Presidential advisers mystify me...

I must admit that sometimes I am mystified by presidential advisers.

Like today, I saw two economic advisers from the Obama Administration on TV and they were both saying that Obama made a good deal when he compromised on the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. Then they said that they didn't like that particular part of the deal, but that it would be easier in two years, right after the 2012 election, to get rid of the tax cuts for wealthy. Why? Because they said it would then be clear that it didn't help the economy. So, then it would be an easy cut.

Hmmmm. Now, I am no economic wizard, but doesn't that imply that in order for the tax cuts for the wealthy to be seen as unsuccessful, then also it means that the economy (or the employment rate) doesn't improve? Do they think the economy and employment rate won't improve in two years? Wow! I hope not. Because that means none of their ideas (or the least the few that they have) were successful and so they haven't worked. Wow, I sure hope this economy improves in two years.

But wouldn't it also be true that if the economy improves, the proponents of the tax cuts for the wealthy could point to it as one of the reasons for economic improvement and thus make the case even more than now that those tax cuts need to be kept in place? And then that would mean an extension of the extension of the tax cuts of the wealthy.

Wouldn't it be just better to eliminate the tax cuts for the wealthy now, which should reduce the national debt, and then to work like a busy FDR to improve the economy...and then show that the tax cuts for the wealthy weren't needed?

The Obama advisers mystify me. But maybe they have to say something and put as much of a happy face on it as possible, considering that they made such a goofy mistake.