Today's Situation Room:

Wolf Blitzer delivers the most important breaking news and political, international, and national security stories of the day. Tune to The Situation Room weekdays 5-7pm ET on CNN.

Wolf Blitzer delivers the most important breaking news and political, international, and national security stories of the day. Tune to The Situation Room weekdays 5-7pm ET on CNN.

July 1st, 2011
04:07 PM ET

BLITZER’S BLOG: Bill Clinton on “class warfare”

Editor's note: The final portion of Wolf Blitzer's interview with former President Bill Clinton airs in today's Situation Room at 6 p.m. ET. The entire Bill Clinton interview will replay Saturday 6 p.m. ET. 

(CNN) - Former President Bill Clinton strongly rejects Republican accusations that President Obama is engaging in "class warfare" when he proposes increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

Clinton is very familiar with the accusation. He was accused of engaging in "class warfare" when he raised taxes on upper-income Americans shortly after he took office in 1993.

The highest income earners went up to a 39.6 percent federal income tax rate. It went down to 35 percent during the Bush Administration. That's where it stands right now, but President Obama has made no secret of his desire to see it go back up to 39.6 percent for those families earning more than $250,000 a year. Republicans, and some Democrats, reject increasing tax rates on any Americans during these tough economic times.

"It's not class warfare to ask Bill Clinton, who was the disproportionate beneficiary of the economy for the last 10 years, to actually return to the taxes I was paying when all of America had a much stronger economy and all of America was benefiting," he told me during a one-on-one interview.

"I'm saying when your country's in trouble," he added, "we're all going to have to sacrifice."

I remember well that first Clinton term in the White House. I was CNN's Senior White House Correspondent. Clinton was bitterly criticized by Republicans for raising taxes, but guess what: he did get re-elected in 1996.

By the way, that section of my Clinton interview on "class warfare" airs today in The Situation Room during the 6 p.m. ET hour.

VIDEO:: How Bill Clinton views Hillary

VIDEO: Bill Clinton on U.S. foreign policy

VIDEO: Bill Clinton predicts Obama's future

VIDEO: Clinton on 2012 GOP candidates

Filed under: Situation Room
soundoff (157 Responses)
  1. tryecrot

    Yes there should realize the opportunity to RSS commentary, quite simply, CMS is another on the blog.

    August 28, 2011 at 1:26 am |
  2. Aman Dutt

    What matters most is not what has happened in past but where do we go from here. While is good to learn from past mistakes, dwelling on it too long will create problems. One should not use injustice committed in past to become defining policy for the future.

    Taking in to account current political and economic conditions we have developed our own proposals for Healthcare and Infrastructure financing; relying on "Targeted Tax Cuts" is the best way to solve these issues today. Visit us today at to learn more about our proposals.

    Aman Dutt

    July 3, 2011 at 1:01 pm |
    • Kit Gainer

      It's just social darwinism. The powerful currently are destroying everyone else. The outcome will be that we die like the inferior animals they believe we are, or we prove our equality by driving our masters to their knees and perhaps our humanity by sparing and re-educating their offspring. Fight or die. It's natures way.

      July 3, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  3. Dennis

    There has been class warfare for the past decade. The ultra-rich against the middle class working American. Why just last year the top executives of the 200 largest corporations had an average of a 12% increase in salaries. Middle Class? Well considering inflations they are under water from a decade ago.

    July 2, 2011 at 6:58 pm |

      They're just doing what Obama and the Democrats do and that is to insure the middle class and the poor do not get any COLA% as long as they can get their 7% raises each year. You know it's only been three years since a COLA for the middle class and the poor with a fourth scheduled for next year to happen. Of course Bush and the Republicans had to have caused this. LIKE HADES.

      July 2, 2011 at 10:58 pm |
  4. rob

    The best example of the class warfare being used by the democrats can be found right here in these posts. Most of them are seething with hatered and misinformation. They spout the same lines of c**p we hear from the Dems on a daily basis. This is the classic example of pitting one group against another to retain or attain power, Dems have been doing this for decades. The Dems play on peoples emotions and insecurities by demonizing their chosen targets and always Republicans.

    July 2, 2011 at 4:04 pm |
    • Lorqine

      We are not SEETHING. We would just like a little fairness with the tax system.

      July 3, 2011 at 12:41 am |
    • Jason

      I am an educated man. I have spent my life working heavily to keep my head afloat with mounting bills and aging parents...Seriously, if taxing the rich inhibited jobs, than why has job growth been created in the last 8 years prior to Obama? If I have to pay more on taxes, and still shoulder more cuts for tax growth, why can't anyone else making over 100,000 dollars...seriously. We ALL have to shoulder the responsiblity. It is just assine to think only republicans have the solution to this problem. We are in this together. To speak as a christian man, we are our brothers keeper. I live in a state, where cuts are made to education, the future back bone of our country, and expected to take it like a champ because most Americans are not fortunate enough to have a silver spoon....sad. Sounds like you are more concerned with money than Americans future.

      July 3, 2011 at 12:44 am |
      • Corey

        Educated??? Job growth under Bush? Really?

        July 3, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  5. CaliforniaBC

    I've got to ask, why are republicans continually sticking to this mantra of keeping taxes low on the wealthy? It's been shown pretty conclusively that the Bush Tax Cuts did nothing for the economy and was determined to be one of 3 primary factors for the doubling of the national debt during GW's tenure. The cuts did not create jobs and honestly, if they were so golden then why did they do nothing to reduce job losses during the recession or help to create jobs in the recovery. All the GOP's tax breaks/cuts have been in effect since we entered the recovery but are they working? It doesn't seem so does it? I think that quite clearly shows that their primary, economic mantra is flawed. Why would anyone think lowering them more would have a positive effect?

    Does reducing taxes create jobs? Not during the last Bush administration and not during this recovery.

    Does raising taxes kill jobs? They didn't under Clinton and raising them 3% now can't do much harm to those who weren't significantly impacted by the recession in the first place.

    July 2, 2011 at 3:13 pm |
  6. altalks21

    This is why we need a universal LIVING WAGE LAW, NOT A MINIMUN WAGE. A LIVING WAGE LAW means self reliance and not relying on Federal, State, City programs or private donations but relying on your own wages, it’s what everyone is working for and should be getting.

    July 2, 2011 at 2:56 pm |
  7. Robfrom MO

    Republicans have been waging "class warfare" for years. The rich now pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes in 70 years.

    July 2, 2011 at 2:25 pm |
  8. REG in AZ

    Bush-Cheney totally proved that the "trickle down" theory is a complete fraud that only makes the wealthy wealthier and solicits political support – giving more money to those who already spend all they want does nothing for the economy. Also, the wealthy deserve no pity as their status has consistently been dynamically increasing while everyone else's has been declining – checking the constantly growing gap between the very wealthy and the middle class substantially verifies that. Besides the tax cuts and considerations given the wealthy over the last decade far outweigh reason and what was given anyone else. Lets get real and refuse to be continually manipulated with BS.

    July 2, 2011 at 2:19 pm |
  9. REG in AZ

    Karl Rove’s group is credited with initiating and financially supporting current ads criticizing President Obama's handling of the economy, tying him to the unemployment rate, national debt and high gas prices ... now really how much more gaul can you have then that and how much more insulting to the public, by taking them for granted as being totally gullible, can you get then that? Karl Rove represents a block of very wealthy, very conservative, very influential people who greatly benefited by the Bush-Cheney (& Rove) total concentration on benefit for Special Interests and those few as they used their offices and America’s resources for their private agenda and while they gave the majority, including the total middle class, only apathy, the costs and an abundance of subterfuge to deceive and manipulate – actually being where all of the current problems started and what the Republicans consistently fought resolving – and that is what they are trying to con the public into supporting a return too. Are we really that easy?

    July 2, 2011 at 2:11 pm |
    • Lorqine

      I put no stock in ANYTHING Rove says or does.

      July 3, 2011 at 12:43 am |
  10. Mike

    Was it "class-warfare" when main-street bailed out wall-street?

    Every major industry in this country was created through the help of the people's tax money. Every major industry is dependent on resources of this nation – that belong to the people.

    If you can argue that you got "rich" all on your own, then you sure can claim you do not deserve to pay your fair share of taxes.

    July 2, 2011 at 11:12 am |
  11. POD

    The rich have been waging class warfare on the poor since the dawn of the hell do you think they got rich....they got rich by taking things (land, labor) from other people....thus making them 'poor'

    July 2, 2011 at 11:05 am |
  12. Mark

    All the hatered taht the NeoCons direct towards Clinton is laughable. They detest him yet they made a fortune on their investmenst while he was president. Unlike the millions lost on investments by the briliant George Bush. And I'll bet all those NoeCons cashed the check that Bush sent them on money he borrowed from China. You remeber that money. That was designed to, as he himself sais, "jump start the economy". Mock Clinto all you want. You added to your wealth. The party of "Do as we say, not as we do" strikes yet again.

    July 2, 2011 at 10:16 am |
  13. Henry Miller

    "I'm saying when your country's in trouble," he added, "we're all going to have to sacrifice."

    How dies "soak the rich" meet the requirement that "we're all going to have to sacrifice." Sounds like the only ones of whom any sacrifice is to be demanded are people–and small businesses–making over $250k.

    Irrespective of that, however, since we all get the same government and we're all subject to the same laws, what possible philosophical basis can there be for making some people pay more than others for exactly the same set of government services?

    In truth, "soak the rich" truly is nothing more than vindictive, envious, class warfare engaged in by Democrats to elicit votes. It's economic foolishness. Not only is the total wealth of all of the so-called "rich" trivial compared to the country's expenditures and debt, attempting to seize that wealth in taxes would simply result in a lot of the wealth going underground or out of the country. In an era when a big majority of Americans have nothing but contempt for Congress and the American government in general, what incentive can there be for sacrificing anything at all to the wasteful, insatiable, irresponsible Leviathan of Washington?

    July 2, 2011 at 9:11 am |
    • StratMaster7

      The rich don't pay the full tax rate. They hide their money in shelters and have great accountants who find every loophole. The plans being proposed include budget cuts which will be detrimental to a lot of the less fortunate and the middle class. There is your "soak the rest of the citizens". Does that make you feel better somehow?

      We as a society help those less fortunate, if for no other reason, because it is beneficial for the rest of us. Republicans especially don;t seem to get that. I mean how can you enjoy going downtown for your $300.00 dinner and $300.00 in entertainment if you have more of those pesky poor people begging to shine your fancy shoes for you because it is the only way they can get food money? If the rich continue to get richer, and the poor continue to get poorer, how much longer do you think you will be safe in your palace?

      July 2, 2011 at 11:05 am |
      • ThinkAgain

        Hear, hear!

        July 2, 2011 at 4:22 pm |
      • Henry Miller

        No, "the rich," being sensible people, do whatever they can to avoid being gouged even more viciously by Democrats who never saw a dollar they didn't want to steal.

        "We as a society help those less fortunate..."

        Something like 70% of Americans receive some kind of assistance from government. That's an awful lot of misfortune. If "we as a society" undertook to help only those who truly can't make it on their own, that would be one thing. But that's not what's happening–that 70% number strongly suggests that being included in the category of "those less fortunate" takes little more than sticking out your hand and demanding "Gimme!" Ultimately, all this does is foster irresponsibility, indolence, and improvidence. Oh, and, by the way, helps Democrats, and some Republicans, buy votes.

        July 2, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
    • PDX Skeptic

      Really? Restoring taxes to the pre-Bush rates is "soaking the rich"? It's pretty obvious if you look at the increasing income disparity, the rich are doing pretty damn well. And let's not forget that many of the "rich" are rich through the labors of the people who work for them, people who are getting shafted in terms of declining incomes, loss of medical care, and a dismal future when they are forced to retire.

      July 2, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
    • ThinkAgain

      Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and many other very rich people in our country have publicly said they think they should pay more in taxes. After all, it's the least they can do for the country that gave them the opportunity to make their wealth in the first place.

      July 2, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
    • Vincent J. Petrosino

      Mr. Miller could not be more if he tried. How does he think tghe rich got that way? They became rich on the backs of the middle class they used to employ. the same people they threw over for overseas employees whose substandard wages increased their coffers. How many people do you think make over $250K a year in the US? Not that many and yes they should pay more taxes, pay taxes on corporate jets and give up oil subsidies to help their fellow Americans whom they have victimized on their road to riches. Yes, Mr. Miller, soak the rich, close the loop holes and dump subsidies because the rich could care less about the middle class and the poor. This is why they bought the GOP.

      July 2, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
    • Bill

      There's an interesting aspect to taxing the wealthy that people seem to ignore or miss, which is that the wealthy are far more capable of handling the increased tax burden of a progressive tax system than the middle class or poor can. For example, consider a flat 10% tax on an individual making $10,000/yr vs another at $1,000,000/yr. The first person would pay $1,000 in taxes, leaving $9,000 as net earnings. The millionaire would pay $100,000 in taxes, leaving $900,000 in earnings. I don't know about you, but $900,000 is plenty of money to live on. Even after using a progressive tax system with, for example, a 25% tax rate for that millonaire, they still have $750,000 in net earnings. Pardon me if I have a hard time feeling sorry for their hardships.

      July 3, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
    • robert

      Ebenezer Scrooge is alive and well. Mr. Miller, you may be a wealth y man – but you are morally and ethically bankrupt.

      July 4, 2011 at 10:03 am |
  14. unretired05

    Finally some common sense spoken and reported.

    July 2, 2011 at 8:58 am |
  15. Carman

    I own several businesses. I started with nothing and spent 40 years building it up to where it is today. I have taken big risks financially to make it happen. I still have a lot at risk ALL the time and it could be lights out at any time. Yes I am successful and make 2 million dollars per year but I pay 800,000 in personal income taxes plus big fees for regulation and licenses as well as payroll taxes. I have created 200+ jobs. I am NOT complaining about paying my taxes but I AM complaining about the mindset that I should continue to shoulder an increasing burden while 50% have no skin in the game and too many are on the dole. In a system where a increasingly smaller percentage of the population pays all the taxes, political mathematics will continue to dictate progressive Class Warfare.

    July 2, 2011 at 7:44 am |
    • StratMaster7

      I would guess that you are well out of touch with the average American. Congratulations on your achievements, and I mean that sincerely. Your story is what America is all about.

      I don;t understand how you can be paying a 40% tax rate, particularly as the owner of a small business with the deductions and expenses you would be able to claim. If you are, you need a new accountant/CFO. Also, if you are, you are not the problem. Most people making your level of income pay a lower effective tax rate than many in the lower income ranges.

      July 2, 2011 at 11:10 am |
    • Bill from GA

      I hope, Carmen, that you understand that the changes in tax code that let so many escape paying taxes came about through the Bush tax code. Changes like doubling the Child Tax Credit, along with lower rates for all. Also, reducing the Capital Gains Tax let many more millionaires escape the higher rates paid by working people.

      Many liberals would happily agree to a return to the Clinton-era tax code, where all workers paid more for the Great Country we live in.

