$200k is NOT a Shift by Obama
Posted by: Chip Hanlon | 10/29/2008 11:12 AM
Newsmax has a report today talking about how Barack Obama has lowered his definition of being "rich" from someone making $250,000 down to someone who earns $200,000 or more, meaning he'd raise income taxes on earners above that level.
In fact, anyone who has been listening knows this isn't a shift at all, it's merely an echo of precisely what he was saying in the primaries.
Kudos to Newsmax for reporting on this, but rather than acting surprised by it they should be pointing out to people all the ways Obama has subtly toned down his promised tax hikes for the general election. In other words, he's simply lying to voters on the topic of his planned tax hikes; $250k is the shift, not $200k.
Now, I made a little trouble around here lately when it was reported I wouldn't be voting for McCain after all (I have already voted and simply skipped that line for the 2nd Presidential election in a row) because I ended up deciding that the Reagan/Gingrich principles of free markets and limited government couldn't survive another Republican President like the current one-- a fiscal liberal.
That said, it doesn't mean we should act surprised by what Obama really believes or that we should refrain from stating the obvious: he, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will absolutely lower the boom on this economy with massive tax hikes next year. And as always, the middle class will get hit the hardest.









Biden lowered the number to 150K very recently. The Obama camp is duct taping his mouth shut until after the election.
This is a no-choice election. Very depressing. If we are so fiscally strapped why all the tax cuts to the lower earners? I dont buy pure trickle down economics, but I think trickle up has even less credibility.