Interviewer Steve Kroft asked him, in as many words, if the YP, as a former Con Law Prof, believes the 90% tax bill on bailout-funded bonuses is constitutional. The YP's response:
"Well, I think that as a general proposition, you don't wanna be passing
laws that are just targeting a handful of individuals. You wanna pass laws
that have some broad applicability. And as a general proposition, I think
you certainly don't wanna use the tax code to punish people[.]
"I think that you've got an pretty egregious situation here that
people are understandably upset about. And so let's see if there are ways of
doing this that are both legal, that are constitutional, that upholds [sic] our
basic principles of fairness, but don't hamper us from getting the banking
system back on track." Source.
Did you hear him give a direct, responsive answer? Did you hear him utter the word, "unconstitutional?" Nope. "Inadvisable," maybe. In the second paragraph, he even suggested that the tax-flogger bill is "illegal," "unconstitutional," and "unfair." But he very carefully crafted a response that avoided accusing Congress of falling all over themselves to enact a punitive Bill of Attainder, with Nancy Pelosi screeching all the way. He just couldn't bring himself to aver, "Nancy, you ignorant slut." The YP simply can't bring himself to embarrass his congressional toadies, even when they seriously deserve it.
As a general proposition.
love your blog, thanks for stopping by mine, please come back and enjoy, i do enjoy yours!
ReplyDelete