General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: We need a new Democratic Party [View all]hfojvt
(37,573 posts)Obama kept the "status quo" (meaning the status quo that was created after Bush tax cuts that massively favored the wealthy) for everybody but the wealthy, who got to keep 68% of their massive tax cuts which were set to automatically expire.
What Obama did there massively favored the wealthy over the rest of us - that is my point. And since the Bush tax cuts actually DID expire before both parties could pass another big tax break for the wealthy, then it is, in fact, a big tax break for the wealthy, because it took a status quo where the Bush tax cuts had expired and it passed a new set of permanent tax cuts that heavily favor the wealthy.
So Obama took a bad status quo, and instead of letting it expire and fighting for something better, he made most of it permanent. And the lying jackweasel tries to claim that he gave $1.3 trillion in tax cuts to the top 5% only so the bottm 60% could keep $600 billion in tax cuts. He's fighting for US.
Oh, wait, Obama never claims to care about the bottom 20% or the bottom 60%, only the "middle class, middle class, middle class", by which he means those in the 60-99% bracket. Otherwise known as "the haves".
So the New Democratic Party represents the haves and the Republican Party represents the have-mores.
But at least the voters have a choice.