. . . why didn’t he submit legislation to the 111th Congress when the Democrats had a majority in the House and a super-duper majority in the Senate (filibuster-proof for six months)?
And why aren’t our friends in the legacy media asking him about this oversight?
Question came to mind as I was reading Rush’s response to Obama using Warren Buffet’s secretary as a prop: “There’s something inherently unfair about the Republican tax code, as though Warren Buffett’s secretary is eating pork and beans while sitting in the sewer grate, while her boss is flying around on his NetJets planes. And, lo and behold, she was up there!” Read the whole thing.
Republican tax code? Democrats had full power for two full years and didn’t try to reform it. So, shouldn’t we be calling it a Democratic tax code?
FROM THE COMMENTS: chad writes:
Republicans need to do a better job explaining double-taxation with dividends and capital gains. The way it is now, people hear about how so-and-so made all this money and only paid 15% while some much poorer person paid 20% or more, never getting the explanation as to how this is an apples-to-oranges comparison so long as we have high corporate income taxes that take a huge cut of profits before they become dividends or capital gains.