesterday’s press conference, the President excoriated Republicans six times for opposing the elimination of this “tax loophole” (which would raise a relatively insignificant $3 billion over ten years).
As one commentator put it, “President Obama Was For Tax Breaks on Corporate Jets Before He Was Against Them.”
By the way, if Connie Schultz is reading this post, I suggest she go to Fact Checker, which has just given President Obama two Pinocchios for his misstatements of fact, and reconsider whether she thinks he is fit to be President.
You might remember that it was Ms. Schultz who, after discovering that Michelle Bachmann had made several misstatements of fact (PolitiFact calls them “Pants on Fire” falsehoods) accused the Republican presidential candidate of intentionally lying and declared that she was, therefore, unqualified to be President.
Assuming “Pinocchios” are as bad as “Pants on Fires”, Ms. Schultz is now duty-bound, in the interest of consistency and fairness, to write a similar screed about how President Obama is unfit to be president.
Do you mind if I don’t hold my breath waiting for that to happen?
5 responses so far ↓
1 HappyTaxDude // Jul 1, 2011 at 8:33 am
I wonder if Connie is any kin to Debbie Wasserman-Schultz? Or maybe she’s a direct descendant of Sgt. Schultz: “I see nothing!” Michele Bachmann at least understands the Internal Revenue Code and has more cajones than most all of the other candidates currently in the field from both parties.
2 Peter // Jul 1, 2011 at 3:02 pm
Yeah, Debbie Wasserman Schultz has several pants on fires herself. But it’s okay because she’s a “progressive.”
3 Brookings Says Cut Expenditures on Middle-Class Tax Breaks // Jul 2, 2011 at 11:05 am
[...] Obama for playing the populist card by attacking deductions taken by corporations for their corporate jets (emphasis is mine): Obama’s poll-tested list of unpopular provisions—from corporate jet [...]
4 Lying for a Progressive Cause is Moral, Lying for a Conservative Cause is Immoral // Jul 3, 2011 at 8:21 am
[...] Obama Gets Two Pinocchios for Corporate Jet Speech Bookmark & Share: [...]
5 Obama Fibs About Tax Rates // Jul 8, 2011 at 10:03 am
[...] Obama Gets Two Pinocchios for Corporate Jet Speech [...]