Elizabeth Warren has been on the campaign trail for months, demonizing the wealthy and castigating top income earners. For the last few weeks, Warren has lectured others about their moral responsibility to pay higher taxes. Yet, when she has the opportunity to (voluntarily) pay higher taxes, what does she do? Elizabeth Warren finally confirmed today, April 20, that she did not pay the higher 5.85 percent rate on her state tax form, a legal option available for Massachusetts taxpayers who believe they should pay more. Just so you know, Warren earned over $716,000 in 2011, and has a net worth of over $14 million. So she could, if she wanted to, afford the higher tax rate. But that is an assumption on my part, since I have never made close to $716,000, nor has my net worth been anywhere close to $14 million.
Let’s see. Does her net worth make her one of the 1 percent that OWS was so vocal about? Is this the same Elizabeth Warren who claimed she created “The Intellectual Foundation For What They [the OWS gang] Do?” Is this the same Elizabeth Warren who advocates for the “middle class?”
Is this the same Elizabeth Warren who once said, “There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own.”
Warren said on Friday that the Republicans’ premise that the proposed tax would do little to trim the deficit “is just wrong…. There’s plenty of places where that money could be used – could be used to pay down the national debt; it’s a down payment but a good place to go.” She also said that “it’s not a ‘gimmick’ to talk about people paying their fair share. It’s really about whose side you stand on.” She said that current Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown’s vote shows he sides with millionaires instead of middle-class families. What is Warren’s “fair share?” Am I the only one who finds Warren’s statements ironic?
Senator Brown’s campaign called Warren a hypocrite for not checking the optional higher tax rate on her personal income. “The problem with running a campaign based on self-righteousness and moral superiority is that you had better live up to the same standard you would impose on everyone else,” said Brown’s campaign manager, Jim Barnett. He continued, “Millionaire Warren lectures others about their obligation and responsibility to pay higher taxes, but she refuses to pay the optional higher rate available in Massachusetts. This is the sort of hypocrisy and double-speak voters are sick and tired of hearing from politicians, especially those who can’t keep their hands out of others’ pocketbooks.”
Some (libruls) will argue that Warren’s statements were made about federal taxes, while her actions were in regard to state taxes. To that, I can only say, “Taxes are taxes, regardless of where they go.” “More” applies equally to any level of government. Besides, what part of more does she not understand? And, are Warren’s current actions a precursor of future actions (more from us but not from her) if elected?
Bottom line: how are Massachusetts voters supposed to take Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren seriously when she clearly doesn’t practice what she preaches?
But that’s just my opinion.Powered by Sidelines