President Barack Obama has been on the campaign trail this week lambasting his Republican challenger Mitt Romney for backing policies that the president claims would harm the middle class. On Monday, Romney responded in no uncertain terms, "Let me tell you the heart of my tax proposal: I will not raise taxes on the American people, I will not raise taxes on middle-income Americans."
While both candidates have essentially made this pledge, a recent Bloomberg Editorial takes Romney and Obama to task, concluding that no matter who is in the Oval Office; your taxes are going up.
This fact goes unmentioned by President Barack Obama, who speaks only of tax increases on the wealthy, and is anathema to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, who insist they can beat the deficit into submission by slashing government spending, cutting taxes and eliminating unspecified loopholes. A look at the arithmetic shows neither campaign is on the level.
The scope of the deficit problem is enormous: Federal spending accounts for 24 percent of the economy, while tax revenue stands at 15 percent. Tax cuts, along with the economic downturn, have sapped tax receipts at the same time as more people have resorted to safety-net programs such as food stamps and unemployment insurance.
On "Real News From The Blaze" Tuesday the panel debated the merits of the Bloomberg.com editorial's case. Despite what both candidates might say, is the middle class going to be forced to pony up at some point?
Stanley Kurtz, author of Spreading the Wealth, contends that Obama is not only bad for the middle class, but that he has quite purposefully targeted them. Kurtz joined the show for this discussion, watch a clip below: