Why Their Policy Differences Matter
March 14, 2008
This wire story goes to the heart of why the differences between Hillary and Obama matter. Hillary’s fondness of sin taxation shows her to be every bit as much the moral monster as her erstwhile comrade Eliot Spitzer, who was clearly revealed by the recent unpleasantness to be every bit as potentially totalitarian as Rudy Giuliani, in other words as all our conservative friends have always known Hillary to be. Though personally I think the most striking comparison to Spitzer is Salvador Allende.
Obama on the other hand wants to vastly lessen the tax burden on the lower and middle classes who really suffer from it, and I’m skeptical of what he can get away with as far as soaking the rich. The point is, as with their health care debate, Obama clearly is instinctively against the managerial state, however liberal his inclinations.
Yes, Obama wants to make the tax system more complex as the story indicates, but what matters is that the inevitable dismantling of the empire in the years ahead will have to lead to a vastly shrunken budget by which justice and common sense will demand equally massive tax cutting.
For those of you who haven’t seen my brief for Obama, this is exactly it – reality on the ground in the world situation and even the economy will have more to do with what actually happens in the years ahead than who the president is, and Obama hands down wins the race for who is most amenable to that reality.
Having said all that, I am infuriated by all the politically correct myths that have been constructed around the Hillary-Obama race, which I am determined in this space to deconstruct. Stay tuned.