Allen West Aimlessly Blubbering, Lying About How Obama Is Incompetent and Hates Free Enterprise

Categories: WTFlorida
Thumbnail image for Allen-West-flag.jpg
FAIRNESS FREEDOM LA LA LA LA AMERICA.
In a move I wish was slightly more surprising, Congressman Allen West has posted another petulant Facebook message that includes an entire Wall Street Journal column he didn't write.

"It seems the inept community organizer has failed. A second term? One must be stuck on stupid!" he wrote. "It is evident that President Obama and his Administration either has an utter disdain for free enterprise and the private sector or is incompetent in understanding how to set the right fiscal, economic, monetary, and regulatory policy conditions for economic growth... Unfortunately it is my assessment that it is not one or the other but both."

"It is evident"? How is it evident, Congressman West? You haven't explained. Is it because you can't? Is it because you have such a loose grasp of economic policy that you just yell about "fairness" and "enterprise" and hope no one notices?

West calling people names happens all the time, but this time, he lied too. So here we are, again trying to correct the ramblings of the bellowing cartoon character who somehow managed to get into Congress.

What West is short on -- and, indeed, has always been short on -- is actual evidence. He's correct in citing the "anemic 1.5 percent GDP growth," but he didn't connect it in any meaningful way to the tax cuts.

The only other number he included in his message -- "We have an Administration with less than 5 percent private sector experience" -- is a lie. It's not true, not even a little. It's not 5 percent -- it's much closer to, ah, 68 percent of Obama's Cabinet, because people interested in actual information went and actually checked. It's a 3-year-old lie West cribbed from Glenn Beck, and he's trotting it out because his appeal depends almost entirely on the ignorance and disdain of voters.

As for Obama hating free enterprise and wanting to destroy the small businesses West claims to care so deeply about -- well, West hasn't provided any evidence at all. The tax cuts he's fighting for apply to those making more than $250,000 a year, which means, according to analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, that about 2.5 percent of small-business owners would be affected. That's it. Eighty-one percent of it would go to millionaires, which is the group West has been far more kind to. How serious is this guy about cutting the deficit anyway?

As for economic growth, well, the CBPP researched that too -- and found that the Bush tax rates resulted in far, far less small-business job growth than the Clinton rates. It's certainly not the only factor that played a role in those numbers, but, again, where are the numbers from West's side? His claim is that the best way to help the middle class is to give their bosses tax cuts. He hasn't bothered explaining why.

He's never explained his support of the flat tax either, other than quoting Ben Hur, and he has outright ignored any mention of American income inequality. West thinks the rich are the ones who make the jobs. The rich have a larger share of income than ever before -- where are the jobs? And why does West think giving them more cash is the answer?

On, and for the people interested in passing on West's other lie, that half the country doesn't pay federal taxes? Yes it does -- and in a bigger ratio than at any other time in history.

West says he's protecting the middle class, but the middle class is disappearing because the rich are being given a larger share of income than ever before. Given, by a tax system that puts the burden on the very people West says he's standing up for, in the name of dishing out cash to the wealthy. He says it's the responsible thing to do -- are we seriously just supposed to take his word for it?




Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
9 comments
jms0764
jms0764

What did Dr. King say about content of a person's character? I'd bet this idiots got him rolling over in his grave. Dr. King is probably thinking that Allen West is NOT what he had in mind.

riverrat69
riverrat69 topcommenter

As usual Asshole Allen West blows it out his ass. His little ignorant catch phrase that the Obama Administration  has 5% private sector experience is an outright lie. But what isn't is West has NO private sector experience. He's never had a job  that wasn't in some way attached to a government check. By the way Allen, the government is not a business. It isn't supposed to generate a profit or sell a product. If it was, we'd nationalize the oil, insurance and agribussiness to start with. And the banks should be first.

Native
Native

Great moments in irony--this post has way more lies, half-truths and omissions than anything West has ever said.

Letting people keep money they earned is not "dishing out money."  Half billion dollar loans to inept solar companies is dishing out money.

The rich pay a higher proportion of total income taxes than ever before in history.

West is correct that almost half of people with income pay no income taxes.  Your inclusion of SS in a discussion of income taxes is misleading.  And in fact the graph you link to says zero about the how much of the income tax share is paid by the top 50% (it's over 95% of all income taxes).

Capital gains taxes (you know, the ones paid by "bosses") were slashed in the 90's.  Apparently you've deemed those to have nothing to do with the glorious advancements of the middle class under Clinton.

