Bottom of the barrel.

UPDATE II: It gets worse. All of what I say below can be disregarded (or read, merely to put what I say here into context). It appears Rep. Carter is engaging in pure deception. His Tweet (cited below) was identical to a post he made to Facebook, which -- on Facebook -- was accompanied by a link to a WSJ article. But that article makes it quite clear that Obama has firmly opposed the tax that Carter claims Obama is "open" to. The headline of the WSJ article ("Obama said to be open to taxing healthcare benefits") is technically accurate, because someone did "say" that Obama was open to this tax. But the headline is obviously misleading -- upon reading the actual article, one finds that the WH has asserted that Obama firmly opposes such a tax. Either (a) Carter knows this and has deliberately joined the WSJ in this deception, by going a step further to claim that Obama is in fact "open" to the tax (and not merely that he has been "said" to be open to it), or (b) Carter has been sloppy and failed to read the article, and has passed on (and heightened) the deception out of ignorance. Either way, the claim that Obama is "open" to this tax is a deception. Carter ought to be called out on it.

Original post:
I think Rep. Carter is running out of ammo. He's scraping the bottom of the barrel now, to come up with ways to attack Obama (or the Dems). And it looks a bit desperate and weak. Here's his latest Tweet, as an example (you can follow him @JudgeCarter):

Obama is open to taxing healthcare benefits to help cover the $600B shortfall for his healthcare overhaul. So much for that 95% tax cut.

How weak is this? Well, I can think of two things wrong with it, right off the bat.

First, Obama is "open" to this tax. Carter wants to attack Obama for merely being "open" to a tax -- it hasn't been proposed by Obama, or promoted by Obama, or signed into law by Obama. It isn't even being actively, currently considered by Obama. He's merely signaled that he is open to considering it. Yet Carter seems to think this is a strong enough basis for criticism. In fact, he seems to think it is a strong enough basis for insinuating that Obama was not being entirely honest about, or that he has somehow failed to remain true to, his claims about providing a tax cut to 95% of Americans. Ridiculous.

Second, even if Obama was actually signing into law a new tax on healthcare benefits, it wouldn't be a basis for this insinuation. Obama promised (and delivered) an income tax cut to 95% of Americans. He never promised, or even hinted or implied, that there would never be the possibility of new or increased taxes elsewhere. Carter is going out of his way to conflate the income tax cut with the possibility of a tax on healthcare benefits in order to suggest that Obama has been dishonest or has failed in some way. Again, ridiculous.

And weak.

And, of course, note that Carter is not offering any new ideas or alternative policies for consideration. It seems weak attacks from the bottom of the barrel are all he's got lately.

We really need new representation in 2010, don't we?

UPDATE: Just thought of another reason this attack is weak -- and maybe even disingenuous or dishonest, on Carter's part. If I understand it correctly (as I recall), the tax on healthcare benefits would run against businesses -- that is, the $$ businesses use to pay for employee healthcare is not currently taxed, and the idea here is to tax that $$. This would not be passed on to employees in any way, though I suppose the cost could be passed on to consumers indirectly. The point is that the tax won't have any direct impact on regular folks, and even the indirect impact is likely to be negligible. Certainly not enough to erase the income tax cuts, as Carter suggests. But I'll admit, I could be wrong about how I understand this -- and it has to be reiterated that such a tax is NOT in the works. Obama is merely "open" to it, remember? Hardly something to get upset about....