      July 2, 2011 at 11:39 am |

      Since the highest personal tax rate is 35% there is no way you are paying 40% of your income in personal income taxes. Also there are numerous advantages to being self employed in the form of benefits and tax breaks. If you are not taking them you need a new accountant. Out of politeness I will not mention the habit of hiding income that is common among the self employed.

      July 2, 2011 at 1:41 pm |
    • Steve

      Carman, you've worked hard. But no harder than millions of others who have trouble getting by each day...some working several jobs to pay health insurance. Sometimes we give ourselves too much credit for our good fortune. None of us became successful (me included) without the help of many around us.

      July 2, 2011 at 1:48 pm |
    • Vincent J. Petrosino

      You pay taxes you can well afford and you have benefited from the Bush years no doubt. You are a millionaire! Did you get there all by yourself? How many people in the middle class and the poor helped you get there with their blood sweat and tears? Most people, not all ,who are on the "dole" used to employed. How many have you hired recently to add to you cadre of 200+? Have you kept people on so they would not suffer hardship? If you have several businesses, we can assume, that is more than two. In today's down economy, you are a substantial entrepreneur. So, what insurance benefits do you provide? How can your employees advance up the economic ladder? Does everyone you employ make the minimum wage or more? Do you have apprentice and intern programs for our younger folks who are finding employment ever harder to secure? Count your blessings! I am sure you are worth more than millions you pull in yearly.

      July 2, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
    • Lorqine

      I think you are very selfish and unhappy.

      July 3, 2011 at 12:49 am |
  16. sick of republican phonies

    The repubs learned their tactics from Hermann Goering well. Accuse your enemies of what YOU are guilty of; repeat and repeat to defer scrutiny.

    July 2, 2011 at 7:00 am |
  17. Geo

    Class warfare is alright when it is directed by the rich and their stoges against the middle class and poor, but it is wrong when the rich have to pitch in their fair share. Everyone has to sacrifice, programs will have to be cut, deductions eliminated, taxes increased and the sacred rich will have to pay a little more.

    July 2, 2011 at 6:49 am |
  18. Class warfare?

    The French Revolution was class warfare. Taxing the super rich is NOT class warfare, it's just making those who benefit the most pay their share of the bill.

    I'm reminded of the jerk who has lobster and steak, then excuses himself to use the rest room when the bill comes.

    If it's class warfare the Republicans want, let them continue the path their on. When the middle class suddenly finds itself "personally responsible" for all health insurance costs and a job that was just outsourced to India, they may bring class warfare to the streets and we'll revisit a Tale of Two Cities.

    July 2, 2011 at 6:38 am |
  19. Brandon

    Jonny DC,

    You argument is faulty. First, no one has ever spoken about raising taxes on families making $250,000 and so I don't know where you are coming up with that. Second, I disagree with you that President Obama's call for billionaires, millionaires, and oil companies to contribute a little more to help fix our debt problem is berating them. This is the segment of the population that benefitted from the enormous and unnecessary tax cuts that were given to them by the previous administration – tax cut that wasn't paid for and which contributed to the deficit. In order words, we borrowed money to give this "segment" a tax cut and they have done enormously well as the result of these tax cuts. I don’t see what is unfair or unethical to ask this “segment” to help contribute a little more to pay back the debt that we went into just to give them a tax cut. What is unfair and un-American is asking “only” the poor and retirees to take a cut in their benefits (social security, Medicare, etc) in order to help pay for the deficit that we acquired in part by giving tax cut to millionaires, billionaires, and oil companies who by the way, are doing extremely well than the rest of the population.
    Every segment of our population will have to give something up in order to pay down the debt and balance the budget. We spent massive amounts of money on public programs, but we also lose massive amounts of money in giving tax breaks to people who are not producing jobs. They take the tax breaks but produce no jobs. If tax breaks could produce jobs, the US will be drowning in jobs. It is absolutely crazy for anyone to think that we can fix our debt and deficit problems by simply “cutting” benefits to the poor and the retirees without raising revenue in the form of taxes.

    July 1, 2011 at 10:37 pm |
  20. ja

    the super rich has sunken the country, with tax loopholes along with battalions of tax lawyers, they should be willing to pay more, you talk about patriotism, that lapel flag is a sham

    July 1, 2011 at 10:14 pm |
  21. D-Nice

    So cutting off people's medicare or medicaid while refusing to raise the top 2%'s taxes is not class warfare? Why is the GOP always the victim? Oh, those poor rich people who would have to pay 4% more in taxes so those freeloading senior citizens can keep their medicare. Just think maybe rich people won't be able to buy that third car or second house, so that grandma can get her checkup. That's just horrible. Thanks GOP, for letting the rich get even richer and keeping those poor people in their place.

    July 1, 2011 at 9:48 pm |
  22. Dr Matrix

    Let's review the "reasoning" for the tax. Under supply side economics you cut taxes for the upper income, the so called job producers, allowing them to invest the money in job creation. Bush1 called it voodoo economics. The people who benifited from this tax cut are the ones shipping the jobs overseas, taking a tax incentive for it and reinvesting that money outside of this country in their own accounts. Now that's what I call class warfare.

    July 1, 2011 at 9:08 pm |
  23. Bill is correct, again

    The Bush tax cuts were never supposed to be permanent – but try telling that to GOP stooges to the wealthy & corporations. The Bush plan was structured this way deliberately so that when it was time to repeal the special breaks the wealthy could whine and complain and make false accusations about "class warfare" just like they're doing here. Rich Americans have benefitted here like they have nowhere else on earth – it is not too much to ask them to return to their former level of contribution.

    Incidentally my husband & I make in the low $100,000's (but no kids) and I don't think it's unfair for our taxes to be raised back to Clinton levels either, so how bout that jja? And stop with that "50% don't pay" lie already – everyone pays payroll tax & gas taxes, & the poor pay those at higher rates than the rich.

    It is true that rescinding these tax cuts has to be accompanied by spending cuts too, but not as drastic as the ones GOPs are proposing.

    July 1, 2011 at 8:10 pm |
  24. altalks21

    This is not socialism, this is Obama using the good ole system of Checks and Balances. This protects the have nots from the haves. This up and down economy is what happens when we ignore consumers (the engine–of-growth) in a consumer based economy (2/3 of the economy) and that has created an INCOME GAP. Consumers and business are interdependent but the business/financial sector is only 1/3 of the economy and part of it is legalized gambling. This lopsided economy will never be stable, until the consumer’s purchasing power is restored and the Income Gap reduced.

    July 1, 2011 at 8:07 pm |
  25. WoodyM90

    Yes, there is class warfare being waged.

    It started with Reagan and the middles class has gotten the living crap beat out of them.

    July 1, 2011 at 8:04 pm |
  26. Dee

    President Clinton left this country in good shape with a surplus and I remember the Republicans attacking him the same way they are doing President Obama. They were hired to take care of the business of this country but they are purposely holding up the economy so that they can win the election in 2012 and see this President fail.

    This is a disgrace with all the name calling and the disrepect to the President. He is a great leader no matter what he does it is not enough for some segments of society. No other President has been treated this way by elected officials.
    It all goes back to the color of his skin not by the knowledge that he has nothing is good enough.

    Until we get over the racial overtones this country will never succeed. I was speaking to a young man who is now a senior in high school and scored high on the SAT he said the young people understand President Obama because he speaks for them and that there are no officials in DC that are addressing their issues. He said they are the future as well as Math, Science and Technology and also that their parents need to understand them and he was right on the money. He also told me young people don't see color this stuff comes from adults.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:59 pm |
  27. John PA

    Now that accusation is such a crock I can hardly believe I'm reading it. Blaming Clinton for 9/11? Go back to Fox...they're calling you. And yes, the 1.9% need to pay their fair share of taxes. Some get by paying ZERO due to creative loopholes; you can hear that directly from them. Even some of the wealthiest Americans agree they should pay more. They all use the same infrastructure we all do; why should they get a bigger break?

