In her weekly attack on Republicans, Debbie Wasserman Schultz stated, “I’m concerned about their commitment to American exceptionalism” while defending the DELUSIONAL statements she made earlier in the week. Here is an excerpt.
“The way I would explain that statement is why aren’t they supportive of closing tax loopholes to make sure that we can not incentivise companies to ship jobs overseas”?
Who are they? Please name the republicans who are against closing those tax loopholes. And since your party controlled both houses of congress between Jan 2007 – Jan 2011 with a filibuster-proof majority, why didn’t you close those loopholes? It must because the Democrats want those loopholes. The only other reason I can think of is complete incompetence. Which was it?
“Why aren’t they supportive of making sure that we can strike a balance and not pile all the pain on top of people that can least afford it in the middle class and working families? Why do they only care about tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires”?
Lest you forget, the ‘Bush tax cuts’ did more to reduce the tax burden on the ‘middle class’ than any previous Democratic legislation. If you have facts to refute that, please list them. And I didn’t know that all millionaires and billionaires were republican.
And again, why didn’t you do something about the tax rates when the Democrats controlled both houses of congress? Even your own Narcissistic president chose to keep the rates intact.
“Why would they say they oppose bailing out the auto industry and rescuing the auto industry so that we can make sure we can have a strong and vibrant American automobile industry and then run from it”?
Was the auto industry or was it the Union that was bailed out? You see even staunch conservatives like myself were not totally against the auto bail out, what I, and many others were against was the how.
The government wasn’t just loaning GM money like the TARP program; they shoved GM through bankruptcy, showing favoritism that would never be afforded a normal company in bankruptcy.
Behind closed door contract deals were struck with the Union prior to bankruptcy. No deals were struck with any non-government investors or debt holders.
The possibility of losing your investment in stock is a risk inherent with their purchase unless you are a government investor. Individual investors were given the middle finger while the State (union) pension funds were replenished at the tax payers’ expense. Virtually every State Pension fund held GM stock.
The bond holders – whose investments are monetary contracts, not stock investments, where also given the middle finger. Those bonds were rated securities (loans) that were supposed to be backed by the Federal Government as binding legal contracts. Held by individual 401ks, people who worked their whole lives, and saved their money, suddenly found themselves with no retirement funds at all. All because of the way the Obama administration rammed them through the bankruptcy court.
Bondholders were not afforded the same protections that the Unions were. That is why we were against the GM and Chrysler bailouts. The government gave protection to the Unions and failed to protect the bond holders. And pretty much anyone else who was owed money from GM.
By the way Ms. Schultz; your concern for the American Auto Industry is well displayed by you owning a Infinity and a Nissan.
“I mean why would they not want to make sure that everyone has access to health care”?
Everyone already had access to health care, before Obamacare. Not everyone could afford healthcare insurance, but no one was turned away at the ER. Many would say there is no difference, but there is a vast difference. Get your facts straight.
“I mean these things — without them it would have prevented us from out-educating, out innovating and out competing our competitors in the global economy”.
There are a number of reasons that we are being ‘out-educated’ by other countries. The main one is tenure, which is not offered in most other countries in the world. They get to dump their deadwood, we do not.
And for ‘out competing our competitors in the global economy’, who has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the global economy? Oh, that would be the U.S. who is 4th.
And to add insult to injury The Effective Corporate Tax Rates on New Investments for 2010 is the highest in the global economy @ 34.6%. So Ms. Debbie Schultz, who is the problem here?
“So I just say that because it’s a reaction to their policies.”
Your policies are the problem, and that is my reaction.
As for your concern about our “commitment to American exceptionalism,” Turning the country into a giant welfare state is not American exceptionalism. American exceptionalism is taking advantage of the opportunities afforded us by freedom and making something out of those opportunites.
Ms. Schultz – you are beginning to make about as much sense as Howard Dean, which is good for we conservatives.