The Myth of Barack Obama Giving Tax Cuts to 95%

October 14, 2008 · Filed Under Economy ·  

Last week I wrote about one of the main points of the Barack Obama campaign is that he has promised a tax cut for 95 percent of Americans.

And that 30% of people in the country pay no federal income taxes. So, their “tax cut” is actually a welfare check.

These truths were reinforced today by the Wall Street Journal.

One of Barack Obama’s most potent campaign claims is that he’ll cut taxes for no less than 95% of “working families.” He’s even promising to cut taxes enough that the government’s tax share of GDP will be no more than 18.2% — which is lower than it is today.

It’s a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he’s also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%. But how does he conjure this miracle, especially since more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all? There are several sleights of hand, but the most creative is to redefine the meaning of “tax cut.”

For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase “tax credit.”

Read the full story at the Wall Street Journal.

Barack Obama and ACORN Voter Fraud

October 14, 2008 · Filed Under ACORN, News ·  

There are currently 14 states investigating ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) for voter fraud, and Barack Obama is moving swiftly to distance himself from his old comrades.

But Obama has extensive ties to the militant liberal group, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Which brings us to Mr. Obama, who got his start as a Chicago “community organizer” at Acorn’s side. In 1992 he led voter registration efforts as the director of Project Vote, which included Acorn. This past November, he lauded Acorn’s leaders for being “smack dab in the middle” of that effort. Mr. Obama also served as a lawyer for Acorn in 1995, in a case against Illinois to increase access to the polls.

During his tenure on the board of Chicago’s Woods Fund, that body funneled more than $200,000 to Acorn. More recently, the Obama campaign paid $832,000 to an Acorn affiliate. The campaign initially told the Federal Election Commission this money was for “staging, sound, lighting.” It later admitted the cash was to get out the vote.

The Obama campaign is now distancing itself from Acorn, claiming Mr. Obama never organized with it and has nothing to do with illegal voter registration. Yet it’s disingenuous to channel cash into an operation with a history of fraud and then claim you’re shocked to discover reports of fraud. As with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers, Mr. Obama was happy to associate with Acorn when it suited his purposes. But now that he’s on the brink of the Presidency, he wants to disavow his ties.

The ACORN doesn’t fall far from the tree, does it?