    July 1, 2011 at 7:50 pm |
  28. andres

    Clinton AND Obama are right, we cannot cut our way out of this mess. But raising taxes only on the rich does not spread the sacrifice we all need to make.

    . We need to make the neccessary cuts and raise taxes on ALL. We got us into this mess and it is time we all sacrifce to get us out of this mess.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
  29. 250 K not rich

    I make 250K. I went to school for 8 years to get my degree. I have over 100K in loans. I have less than 20K in savings, and because I am now working for 2 years maybe 50K in retirement. Because I am rich, I take out extra insurance to protect my family from my death so they don't have to pay my bills. I live in a 250K house, drive a 1993 4Runner, and have 2 young kids. Because I am rich I know outside of an academic scholarship and working through college I need to save money for my children. I work 60 hours a week and any extra money I have I am trying to pay down my loans.

    My american dream is to pay off my house, student loans, and build up a nest egg before I turn 60. I have 25 years to go

    July 1, 2011 at 7:39 pm |
    • StratMaster7

      I'm not quite sure what your point is. A 250k house is more than what most Americans have. You are 35 years old and if you continue to earn at your current level, based on the house value and other things you mentioned, which indicate no car loans etc. you should have your loan paid off in 2 years, right?

      Your post sounds like you are complaining that you cannot meet your desired standard of living at $250k a year. Is that your point? I make well into 6 figures, but have never made near 250k, and I can easily retire when I am 55.

      July 2, 2011 at 10:58 am |
  30. Peikovian

    Anyone who has ever paid someone else to clean their home knows that income left in private hands will be passed along. If that extra income vanishes, the house cleaner vanishes. Sure, the family can afford to do without the extra income, but can the house cleaner afford to do without a job? The wealthy invest throughout our economy. Sure, they can afford to have less, but can the companies they invest in afford to do without it? If those companies can afford it, will they afford it through layoffs? "Tax the Rich" always assumes that government is inherently better managed than private companies and will achieve great and necessary goals. Government is best at protecting life and property. The rest of the time it creates losses, subsidizes losses, and misdirects capital. Example: USPS or Fedex

    July 1, 2011 at 7:35 pm |
    • StratMaster7

      So you are concerned that millionaires will fire their maids if their taxes go up 3% a year? Really!!??

      Those tax breaks were in effect during Bush's presidency. Look around you. What are the unemployment rates? Yeah, I can see where those tax breaks have REALLY been passed back to the "poor masses" through job creation.

      July 2, 2011 at 11:13 am |
  31. Looking Glass

    The rich are killing this country. Wake up and take back your America. Middle Class and the poor . . . storm the gates. Say no to American companies who ship your jobs oversea. reject their services and products. Allow foreign Companies to set up factories here in America under the condition that they would only hire americans to work them. We would only buy from those companies. Watch how fast the market changes. We the people have the power. Bring down the house of cards. That felt good!

    July 1, 2011 at 7:35 pm |
  32. djusmc7229

    Benefited from 30 years of tax breaks?!? They got to keep 4% more of THEIR money, while still giving up 35%! 50% of this country pays NO taxes. Where exactly are these "shared" sacrifices liberals keep talking about?

    July 1, 2011 at 7:33 pm |
  33. Janice

    How can the top 2% complain about class warfare when the worst act of it was committed against the middle class and poor during the 60's and early 70's? They did not lose 58,000 of their class!

    July 1, 2011 at 7:32 pm |
  34. don

    why not ask federally elected politicians to work for free since they're the ones that created the mess with over spending. You want to increase taxes on anyone already paying taxes you better cuts ALL waist full spending first. Lets stop giving cars to elected officials and temporarily end all scientific research grants.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:26 pm |
  35. scieng1

    The dirty part of raising taxes is that it admits that our bloated and wasteful government is not willing to live by the standards it expects even of the wealthy. With the massive waste of overcontrol, regulations made just to create more jobs for regulators, and more taxes wanted to control the lives of every individual, it is no wonder people are so upset over more taxes. More taxes will be wasted, just like ours are now. Let's have a smaller government.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:24 pm |
  36. fordf250

    i wonder if ole bill an hilly would be willing to sacrifice the govt pensions for life, just not take them, as his real money where his mouth his,, ,just out of the goodness of his liberal heart, just say no to his presidential pension, i doubt for one second he would even entertain the thought. a couple friends of mine in austin just got raises, 4k, a year, guess what, it put them over the 250 a couple barrier, guess what, now they will go into the tax bracket where they essentially have to give that 4k raise to the govt beccasue the jump in rate eats up the raise, and if they dont get one next year, they are still getthing whacked,

    July 1, 2011 at 7:22 pm |
  37. John

    The Republican are a bunch of IDIOT. That all they do Is LIE, and complain.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:20 pm |
  38. Patricia D

    If I had it I wouldn't want to give it away either. Not with such irresponsible people at the helm of our govt in Washington. Show me that you can use money responsibly, not just give it away to BIG oil BIG business in the form of subsidies and huge tax breaks, or continue throwing it down the bottomless Pentagon pit for war and violence, then we'll talk.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:20 pm |
  39. Psych MD

    These responses are all clearly generated depending upon which side of $250k your family income resides. I am right at the threshold so can take a hopefully unbiased viewpoint. $250k for a family does not provide for an extravagant lifestyle for a family, although it does certainly breed financial stability. Unfortunately, the average family income in the U.S. is well below this cut-off. $100-$350k/ year to me is the new middle class. Upper class income is in the $350-500K/ year range. This population (those over $500k/year) have been disproportionality avoiding their tax liability each year. Corporations are an even bigger offender but this goes with the "price of doing business." Rather than hammer the new middle-class, I suggest we adjust the cut-off to affect the "upper class" and corporations without trying to expand and deteriorate America's new middle class.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:14 pm |
  40. buscar

    I would support raising the taxes on those making more than $250,00/year, but with the deductions for children, etc. But I wouldn't stop there. Raise it to 39% for 250,000, another 5% for over $1 million, another couple of percentage points for each million above that. I would also abolish the cap of $106,000 on which individuals have to pay social security.
    People, the rich have gotten richer by way of lobbyists who have bribed legislators to make laws and rules that benefity the wealthy. Look up the statistics on how the differentials between the top 1 oe 2 percent versus the rest of us have skyrocketed over the last 3-4 decades. It's time to reverse that trend while we still have at least a skeleton of a middle class.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:14 pm |
  41. Tommy Blackflag

    Its funny how you idiots think someone cares about your opinion. You are pathetic mules. Kill yourselves. Seriously. Over-population is the real problem in the world. The more of you self-centered moronic rubes we can lose from the overcrowded face of this planet the better. Join a suicide cult or something. And if they don't have one in your area, start one. That's what Craigslist is for. Damn I hate you people.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:14 pm |
  42. Byrd

    For the life of me, I can't see why raising taxes on those who can most afford it is such a problem with the average America. It won't lower their standard of living by one little bit and would go a long way into helping America recover. But truth be told, just as Reagan taught them in the "I got Mine, so..." era, they could all care less. The country to them is no larger than the size of a dollar bill.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:12 pm |
  43. che-3

    It took him this LONG to make such a statement. This sleaze BALL ex-Prez. is in fox hole with Sen Ryan. Have you all forgotten what this ex-pres. told Sen Ryan behind a curtain that if Dem. pick on the Sen Ryan's medical plan or proposal they, (Dems) will lose. He even had the nerves to tell Sen. Ryan to give him a call so that they could talk things over to help him advance his course. Speak of stabbing Dems and Prez. Obama in the back! Pres. Clintton is a back stabber and a sleaze ball.

