Jay Carney, Above the Fray

    Jake Tapper peppered Jay Carney today with questions about last month's terror attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.  Tapper was trying to pin down Carney on why the attack was  mischaracterized for so long as a spontaneous demonstration gone violent, when, as the government now admits, it was neither spontaneous or a demonstration.  Carney tried to put things in perspective [emphasis mine]:

Again, this is a moving picture, and people who on the night of an attack or the day after claim they know all the facts without making clear that what we know is based on preliminary information aren’t being straight, and they’re in some cases trying to politicize a situation that should not be politicized. I think that’s what the president was getting at. And I think many other people felt the same way.

After some further back and forth, Tapper's questions concluded with this [again, emphasis mine]:

TAPPER: ...Democrats have talked about budgets being cut for embassy security. And I’m wondering if that’s something that the White House believes was a problem as well, that there was — there had something to do with money being withheld by House Republicans or whomever. 

CARNEY: ...What is simply a matter of fact is that this president has fought for and put forward funding that he believes is necessary for our diplomatic personnel and diplomatic security around the world. And others have sought to reduce that funding over these past several years because of a — of an approach to our budget priorities that prioritizes tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. That’s just a fact...

Regarding politicization, Carney was channeling Groucho Marx: "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others."

The Obama Administration's Class War on War

    It would certainly be difficult to build up much sympathy for the super-rich, but the Obama administration launched one of the purest class warfare volleys over the weekend that I've seen.  On Sunday, the Obama Truth Team tweeted this:

    Note that the usual hackneyed phrase "millionaires and billionaires" has been truncated to "ask billionaires to pay their fair share."  According to a Wall Street Journal article in June 2011, the number of millionaires in the U.S. was about 3.1 million at last count.  On the other hand, billionaires in the U.S. total only 425 according to Forbes latest list.  Due to the lack of details provided by the Truth Team, I must assume the billionaire tax is the Cadillac version of the Buffett Rule.  But according to a March report in the Huffington Post, the Buffet Rule including millionaires would only bring in $31 - $47 billion in new tax revenue over the next decade, in other words, only $3.1 to $4.7 billion per year.  Exclude those relatively destitute millionaires (it takes 1,000 millionaires to make a billionaire) from the pool and the new revenue could easily drop to $1 billion per year.
 
    The Truth Team's phrasing ("automatic defense cuts could be prevented if House Republicans dropped their refusal...") sounds somewhat magical, as if their single action would break a spell.  However, a less charitable interpretation is that the Obama administration is holding the Pentagon budget hostage unless the Republicans agree to shake down 425 American citizens.  For a measly $1 billion in tax revenue, the White House threatens $56.5 billion in additional cuts to the defense budget.  The Democrats have often resorted to class warfare to advance their policies, but threatening America's ability to wage real war certainly raises the tactic to a whole new level.