Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) is leading the charge to protect the rich. This morning, Cantor uploaded a CNBC video on his You Tube page (yes, he has one) he titled, “Warren Buffet Seems To Disagree With President Obama’s “Buffet Rule” (that’s Buffett, Eric). This is, of course, not at all what happened.
In fact, Buffett knocked down the GOP’s business uncertainty meme before he repeatedly said he supported what President Obama is trying to do, and that he would need to read the actual bill before commenting on said bill. Doh.
That didn’t stop Cantor’s communication director from tweeting: “Tough day for the White House – Warren Buffett not so much a fan of President Obama’s Buffett Rule. Yeeesh”
This naturally set off an orgasmic frenzy on the right, with the RNC leading the way on Twitter: “Warren Buffett Not So Keen On ‘Buffett Rule’” under the hashtag of #Obamanomics. (The grown ups are apparently out for the day.) The National Review, The Daily Caller, the DC Examiner and more are jumped on this meme faster than Joe Wilson screaming, “You lie!” Each headline getting progressively farther from the truth, until the DC Examiner’s headline fell on the sword of lies: “Buffett doesn’t support Obama’s ‘Buffett Rule'”
Once again we have to debunk these boys, but there’s a treat in store for you this time. While Sorkin was trying to get Buffett to say he didn’t agree with the President’s plan, Buffett managed to kill the GOP’s “uncertainty” meme along with explaining that he supports people like himself paying their fair share of taxes. Ouch. Because Buffett wouldn’t comment on something he hadn’t yet read, the Republicans decided he must not support it.
This is called projection.
CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin sits down with Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway CEO:
Actually, after Buffett was done knocking down the GOP meme that Obama is anti-business, Buffett said there is not uncertainty for businesses in America right now. Oh noes! No matter, Eric is a good Republican so he simply ignored that part. Then, Warren said he supports the idea that the wealthy should pay their share of taxes and he is waiting to read the actual legislation before he comments further.
Naturally Eric Cantor took this to mean that he didn’t agree, because Cantor doesn’t believe in reading bills, as evidenced in the number of times he and his Republican cohorts complained about the healthcare reform bill being too long to read but not too long to criticize. We do pay his aides hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to read things for him, but this is still not sufficient apparently. Eric Cantor, a government welfare bum, can’t even read. And they wonder why government “doesn’t work.”
A wee trip to reality land via what Buffett actually said today:
Sorkin: One of the other reasons you’re in town is for this Obama fund-raiser tonight. So many people say that the president is anti-business. Do you believe he’s anti-business, and why not?
Buffett: No. Rhetoric and policies. He took action to save General Motors and Chrysler. He embarked programs that have kept the banks around. He knows, and he knew it ten years ago. It’s like a –
Sorkin: So the talk of higher taxes and more regulation you don’t think is creating more uncertainty in the business community?
Buffett: I don’t have any uncertainty. We are investing at Berkshire record 7 billion in plant and equipment this year, never before that much. 90-plus percent is in the United States. We’re seeing our businesses doing well. Business is coming back in the United States.
Sorkin: Let’s talk about the Buffett rule for a moment. How did it come about in terms of the white house getting in touch with you and you put you are your name to this?
Buffett: Gene Sperling called and said, can we use your name? I said, yes.
Sorkin: Are you happy you want —
Buffett: Yes. sure, I wrote about it.
Sorkin: Are you happy with the way it’s being described. Is the program that the White House has presented your program?
Buffett: (some people actually read things before commenting on them, so old fashioned Warren!) Well, the precise program, I don’t know what their program will be. My program would be on the very high incomes that are taxed very low — not just high incomes.
If you make 50 million appearing on television, that income won’t change, but if they make a lot of money and pay a low tax rate, like me, it would be changed by a minimum tax.
Sorkin: Does that mean you disagree with the president’s new jobs proposal which would be paid for by raising taxes on households with incomes of over $250,000.
Buffett: That’s another program I won’t be discussing, but my program is to have a tax on ultra-rich people who are paying very low tax rates. Not just all the rich people. It probably would apply for 50,000 people.
Sorkin: (fighting to get a sound bite) That means you disagree with the president on the 250,000.
Buffett: (too wise for you Sorkin) No, no, you may disagree –
(So it seems, eh, Warren?)
Sorkin: I’m asking, you agree that 250,000 is the right number?
Buffett: I will look at the overall plan that gets submitted to congress and decide net do I like it or do I not like it? There’s no question there will be parts I disagree with.
Sorkin: Are you a supporter of his jobs program right now?
Buffett: I am a supporter of the action he’s trying to get the congress to join him in taking to really do something.
(OH NO. Buffett just said he is a supporter of what Obama is doing. But, wait, that is not at all what the Right is running with. Spin this crap, doctor!)
Sorkin: But you agree with all the details or no?
Buffett: (again) I haven’t looked at all details.
Sorkin: Fair enough
Yeah, that was SO Buffett disagreeing with the Buffett rule! Way to go Eric, you leader of the House of Representatives, and a special prize for the conservative media who wasted no time carrying Cantor’s unchecked water. This is called “breitbarting” – selectively editing to suggest someone meant something quite different than the full context suggests.
Warren Buffett is obviously behind the idea that we need to generate revenue and that the folks who are not paying the same share as others should have to pay their fair share. He may not agree with every aspect of the plan after he reads it, but he does agree with the general principle and he is supportive of what the President is trying to do in getting Congress on board to actually do something.
Psst- little hint: Just because Republicans make up their mind without reading bills doesn’t mean everyone does that.
Maybe they should take a hint from Warren, because Buffett is much more successful than they are and according the the GOP, wealth makes right. While the Republicans wring their hands over “uncertainty”, winners like Buffett are investing and getting even more rich. Therefore, Warren Buffett is more right than they are. He works harder, he’s more entitled, and he is a job creator, which Eric Cantor can never be, seeing as he is a “big government teat-sucking parasite.” Oh, sorry, that only applies to those other government workers. My bad.
The Buffett Rule is not exactly a cruel class warfare attack on Paris Hilton. The idea is that “no household making over $1 million annually should pay a smaller share of its income in taxes than middle-class families pay.” Share means that instead of the super rich getting so many deductions that they pay a 5% share of their income, they would pay the same share as the rest of America. Kleenexes courtesy of the Koch brothers will be provided for Cantor’s sponsors.