    July 1, 2011 at 7:12 pm |
  44. LolZatsluttyboy

    Nobody cares what billy BJ says. He has the moral fabric of george soros. he can start forking it over at 40% of what his poor judgement overrated speaking engagements draw. he's a hasbeen that nevershouldabeen. trash boy

    July 1, 2011 at 7:09 pm |
  45. TaxNoMore

    Just because he was reelected doesn't make the fair. My family is not in the Obama $250K range, but close. Here in California we also have our wonderful 10% not to mention all our other taxes and fees. $250K in Calif. is NOT rich. To quality to buy a medium price home you must make at least $117K, not a mansion, just a 2 or 3 bedroom about 1,400 sq. ft.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
  46. brian

    I will never be popular with anyone with my opinion but feel that everyone should pay the same percentage of their income to the government . NO DEDUCTIONS. No one should have an effective tax rate of 0 % . The not so well off can look at it like buying some self respect . The better off are not being held hostage due to their success. Every man is supposed to have been created equal. An equal share of their income should go to finance the country. If a man is successful and earns more he should give a percentage to the government. If a man is not so industrious he keeps the same percentage of his income as the successful man.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
  47. Carol Ann

    The rich need to pay their fair share however at some point everyone needs to pay their fair share. The problem with zeroing in on the rich as the end at to be all in fixing out debt is that middle class & poor will soon begin to rely on the rich and it could become an entitlement mentality.

    Everyone must play a part in the recovery so we will not repeat the same mistakes. It was all of our greed that got us in the predicament.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:53 pm |
  48. Johnny DC

    Here's a better angle – explain to me how Obama is NOT engaging in class warfare.

    Targeting a particular segment of the economy (oil companies) for criticism. Targeting a particular segment of the population for (the "millionaires and billionaires") tax increases. This president goes out of his way to segment off particular groups and then berate them.

    How much money do you save? Do you really believe a family earning $250,000 qualifies as a "millionaire or billionaire" family? Do you think increasing their taxes 4% – essentially taking from them another $10,000 annually – will go without suffering?

    Enough of this. Enough trying to pin the problems of today on the shoulders of the few. The biggest problem today is spending. That's plain and simple. To pretend that we can steal more from the taxpayers – ANY taxpayers – without comprehensive massive spending reform is ludicrous and, back to the point, is only being done for political gain.

    The golden rule of failing countries – promise the lower 80% the wealth of the upper 20% and you will win elections every time. Doesn't make it right. Doesn't make it moral. But it makes you a dirty, dirty winner.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
    • Wzrd1

      Yeah, you deserve that special lower rate than everyone else. After all, the poor can afford to pay that extra.
      They can give up food and medicine.
      Let's follow the program the GOP has set up for us instead, abandoning our military overseas in the war zone by shutting down the government so that they can't even order fuel to fly home, tickets for the main body of troops or even ammunition.
      Let's allow our seniors to starve because their social security checks don't come in, their medicare not paying.
      Let's let my pension from the military not come in. I've been called a leech over it after serving over 27 years protecting this once great nation.
      No, let's burn the house down with our families inside. Because the money isn't there to do the right thing, we're in a depression, where many need help to feed themselves. Let's go back to starvation in our cities like we started out with the last depression, but this time we'll tell our fellow Americans that they're not worth being helped and their kids should not have been born, so they'll starve instead.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:07 pm |
      • Wzrd1

        I give the fuck up. I use no profanity or even coarse speech, forever moderation.
        Screw * It's not worth the effort.
        Since it's not worth the effort for you to fix your fucked up word filter, your * is not worth me letting into my network. New websense block installed in 5 minutes.

        July 1, 2011 at 7:09 pm |
    • R

      Got to the word "suffering", and your amusing tirade became ridiculous.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:26 pm |
    • jenssen

      It looks like you don't understand marginal tax rates.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:38 pm |
    • PK

      Ohhh the suffering!! You do realize that the other 99.8% of the people on this planet live on a yearly income smaller than $250,000 dollars a year? Even with a loss of an additional $10,000 a year, you are still part of that very elite club. Lets gain a little perspective here.

      I am sure you, along with many of the other people that share your point-of-view, will argue that you have earned this position through hard work and you believe everyone bares responsibility for themselves. Disregarding the extreme outliers, luck played a very significant role in getting you to where you are now. Simply being born into the wealthiest and most powerful nation in the world has given you a rather large advantage. I would also guess that you and many of your peers have been raised in environments, wealthy or not, that afforded you opportunities and instilled certain qualities/values that set you down this path (Genetics are a topic of another conversation). You took advantage of being that position and now you are successful. I commend you.

      The reality is that regardless of how hard you work, MOST people on this planet will never attain that position.

      Lastly, the disparity between rich and poor in this country has become exacerbated. Mainly as a result of the rich and powerful creating an economic and political environment that favors themselves (Class warfare, what?). Look at the numbers folks. This country experienced its height of prosperity when taxes were high, investment in the middle class was a priority, and Americans took pride in making sacrifices for their country. Long live humanity...

      July 1, 2011 at 8:27 pm |
    • DK

      Quit your complainig. If you make $250,000 per year, then you can afford to make cutbacks. In the state of WI, our new Republican governor cut teacher's benefits that amount to an huge cut in salary. In the majority of districts, teacher starting pay is under $30,000. The republican governor in Ohio is doing the same thing. I am an independent and have voted for Republican leaders in my state. Now I don't think I can afford to think like a republican anymore because we are receiving increasly lower income wages. Educational attributes don't guarentee higher wages anymore. Our governor never finished college but he had the wealth to buy his position as governor.

      July 1, 2011 at 9:34 pm |
    • Ken, AZ

      You are obviously in the top 2%, otherwise you're an idiot. Please explain to me how Republicans protecting corporations and the top 2% earners, of which I am one, at the expense of those least able to afford it is not class warfare. What is "Free Market" when the government subsidizes your industry? What is fair about the wealthiest among us pays less than 20% in taxes when the middle class pays in excess of 30%? What's fair about corporations paying zero taxes by hiding profits off shore?

      July 2, 2011 at 12:17 am |
    • dnick47

      Hey Johnny, the GOP'er have been waging class warfare since Reagan. Their policies beat the poor and middle class right into the ground and stomp them into fine dust

      July 2, 2011 at 9:00 am |
    • Henry Miller

      Very well stated!

      July 2, 2011 at 9:14 am |
    • StratMaster7

      Well, yes I would say most people who consistently earn over $250k a year end up millionaires. And while this is certainly a generalization and there are exceptions, most people I know in that bracket pi... oops, can't use that word. Most people in that bracket frivolously "throw" away way more than 10k a year.

      I understand that that top few percent of earners feel they deserve to spend their money as they see fit. But as the old adage says "with great wealth comes great responsibility". I am 100% in agreement that tax reform and overhaul is necessary, but I am also 100% sure it won;t happen with the current congress or in the current political environment, which seems to have Americans all thinking they can have their way along partisan lines instead of having to work together to solve real problems.

      See the State of Minnesota for an example; where the politicians are enjoying a nice 3 day weekend while the state government is shut down because they could';t agree to a budget.