Small business owners overwhelmingly oppose Obamacare because of the burdens it places on them (and yes, it's more than 2.5% of them).  No wonder they think Obama is incompetent and disdains them.

You could tax every millionaire in this country at 100% for all earnings over $1 million, and even assuming such a proposal wouldn't kill economic growth, it would not make a dent in the deficit.

Who do you thinks create jobs? Poor people?  Maybe in the newspaper business since they're all going broke, but that's it.

You only prove West right when you attempt to defend Obama from West's criticisms by espousing the Marxist view that tax cuts "dish out" and "give" money to the rich.  Characterizing his statement that Obama is inept, incompetent, and disdains small business as a "lie" is absurd, as is amply demonstrated by your cartoonish attempt to do so.

smdrpepper
smdrpepper

Its really sad that people like the criminal West cant find anything that the President is actually doing wrong so they are forced to lie about it.  Going so far as to literally edit something together to say he said something horrible. 

Is President Obama perfect?  No, there is more he could try to do if he was not so hung up on the ideal of bipartisanship, something that went extinct like the dodo the second he was elected.

What makes things worse is there are those who are weak willed enough to buy whatever their right wing talking heads spout off about without actually paying attention.

The republicans are the ones who killed the middle class, with their trickle down crap.  They remove any regulations that may actually reign in the banks and anyone else who sucks on the masses like bloated ticks.

Just all around sad.

smdrpepper
smdrpepper

 @riverrat69 I am still waiting to see any of these tea baggers show what the criminal West has actually DONE in Congress other that spout useless catch phrases.

rabdill
rabdill

 @Native First of all, your statement that I "prove West right" doesn't make any sense. Your last paragraph is a logical abortion, and my views on tax cuts have nothing to do with Marxism, unless you're one of the folks who think the 16th Amendment is Marxist, in which case I can be of no help to you. But let's start from the beginning, because I really do appreciate your feedback.

 

"Letting people keep the money they earned" is just a reworking of "make somebody else pay for it," and, in these cases, "somebody else" is always the lower classes. I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, though.

 

It's hard to quantify your statement about the proportion of income taxes paid by the rich -- do you have a source for this? Also, why is it a bad thing? The rich would pay a higher proportion even if we had West's flat tax -- it's how percentages work.

 

And West is the one being misleading about the income tax. Yes, there is a personal income tax, but everybody has payroll taxes taken out of their paychecks (their income) -- except for the very wealthy, who make large chunks of their money through capital gains. If it's fair to include capital gains in the debate, than it's certainly fair to include payroll taxes, to say nothing of regressive sales and state taxes.

 

As for the income tax burden on the top 50 percent, that "95 percent" number looks a lot more reasonable when you consider that just the top 10 percent of earners hold 73 percent of all American net worth.

 

I'm not sure what capital gains numbers you're using, but we must be looking at different numbers. The long-term capital gain tax rate was at 28 percent in Clinton's first term, then went down to 20 percent. Now it's at 15. That's the opposite of what you're saying.

 

As for small businesses hating Obamacare, I don't much blame them. It must be really nice to run a big company and not have to give a crap about your employees' health. Owners disdain Obama because they're not allowed to take advantage of their employees anymore, though this is another area where I think we'll have to just disagree.

 

And when it comes to "Who do you thinks create jobs? Poor people?" the answer is ABSOLUTELY! Consumer spending is what drives the economy. If the consumers are getting boned by tax laws that favor the rich and labor laws that favor the owners, who's going to be buying all the widgets when the top earners are holed up in huts on top of their money-piles?

 

The top 20 percent of earners have seen their share of income rise markedly since 1979. The bottom 80 percent, no matter how you slice it, have lost ground, and there isn't any possible justification for letting it continue except that the problems of the lower classes are simply not the concern of the better-off. People call it redistribution of wealth, because that's the easy way to dismiss it without addressing the problems, which are growing every year. It's not spreading money around -- it's making it fairer to earn it in the first place.

riverrat69
riverrat69 topcommenter

 @Native

 I'm still waiting for the Bush tax cut trickle down. Hey Allen, you think it'll be much longer?

rabdill
rabdill

 @smdrpepper I know what you mean -- at a point, there are just fundamental differences between Republican and Democratic philosophies. But one side has numbers, and the other side has buzzwords. It's not a legitimate debate.

Now Trending

Miami Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

General

Services

Loading...