President Obama, speaking in Florida yesterday, said that he cut taxes for 95% of Americans (messing with the tables one year and making it up the next and “paying” for the rest by raising taxes on future generations isn’t “cutting taxes”), and that instead of Tea Partiers complaining, “you’d think they’d be saying ‘thank you’!”

Michelle Malkin posted part of a Newsweek article that shows all the reasons we have to say “thanks” to Obama:

By all estimates, the budget outlook is daunting. The latest projections of the Congressional Budget Office reckon the cumulative deficits under President Obama’s policies to be $12.7 trillion from 2009 to 2020. In 2020 the estimated annual deficit will be $1.25 trillion, or 5.6 percent of the economy (gross domestic product), despite assumed “full employment” of 5 percent. And the deficits get larger with every succeeding year. Given unavoidable uncertainties, these precise projections are likely to prove wrong. But their basic message seems incontestable: there’s a large and growing gap between the government’s promises and the existing tax base.

How big a tax increase would be needed to close the gap? Well, huge. To put things in perspective, all federal taxes (income, payroll, and excise) averaged 18.1 percent of GDP from 1970 to 2009. Under CBO’s assumptions about Obama’s policies, taxes in 2020 would already be slightly higher, at 19.6 percent of GDP. But on top of that, there’d need to be a further tax boost approaching a third to balance the budget, because spending is projected at 25.2 percent of GDP. Needless to say, this would be the largest tax burden in U.S. history, even including World War II.

Yeah, thanks a lot. The president forgets that Tea Partiers are better educated than most, so they’re not likely to be handed a turd, be told its gold, and believe it. Of course, Obama’s statement isn’t intended to persuade Tea Partiers, but rather reinforce the votes of the spiral-eyed, Twinkie-brained handout-seekers who don’t know Hope from Shinola.

Isn’t this guy supposed to be President of the United States? Suddenly a good portion of the country is “they”… The problem is that almost 100% of those “theys” are active voters, and Obama and the Democrats will get the same “thank you” from voters in November that voters are getting from them now.

Here’s Mr. Humility wondering why we’re not bowing at his feet:

Comments

7 Responses to “Thank You, Mr. President! — For What?”

  1. Nanny on April 16th, 2010 2:03 pm

    Yeah right – we should be thankful for "turning over" via mandatory laws, hard earned money to a bunch of out of control spend freaks who look down on us for questioning their sanity. My oh my what thin skin this man has.

  2. Doug on April 16th, 2010 2:09 pm

    Like Dennis Miller once said: The color of a person's skin is of no concern to me — the thinness of it is.

  3. Nanny on April 16th, 2010 2:55 pm

    Think the national media is biased against the tea party – think again. The link below is the headline on the news page of WATZ in northeast Michigan. I wrote the news director and asked him if uses derogatory terms to describe the environmental group that is trying to prevent a clean coal plant from being built in Presque Isle County. I don't think he will be answering my email.
    http://www.watz.com/wire/localnews/12926_Tea_Bagg

  4. Nick on April 16th, 2010 5:38 pm

    Right, no conservative ever bashed anyone for criticizing Bush. What did Doug call it? Bush Derangement Syndrome?

    Please, you are a hypocrite of the highest order.

    Mandatory laws? As opposed to voluntary laws? You idiot.

  5. Nanny on April 16th, 2010 6:57 pm

    Uh Nick – last time I looked paying your taxes was not an option – it is the law. Oh that's right – you're a liberal weenie in the 47% that pays no taxes.

    How was 7th grade today?

  6. Nanny on April 16th, 2010 6:53 pm

    At approximately 1:50 pm they changed the head line from tea baggers to tea partiers but the link still says tea baggers. Kinda of an – Okay I'll change the offensive head line but keep the nasty in the link – ha ha poked you in the eye statement.

  7. archer52 on April 17th, 2010 4:45 am

    Bo is one arrogant son of a gun. Then again, all tyrants are. But there are times you have to wonder if he is a liar, crazy, stupid, or just doesn't give a hoot.

    None are good traits for a president.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.