      July 2, 2011 at 10:50 am |
  49. Thomas

    Fix the existing system. 50% of american paying no federal income tax is outrageous. GE paying zero corporate tax is outrageous. My realy tax rate is about 22%, never zero. Fix the rules and make them equitable for all.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:43 pm |
    • jenssen

      How about the flip side of that statement? "50%" of Americans not making enough money to be able to pay income tax is outrageous. What about students who don't work – should they be paying income tax? People at the poverty level don't pay taxes because it's a poor policy decision to tax people already on the knife's edge of total collapse.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:42 pm |
    • Dixon

      The majority of this countries wealth is controlled by a very small portion of our population. You have to know that when you own all the money you will need to pay more taxes. How about a consumption tax... As for class warfare...the Republicans participate in this everytime they are in control. With budget cuts to education, elderly and the poor. Lets make some cuts to the companies who ALWAYS come in way over budget on every contract they sign with the government. Give the companies who produce jobs here in the states a big tax break. Then you can let the companies who go overseas for labor pay the taxes for those who stay home.

      July 2, 2011 at 4:27 am |
  50. Anyone But Obama

    Yes, Wolf Blitzer, ever the 'objective' journalist, never letting his liberal agenda get in the way of his reporting.

    Is the next interview with George Bush on how GW inherited a failed Al Queda policy by the Clinton administration which enabled 9/11?

    Probably not.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:42 pm |
    • FL Guy

      What have you been smoking? Based on increased activity and intercepted communications, Clinton's security people warned Bush and his boobs of an almost certain attack on US soil coming up and they brushed it off. You can lead a donkey to water but...

      July 1, 2011 at 7:06 pm |

      Bill was too busy getting his tools cleanded to worry about equalization of taxes.

      July 1, 2011 at 10:22 pm |

      That's good enough for me for I don't even want to mention Obama's name the fraud, lying dog lover.

      July 1, 2011 at 10:25 pm |
  51. Greater Good

    WHEN THE RICH HAVE TO PAY MORE they complain...LOUDLY...but life pretty much stays the same. Sure, they may threaten to take jobs overseas to improve their bottom line, which is what they're going to do even if taxes remain the same.

    WHEN THE POOR HAVE TO PAY MORE, they get sick, commit crimes, and go to prison.

    The second scenario ends up costing us far more in the long run. But again, that simple logic eludes the GOP.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
    • TaxNoMore

      I like your idea. Let's use our taxes to build more prisons.

      Better yet let all the liberials, including Obama & Clinton, donate all their money over $250K a year to the U. S. Government.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:01 pm |
    • Don Fowler

      There is a clear and simple truth that America was founded on. That ALL MEN are created EQUAL. It is already an UNEQUAL system that those that work hard for their money have to pay a higher percentage of taxes. What the Republicans, and in my opinion anyone who is a logical person, are fighting is the government overspending. No reasonable person wants taxes raised on ANYONE. We should all be paying far less taxes. a 40% tax just from the federal government is ludicrous. I'd be better off on welfare than to work hard just to have to pay a higher percentage to the government entity that grossly mismanages MY money. End the government overspending.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:08 pm |
    • Kevin in Ohio

      You just don't get it, do you? So called "rich" people already pay the lion's share of taxes, and any greater burden will further stifle any ability for them, theones who create jobs, to create any more jobs. Stop playing the victim card.... the liberals have almost completely ruined this country with their class warfare. the "greater good" will happen when Obama and his cronies are sent packing forever.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:20 pm |
      • Greater Good

        Really? My wife and I are school teachers and we owed over $1,500 in taxes this year.
        GE recorded huge profits and owed the govt. NOTHING. And that's just ONE example.

        Explain to me how this is fair, exactly?

        No one wants to pay highter taxes, but if I'm paying that much, then these huge corporations better damn well share in the sacrfice.

        July 2, 2011 at 1:12 pm |
    • djusmc7229

      Maybe the poor ought to work harder, or at all. There are those that truly need help, and should get it, but there are many, many more that just want the handouts. Why should anyone have to give their hard earned money to anyone?

      July 1, 2011 at 7:28 pm |
  52. Dr. Malone

    Mr. Blitzer,
    You and the correspondent were wrong about the "class warfare" issue as it relates to President Obama. President Clinton was correct when he said that people in your business need to be careful about using it to describe President Obama's critique of Republican. This is their term that you and others have allowed to bleed into stories and now it becomes the label that's used when discusing an increase in tax rates on the rich. It's just like so-called "Obamacare" which you and others are now using. It gives legitimacy to Republican dogma which I expect on Fox but thought you and others had more common sense..but I was wrong. President Obama has been clear about which group of people have benefited from 30 years of tax cuts and loopholes. Maybe you need to get clear. Peace.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:39 pm |
  53. Matt

    Upper income individuals have to pitch in to move the country forward – TAKE SOME FREAKIN RESPONSIBILITY!!!!!

    July 1, 2011 at 6:37 pm |
    • TaxNoMore

      Their already taking RESPONSIBLITY for 80% to 90% of the taxes paid. I think you & the rest of the poor need to start paying a share.

      Let's emplement a flat tax of 15% to 20% on EVERYONE.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:04 pm |
    • Kevin in Ohio

      Just who is not "pitching in?" Its the people who continuously cry that they are ENTITLED to government handouts. Its time we stop this nanny state dead in its tracks...if it isn't already too late. American income earners and job creators are already taxed enough.... and Obama is making sure they can't take any further risk or make further investment in jobs.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:25 pm |
    • djusmc7229

      They pay 35% of their income. How much do you pay?

      July 1, 2011 at 7:30 pm |
    • Henry Miller

      How about the lower income people, those who pay no federal taxes at all? Shouldn't they have to "pitch in to move the country forward?" Or are they just along for the ride?

      People who pay no taxes but demand endless entitlements are the ones who should "TAKE SOME FREAKIN RESPONSIBILITY!!!" Far from helping to "move the country forward," they're dragging the country down.

      July 2, 2011 at 9:21 am |
  54. Alex in NJ

    Obama is a flat out liar. This isn't a millionaire/billionaire tax. 250k is FAR from a millionaire, especially with kids' college to pay for. Also, many of these 250k earners are small business owners a.k.a. the nations' best job creators. This is all setting aside the fact that the top 10% of earners already foot about 75-80% of the federal budget. When you combine federal, fica, state, and local taxes plus property taxes the average 250K earner pays about 55-60% of their income in some sort of tax. When will enough be enough. How much of their money do we want? If you want socialism just say you want socialism because this is socialism. I make 30K a year so it's not like i am some rich guy up here complaining. I am just sick of the lies.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  55. MCA

    The highest bracket used to pay 90%, and we used that money to make America world class. They can pay a few more percent now to help salvage it.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
    • Martha in CF

      I agree-say you want the tax set at 90% like it use to be, then settle on 50%, then it won't look so bad to them.....I think it is a shame that the rich aren't stepping up to the plate and offering to help out.....

      July 1, 2011 at 7:01 pm |
    • TaxNoMore

      A better idea would be all the TAKERS stop taking the handouts that our taxes pay for, then the taxes of us taxpayers could be cut in half.

