Michelle Malkin examines the Obamas' recently released tax returns (this release is a normal procedure for people running for President). Here's how the evils of capitalism and the horrendousness of America has treated the two of them: with a 2006 total income of almost $1 million and a 2005 total income of around $1.7 million. This is not only from high-priced salaries, but also from book sales of Obama's two best-sellers.
Isn't life awful in America?
Byron York has more details about their trials and travails here:
Something else that strikes me about the returns is their relation to Michelle Obama's tales of her and her husband's struggle. When I saw Mrs. Obama at an appearance in Zanesville, Ohio last month, she was telling a group of low-income women — the median household income in the county in which Zanesville is located was $37,192 in 2004, well below the state and national medians — about how hard it can be to keep things together. Her talk often touched on money. "I know we're spending — I added it up for the first time — we spend between the two kids, on extracurriculars outside the classroom, we're spending about $10,000 a year on piano and dance and sports supplements and so on and so forth," she told the women of her own household expenses. "And summer programs. That's the other huge cost. Barack is saying, 'Whyyyyyy are we spending that?' And I'm saying, 'Do you know what summer camp costs?'" The women nodded in agreement, although the Obamas were spending what amounted to nearly a third of a Zanesville resident's annual income on piano and dance lessons.
To show just how much she understood the plight of these women, she spoke a bit about her own history:
"Barack and I were in that position," she continues. "The only reason we're not in that position is that Barack wrote two best-selling books… It was like Jack and his magic beans. But up until a few years ago, we were struggling to figure out how we would save for our kids." A former attorney with the white-shoe Chicago firm of Sidley & Austin, Obama explains that she and her husband made the choice to give up lucrative jobs in favor of community service. "We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we're asking young people to do," she tells the women. "Don't go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we're encouraging our young people to do that. But if you make that choice, as we did, to move out of the money-making industry into the helping industry, then your salaries respond." Faced with that reality, she adds, "many of our bright stars are going into corporate law or hedge-fund management."
I suppose one would feel pretty good about encouraging others to go into low-paying helping professions when one has multiple millions like the Obamas. But did she take her own advice before those huge paydays with the books? York answers that question:
And now we have the tax returns from some of those struggling years. We all know that the Obamas did well in 2005 and 2006, when Barack Obama's books were selling and the University of Chicago gave Michelle Obama an unusually large raise, from $121,910 in 2004 to 316,962 in 2005. In those years, according to the tax returns, the Obamas' adjusted gross income was $983,826 in 2006 and $1,655,106 in 2005. But now we see that the Obamas managed to scrape by in the years before that, as well. The returns show them with an adjusted gross income of $207,647 in 2004, the year Barack Obama spent running for the Senate. Their adjusted gross income was $238,327 in 2003. It was $259,394 in 2002; $272,759 in 2001; and $240,505 in 2000.
Do you really think they can empathize with people earning an annual salary that's one fourth of their monthly income?!
Hypocrites!
This is just another example of how liberals believe in one set of rules for them, and another for you, the peons out in the real world. They don't need your input, and they don't really care about your petty little trials - they know what's best for you because they're better than you because they have more education and money than you. All you need to do is just trust them to give you whatever you need...
The Obamas should be an example of the greatness of capitalism and American freedom, but instead they are choosing to use their significant accomplishments to further the racial and economic discrepancies in this country for their own personal gain...regardless of the cost to you, the American citizen.
There's my two cents.
***UPDATE***
Bloomberg looks at the Obamas' charitable giving. From 2000-2004, they contributed less than 1% of their income. When the book sales took off, they increased their giving to about 5%. Given that most rich people give around 2.2% of their income, I suppose this isn't bad, at least not in the last couple years. Still, I read this and think that if my family -- which makes a very vanilla middle-class income -- can scrounge up around 10% of our income for charitable giving, surely someone making six or seven figures could manage the same, couldn't they? For all his generosity with your tax dollars, he isn't nearly as giving with his own money.
Interpret that however you want.
No comments:
Post a Comment