EagleTribune.com, North Andover, MA


December 1, 2012

Column: Give Obama what he wants and let him explain the consequences

I’m joining a bandwagon.

It’s a small one so far, but I think it has promise. It’s not the I’m-going-to-break-my-no-tax-increase-pledge-to-Grover-Norquist bandwagon, although that’s an element of it.

It’s not just about taxes. It’s about pretty much everything. This is about what professor, author and columnist Victor Davis Hanson has called, “Let Obama be Obama.”

As the president’s jeering, gloating supporters constantly remind us, Obama won. He beat Republican Mitt Romney, whose major sources of support were old, white men and married women, two of the most obsolete species in the country and not at all representative of the glorious, diverse majority that will lead the Divided States of America (Latinos, Blacks, Asians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders, union members, environmentalists, perpetual students, single women, welfare recipients, government employees etc,) “forward!”

If Romney had won with a majority that didn’t even crack 51 percent, we would be hearing constantly from the Democratic public relations arm – the mainstream media – that this was no mandate.

But since Obama is the winner, the consensus among all intelligent, right-thinking people is that the American people (save for that obsolete fringe) want the president to do everything he has said he wants to do to achieve the “fundamental transformation” of the United States of America.

So, Republicans should get out of the way and let him do it. Right now, as Hanson and others have noted, the president can make any number of promises to any number of his interest groups, secure in the knowledge that Republicans will block them and he can then blame them for “obstruction” and never have to live with voters finding out what the consequences of many of those promises would be.

I’ve already declared myself a supporter of “taxing the rich,” although I think Obama should be held accountable for his double talk – he still goes on and on about “millionaires and billionaires” not paying their fair share and not “needing” a tax cut (which is his way of defining tax rates staying where they are), but his actual proposal would require individuals making one-fifth of a million to pay higher taxes.

Text Only | Photo Reprints

Helium debate
Political News