      The best part is maybe the TAKERS won't feel like unless parasites anymore. Oh wait, they have no problem being leeches, it's owed to them. I just haven't figured out why I owed them.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:19 pm |
    • Kevin in Ohio

      Gee, why not 100%?????? Oh, that's right...Socialism has NEVER worked.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:26 pm |
  56. Bitsey

    Republicans want a a corporate theocracyand class warfare. Tax the rich. Allow workers to be shareholders in the companies and all will benefit. Good capitalism vs bad capitalism.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
    • djusmc7229

      That would be communism.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:35 pm |
  57. Kevin Collins

    The wealthy - these supposed "job creators", as GOP leaders like to call them - haven't been doing any job creating these last several years with their beloved tax cuts! Rather, they've been sticking that extra money under their mattresses and/or in their offshore tax havens. So when Republican leaders spew their hoary "These are the people who create jobs!", simply ask them, then, where exactly are these supposed new jobs? Non-wealthy GOP voters, please wake-up - the wealthy and corporations do *not* have your backs. Ever since Bush implemented his benefit-the-rich economic policies, the middle class has been steadily dissolving, and it'll keep doing that if GOP leaders and their big-business buddies have their way. At this rate, America will look like Argentina in a few years.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  58. Jarret

    Flat Tax for everyone with no deductions!!

    July 1, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
    • Don Fowler

      I agree on the federal level. All people should pay their equal share. The reality is that each and every person uses a base dollar amount of services from the government. Paying equally for those services is painfully logical. So, if that number is $10,000 per year then each person should pay that. It's a testament to the people who work hard to make their money that they are willing to pay much more than they are required to cover their share. I'm really sick of the whining people complaining that the rich don't pay enough. I'm not rich, but if I ever am I will have worked for it. Why should I pay more to drive the same road as you. More to sit at the same stop light? Makes absolutely no sense

      July 1, 2011 at 7:13 pm |
    • jc

      We've been sayin this for years, no decades if not longer, I agree but why cant we get this idea into the heads of all the nut jobs in washington? FLAAAAAAT TAAAAX!!!!! Everyone is equal and we should all pay an equal percantage of our income no matter what it is.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:16 pm |
    • rosegarden

      So true. But majority of Americans misunderstand the concept of flat tax, and are also fear of it. I prefer to remain the same tax rates regardless you are rich or poor, no more itemize deductions and loopholes. Everyone of us needs to scarify in tough time. Tax evasion not exclusive to rich, it happens around us, poor does the same too. Only by simplified our tax system can generate more incomes and encourage rich to invest in this country. No deregulation though, we learned very hard in 2008.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:31 pm |
  59. Gloria Enoch

    From here in Canada (a duel citizen) I don't understand all of the concern about the use of the expression 'CLASS WAREFARE" After all if an elete class of persons takes away union rights, if that class of eletes are unable to ensure an equitable distribution of goods and services then they are are engaging in an economic war. That war has serious consequences on the rest of the people. So of course that is CLASS WAREFARE. Call a spade a spade.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  60. Rex

    I suspect that Mr Clinton has enough tax shelters and loopholes to be able to avoid any increase in his taxes, so why wouldn't he want to raise them? Mr. President, I will make a deal with you – I'll agree to having my taxes raised if you will raise them on ALL Americans, including those who don't pay taxes now. To use one of the president's favorite terms, everyone should "have some skin in the game"... not just those of us who work hard.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  61. joseph thomas

    jennifer granholm was the worst govener mi. has ever had . so bad she was equally loathed by dems. and republicans. she spent 8 years in office with no acoplisments. she quickly fled mi. when her term was up. thank god. you should examine her disastouris record ruining the lives of hundreds of thousands. your interview should have taken place in downtown detroit. she did keep one campaign promise when she said mi. citizens would be blown away when she finished her term. come on wolf dont give this carpetbagger another chance to take advatage of good people. report on her pathehtic true record.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  62. ralk

    Then start forking it over b i t c h!

    July 1, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  63. usaf2

    Blitzer the Wolf in a Armani Suit.........................

    July 1, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  64. George

    Bill Clinton should pay ALL of his wealth to compensate for his failure as President to enforce our borders, which accelerated the brown tsunami that is costing us enormously today.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
    • Senora Gringa

      It was Reagan that offered amnesty. All that did was establish a home base for the relatives to come live when they managed to get into the US, legally or not.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:05 pm |
    • jc

      brown tsunami? what a looooooooser!

      July 1, 2011 at 7:11 pm |
    • LolZatsluttyboy

      You bloddy ROCK!! Wish I'd thought of that!!

      July 1, 2011 at 7:17 pm |
    • John PA

      Racist much?

      July 1, 2011 at 7:47 pm |
    • MW

      You are a fool George. Every president made decisions that were costly in hindsight. How about Bush? Two unfunded wars, an unfunded tax break, Katrina, 911, etc... Those events cost our nation more than any action any president has made in the last fifty years all together. Let's take the Bush money too!!!

      July 2, 2011 at 8:58 am |
  65. isadore

    All for taxing the rich. NOBODY rips off people like the rich. I work a blue collar service job, and it is always the rich ones that try to rip me off or treat me and/or my crew like worthless worker bees. I have grown to really despise rich people. Tax 'em all.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  66. G Reynolds

    Finally, someone with political power understands that in order to pay off the government debt, taxes must be colllected from citizens who have money. Gee, what is so hard to understand? You can't pay off a bill with nothing, stupid. Tax the rich, tax the middle, tax whoever you need to tax and get rid of the debt!!! Stop the stupidity of pretending that taxing the rich is somehow immoral – did conservatives go brain dead? The bills must be paid so pay up, conservatives are a huge reason why there is such a huge government debt – did the oil & gas industry vote for their own billion dollar handouts? did the agriculture industry vote for their own billion dollar handouts? did any of the conservatives favorites vote for their own handouts? are we supposed to pretend these rich people needed socialist handouts from the government to scrape by? Basic budgeting – you helped create a huge debt moron so now you are going to have to pitch in and pay up. Get it?

    What jackas taught these fools that taxes do not need to be collected to pay off the government debt? What was the first act of the First Congress? They passed a tax act to collect tax revenue to provide for paying the government bills and running the government. Who did the First Congress collect the tax revenue from? Wealthy landowners and those with the means to pay up (because as you know, our Founding Fathers and Founders in general were intelligent people).

    How did the conservatives figure that they have anything in common with the founding Fathers and the First Congress? They have nothing in common. Their stories of taxing the rich do not add up, the First Congress had the intelligence to understand that the wealthy must be taxed – so big difference here. So why do conservatives keep lying about this?????

    July 1, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
  67. Aztrazolo

    My problem with this is that the Government asks the rich to pay more while it is unwilling to spend less.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
    • Allears

      Have you been hiding under a rock?. Did you listen to any of the Presidents speach? Compromise was mentioned. Let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire and cut trim the fat from federal spending. It's a fairly simple solution that will at least help us start to climb out of the deep hole we currently find ourselves in.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:15 pm |
    • Looking Glass

      You know that's not true. You sir are a willing lier.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:24 pm |
    • TaxNoMore

      Agreed. 51% of us that pay the taxes should ALL be paying less. I thought Obama was going to eliminate all the Gov't organization that were doing the same thing as other branches. And how about less earmarks. And forget the stupid trains. In Calif. we're going to waste $9B of Fed funding for a few miles between 2 cities with less than 200K people combined.

      Worst of all was the stimulus. In Calif the money was used to continue paying Public Union employees bloated salaries & benefits, instead of creating even ONE job.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
    • Henry Miller

      A very good, succinct, statement of the problem.

      July 2, 2011 at 9:22 am |
  68. wcnea567

    Republicans' rejection of tax increase for wealthy Americans and prevent them from paying their fair shares of taxes is more donor protection than class war fare. When Warren Buffetts, one of the richest American, said his tax rate was lower than that of his receptionist, we know American tax system is not fair. But republicans continue to insist American middle class to pay at a higher rate than wealthy Americans. Their job creation by the wealthy is a republican myth. One hundred dollar earned by a low or middle income American creates more jobs than one hundred dollar earned by a wealthy American. because low and middle income Americans spend all their income in the US whereas wealthy Americans also spend their income in foreign investments, foreign travels, foreign vacations and other foreign luxuries that do not create job in the US.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:15 pm |
  69. alv1867

    I reject the 250K...maybe 750K

    July 1, 2011 at 6:15 pm |
    • Martha in CF

      I agree-raise it to 750k..........

