Contributors

Monday, December 05, 2011

A Matter of Personal Preference

Some of my high school friends and I used to have the classic "Beatles v. Stones" debate. Some were Beatles fans and some were Stones fans. Often the debates became quiet heated as each side was passionate that they were right and the other was wrong.

Obviously, there was no right and wrong because it was simply a matter of personal preference. To me, this is exactly what is going with President Obama. For most folks, it's a matter of personal preference and they really don't spend the amount of time someone like me does in researching the various issues.

This is particularly true of the people that don't like the president. In general, there's nothing rational about it. He could fix everything wrong in the world while personally saving their families from drowning and these folks would still not admit that he has been a good president. There are several reasons for this. First, he won and they just can't accept that. Second, he's doing a better job than George W. Bush, the man they pinned all their hopes and dreams on only to watch him fail in several key areas (nearly ruining our country), and they just can't accept that. Third, he's black (side note: don't even try to wriggle out of it, reverse race card players, and do your little schitck) and they just can't accept that.

So, one can indeed look at these reasons and see that they are purely emotional. So why don't they just admit it? Is it so hard for them to say, "I just don't like him and it's not based on anything factual" ? Honestly, it's like pulling teeth but that's the pride and seemingly infinite hubris of the right.

It's not that difficult for me. I like Dennis Kucinich but know that there is no fucking way on earth that he should be president. I like Mitt Romney but wouldn't vote for him because I ideologically disagree with him on a number of issues. I dislike the Bushes but have to admit that the elder Bush was partly responsible for the economic boom of the 90s. And the younger, for all of his colossal fuck ups, literally shifted the tide in Africa regarding health and human services.

My confusion is best illustrated by the issue of taxes. Take a look at these figures, courtesy of Politifact and the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center.

Second-lowest 20 percent

2008 tax burden: $1,715
2011 tax burden: $1,396
Decline of $319

2008 tax rate: 6.7 percent
2011 tax rate: 5.7 percent
Decline of 1 percentage point

Middle 20 percent

2008 tax burden: $6,290
2011 tax burden: $5,535
Decline of $775

2008 tax rate: 13.6 percent
2011 tax rate: 12.4 percent
Decline of 1.2 percentage points

Second-highest 20 percent

2008 tax burden: $13,749
2011 tax burden: $13,078
Decline of $671

2008 tax rate: 17.4 percent
2011 tax rate: 16.5 percent
Decline of 0.9 percentage points

So for each of the three middle quintiles, both the amount of tax paid and the effective tax rate paid declined. A significant portion of these three groups are: a) conservative and b) complain about their taxes being raised. Yet here is a president who lowered their taxes. Does he get credit?

Nope.

Why?

Because of personal preference.

What a craptacular way to run a country. Imagine where would be if people took the time to educate themselves on the facts and voted without feeling...without their pride. Now imagine if, instead of 55 percent of us voting, 95 percent of us voted.

What sort of country do you think we would have?

11 comments:

Juris Imprudent said...

...someone like me does in researching the various issues.

Woo - don't hurt your shoulder patting yourself on the back there M.

What sort of country do you think we would have?

I can't say for sure, but I doubt it is what you imagine.

last in line said...

>the man they pinned all their hopes and dreams on

Not the case with me so keep arguing with that mythical conservative voice in your head.

Anonymous said...

Third, he's black (side note: don't even try to wriggle out of it...

In other words, you're racist because I say so.

Juris Imprudent said...

This provides an interesting look at tax rates and income inequality of the last 30 years.

With neither bashing nor hero-worship of Obama - if anyone can even imagine such a thing.

Mark Ward said...

Not the case with me so keep arguing with that mythical conservative voice in your head.

Last, I've had the pleasure of knowing you personally for over a decade and I seriously mean it has been a pleasure because you are like a brother to me:) So, it is with that love that only brothers can bring that I gently remind you of how, in the year 2000, you vocally supported Bush on more than one occasion and did so throughout his presidency. There were a few admissions towards the end that he wasn't that great so at least that's something.

I guess what I'm after here is a comparison: who has been a better president-Obama or Bush? I'm willing to bet you'd say it's Obama if you honestly look at facts and results. If that's the case, then how will you not vote for him next November and simply click the "R" as your normally do? The only reason why I can see this happening is personal preference. There's nothing wrong with that and, when you or anyone actually admits that to me, at least they'll have more integrity and perhaps we can build from there.

last in line said...

I did vocally support and vote for GWB. That's a far cry from "pinning my hopes and dreams on him" - that's what you do. (that whole words have meanings thing again) There are a ton of archives on here of my writings and you will see that I often said that Washington DC is not the center of the universe and that my happiness is not derived from who is in the white house or who won the last election.

The question you gave me regarding who I will vote for next year leaves out one important element - who the GOP nominee will be. We don't know that yet, and GWB isn't going to be on the ballot.

rld said...

You're telling us Obama lowered our taxes? How does that jibe with your repeated claim that we are operating under the Bush tax cuts Markadelphia?

juris imprudent said...

Saying Obama is a better President than Bush may be the biggest case of damning with faint praise I have ever heard.

At that, what exactly is better in the Obama Admin? I see more continuation of Bush policy than departure from it. President can order the unilateral attack on another country - without even discussing it with Congress? The argument about classifying the govt's position on law, i.e. you don't even get to know what the law is? Did Bush order the killing of an American citizen without even a hint of due process? Corrupt crony capitalism?

C'mon M, or anyone else in the yippee little dog posse - what is so great about this Administration?

juris imprudent said...

Wow, this is pathetic - not even an attempt to define what makes Obama's Admin great. Not even a half hearted effort like say this.

Mark Ward said...

I get tired of repeating myself, juris. Besides, I put up several items a while back under the heading "What The Fuck Has Obama done?" and you bitched about them.

Juris Imprudent said...

Oh, you mean like his support for gun rights? Contrast that with what his DoJ and BATFE people did with Fast and Furious and what their intentions were. They wanted to create a problem to expand their power. That probably gives you wood.

You and your yippee dogs are a sad little tribe of pathetic thumb-suckers.