Share This Page

True Alinsky disciple

| Tuesday, Dec. 4, 2012, 8:52 p.m.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner's opening bid to Speaker John Boehner, a demand for $1.6 trillion in new taxes, was not meant as a serious offer. It was an ultimatum couched in an insult. Translation:

“We won the election. We have the whip hand. Not only are you going to sign on to higher tax rates and higher tax revenues, we are going to rub your tea party noses in your coming capitulation.”

That Boehner did not throw the offer back in Geithner's face and tell him, “Give me a call, Tim, when you're serious,” suggests that the speaker feels he is holding a losing hand.

The Obamaites are looking to dictate terms. They want a triumph. What explains their hubris?

Two years ago, Obama had to eat crow and extend the Bush tax cuts. Now it's payback time. And behind their arrogance lies a belief that the GOP cannot say no. For if the Bush tax cuts and the payroll tax cuts expire on Jan. 1, Americans will face the highest tax hike in history.

Even Senate Democrats fear this would force a selloff or breakup of family farms and family businesses at death. Yet somewhere, the radical socialist Saul Alinsky, who inspired the young community organizer, is smiling.

Why does Obama see himself in the catbird seat? He believes that if we go into the abyss, he can paint the Republican Party as having imperiled the economy and imposed tax increases on the middle class. He will be able to posture as the rescuer by proposing to the new Congress an Obama tax cut that restores the Bush rates for all couples earning less than $250,000.

Obama believes he will then be seen as pulling the nation out of the pit into which the GOP had plunged it, simply to spare its fat cats a needed haircut.

In “Rules for Radicals,” the Alinsky rulebook and Obama playbook, the first rule is, “Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have.”

Clearly, many Republicans think that if they do not yield, Obama will let the country go over the cliff, blame them and portray himself credibly as the man who saved the nation from Republican intransigence over a small tax hike for the rich that most Americans support.

Yet Obama is not without risk here. As America heads toward the cliff, there could be panic selling of stocks, bonds and assets to avoid higher taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains in 2013. The economy could tank. Obama could become the Democrats' Herbert Hoover.

As for John Boehner, he must know that if he yields too much, his caucus will rebel and his speakership will be at an end. What to do?

Forget the deal. Walk away from the talks with Geithner. Pass an extension of the payroll tax cut and send it to Harry Reid. Pass the Bush tax cuts and send them to Harry Reid and say:

“Harry, you are going to have to pass this extension of the tax cuts, or kill them or send us a counteroffer. Do nothing, and you, not we, will take America over the cliff.”

When Sen. Edmund Ross rose to cast the decisive vote in the impeachment trial of President Andrew Johnson, he said, “I looked down into my own political grave.”

Reviled by the radicals of his era, Ross yet made it into JFK's “Profiles in Courage.” We are at such a moment.

Pat Buchanan is the author of “Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.