      July 1, 2011 at 7:04 pm |
  70. someoneelse

    Hell, just making them pay anything would be nice, let alone what they should ethically pay. And for the people who say they already pay a lot, obviously you are oblivious to the concept of a good accountant and tax breaks.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:13 pm |
  71. Richard Morris

    I am a firm Republican and I think we should definitely go back to the pre-Bush income tax rates. I also think we should raise the retirement age to 74 for Social Security and Medicare benefits. Country's going broke and things are going to have to change.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:12 pm |
  72. stonesrule

    BS!!! This is legalized theft! Fair Tax is the best way to go....

    July 1, 2011 at 6:12 pm |
  73. DB

    Unfortunately with past Presidents you get ideas from the past that may have worked back then. There is no economic bubble or wave to ride on the horizon like the or housing. Having said that the richest already bear a burden but should willingly go further for the good of the Country.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:11 pm |
  74. Chapin

    'we're all going to have to sacrifice". Guess what, Mr. Former President? 1/2 of Americans pay no federal income tax whatsover. If all of us are in this together, all should pay taxes in proportion to what one earns. The implication that the weathy does not pay its fair share is that all wealth is ill-gotten.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:11 pm |
  75. Wise1Speak


    President Clinton is absolutely correct. For the past decade, the middle-class has been crushed, pummeled, and devastated by 'Wall Street / Banking' deregulations and wicked greed. Corporations like Massey Energy and Koch Industries is stripping the life blood from the middle-class while sewing seeds of division and chaos among hard working Americans.

    President Obama is NOT engaging in class-warfare, , , , class-warfare is already here and it was bought and paid for by corporations, financial industries, insurance industries, and a few bad rich folks. And these fraudulent corporate and banking crooks lobby their Republican GOP Tea Party Christian Conservatives puppets to execute hypocritical policies that were implemented by President George W. Bush and the Republican-led Congress from 2000 to 2006. And any attempts to reverse those anti-middleclass policies are 'obstructed' by the Republican Tea Party led Congressional House.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:10 pm |
  76. Earnest T Bass

    I wanted to comment but decided not to, it's a waste of my time!

    July 1, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  77. us1776

    I don't think the upper class of the country realize just how much pain and suffering is occurring in middle-class America right now. People losing jobs right and left. Small businesses closing that had been around for 30 years. It's distressing. I never thought I would see this much pain in our country. Never.


    July 1, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
  78. George

    You bet the rich can pay more. They haven't paid ANYTHING since Reagan took office and gave them a 30 year tax holiday. The poor haven't paid anything either, but they have nothing. The middle class has died out paying for welfare for both.

    July 1, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
    • Don Fowler

      You really don't know what you're talking about. I know several people that you would call "rich". Each one of them pays close to half of their income to taxes. There is no way around the tax code for honest individuals.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:18 pm |
    • Kevin in Ohio

      They haven't paid ANYTHING????? What planet are you living on? The top 1% of income earners pay 40% of the taxes. the top 5% pay 52%. The top 25% pay 85%. Go to Russia if you like socialism so much.

      July 1, 2011 at 7:29 pm |
  79. Fred

    Clinton is still just as stupid as ever. What the PEOPLE are saying is...CUT THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT DOWN. It's crazy how big they've let it get. Then EVERYONE's taxed can go down even more. And this is also just matter of fairness. The tax rate should be the same across the board, maybe none for those at the poverty level, but other than that, the same....a flat tax would be even better.

    July 1, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  80. tee

    The rich don't want to sacrifice, that's a job for poor people, greed is greed.

    July 1, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  81. jmsramsey

    As crazy at it seems, $250, 000 isn't lot of money if you live in NY City and most of Jersey and alot of other areas! If they raise taxes on the rich, it should be starting at $500,000. Everyone is always complaining about Social Security going bankrupt. The FICA deductions stop at $106,000 per calendar year which is unfair to the middle class. Why don't they continue the FICA deductions to a much higher earnings figure such as $1 million dollars or always deduct it? Makes sense to me and it would be fairer.

    July 1, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  82. jja

    Ummmm Bill? $250,000 for a married couple in America today, is not wealthy 'k??? They don't own yatchs, limos or ski lodges in Aspen, 'k??? And yes, it IS class warfare – you did it and now Obama is at it as well. You actually made more sense when Monica was taking care of you – sounds as if the years have caught up.

    July 1, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
    • John PA

      Seems to me Clinton left office w/a surplus; can any recent Republican Presidents claim that? Huh?

      July 1, 2011 at 7:52 pm |
  83. Jason

    Clinton did win reelection, however, only due to the divided GOP vote Ross Perot & Bob Dole. Also, Clinton did not win his reelection with a majority of the vote and never received more than 45% of the vote in either of his presidential elections.

    That aside, I agree. When times are tough, those who have the ability to pay more should until things level out.

    July 1, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  84. Stuart

    Clinton didn't spend money the way this clown does!

    July 1, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  85. Randy

    Accusations of "class warfare" is just a ruse, a diversion by Teapublicans away from their own involvement in getting the US into a deep, deep economic hole by lowering taxes, waging endless wars and other financial shenanigans. We have yet to see them pass any jobs' assistance bills even though they control the House. They talk the talk but certainly don't walk the walk preferring "Let them eat cake." over "Let's get them some jobs."

    July 1, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  86. Wired

    And thus he ended his two terms with a surplus, shortly before Bush got a hold of it and mangled our economy. And Lo, the masses of inbred republicans insist that Clinton's surplus was a relic of a golden era of Reaganomics. however this is simply not true.

    July 1, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  87. stearns

    I think the taxing limit should be raised for families earning more than just 250,000 (like pro sports and movie starts). It's the really wealthy that get away with paying their taxes since they have the ability to donate large sums of money to pull them out of having to pay their taxes. Sure they're giving money to good causes but most non profits, profit quite well from wealthy contributors. Look how much money some of non profits make (including churches) and then see if it makes since that those who contribute to non profits get a tax break.

    July 1, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  88. scrumptuoso

    Most people I know make 6 figures and most of them can't afford a house.

    You need to adjust for cost of living if your going to talk about rich vs poor.

    July 1, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  89. rob

    The Dems play class warfare against the repubs all the time. Its not a matter of tax increases on the wealthy being class warfare, its statements like pesident Obama uses when attacking republicans. He compares thr "rich paying a little more" to a child getting and education, building roads, health care for the sick etc. etc. Other Dems come right out and say Republicans want children to DIE from asthma so the "rich" don't have to pay higher taxes. Once again CNN and especially Blitzers blog doesn't give all the facts.

    July 1, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  90. GI Joe

    BUT - Bill Clinton is not half-white. The old white fat southern red-neck republicans can't stand that "boy" being in the whitehouse. They are already discussing burning it once he is gone. (Let 'em try it).

    July 1, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
  91. logicinLA

    Class warfare? You mean the main plank of the Republican platform?
    Just look at the budget items they want cut and then look at their position on taxes.
    Healthcare- wealthy have it- middle class and below need it. Tax relief- middle class needs it, wealthy can afford more. The arts- the way for many out of poverty- the rich can afford to pay for anything they want If you have never suffered, you have no clue.- Enter the Republican party!

    July 1, 2011 at 4:47 pm |

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.