Obama: Tax scare wrong; Climate scare OK

April 15, 2009

Speaking about taxes today, President Obama said,

“For too long, we’ve seen taxes used as a wedge to scare people into supporting policies that increased the burden on working people instead of helping them live their dreams. That has to change.’’ [Emphasis added]

But speaking about American use of oil two months ago, President Obama said,

America’s dependence on oil is one of the most serious threats that our nation has faced. It bankrolls dictators, pays for nuclear proliferation and funds both sides of our struggle against terrorism. It puts the American people at the mercy of shifting gas prices, stifles innovation, and sets back our ability to compete.

These urgent dangers to our national and economic security are compounded by the long-term threat of climate change, which, if left unchecked, could result in violent conflict, terrible storms, shrinking coastlines, and irreversible catastrophe.

So why is scaring people about taxes not OK, but scaring them about global warming is perfectly fine with President Obama? Is there any hypocrisy here? Actually, no.

President Obama’s plans for ever-expanding government control of our lives depends on a higher taxes and public fears of catastrophic manmade climate change.

2 Responses to “Obama: Tax scare wrong; Climate scare OK”

  1. timetochooseagain Says:

    The first statement is based on false premises. The liberal notion of freedom as a “burden”. Yes, they are all our Daddies and will protect us from ourselves. What nonsense.

  2. geophys55 Says:

    Quoting the “o”:

    “America’s dependence on oil is one of the most serious threats that our nation has faced. It bankrolls dictators, pays for nuclear proliferation and funds both sides of our struggle against terrorism. It puts the American people at the mercy of shifting gas prices, stifles innovation, and sets back our ability to compete.”

    Commenting:
    What the “o” left out is that this would be true only if he were talking about imported oil. But he wasn’t so that makes him irrelevant.

    The “o” is attempting to destroy the coal industry (which is 99.5% domestic) and the domestic oil industry.

    The “o” also decided to close Yucca Mountain after untold tens of billions were spent to provide long term storage for nuclear waste. That will cripple the nuclear industry, because they have to store the stuff on-site for the foreseeable future.

    The “o” seems to me to be the biggest impedement to domestic energy.

    Can we conclude that he wants all those bad things he mentioned to happen?

    Hmmm.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: