That sentiment isn’t exactly a surprise; however, the fact that McDermott was referring to an amendment that dropped the tax liability on unemployment benefits makes this a bit more of a head-scratcher. Then again, reality is whatever these folks and their willing accomplices in the media want it to be these days.

Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX): Mr. Chairman, just yesterday President Obama said he agrees with that concept, and that we shouldn’t be taxing people on their unemployment benefits. I would hope that it’s an oversight on y’all’s part, and [that you] would accept this amendment.”

Rep. “Baghdad Jim” McDermott (D-WA): “Certainly Mr. Johnson’s amendment has press appeal, but it follows an old pattern of giving the tax benefit to the people on the top of the income scale, even though they only get 34% of the benefits. If you don’t pay taxes, you get nothin’ out of this amendment. It is not good for people on the bottom who are the ones who are most likely to be affected by the unemployment insurance….[inaudible]”

On behalf of those who are receiving unemployment benefits because they lost their jobs in this economy and need the income to get by while looking for some other opportunity to feed their families, I have to ask: What the heck is McDermott talking about?

First of all, it’s a serious indictment of both our tax system and the vote-buying tradition of this country’s politicians that the idea those who don’t pay taxes should benefit from a tax cut is even being discussed in public.

Second of all, if unemployment benefits are so plum that receiving them puts someone “at the top of the income scale” (they’re not, by the way), I’d say that’s a problem Baghdad Jim and his Party of Taxpayer-Funded Giveaways need to accept some responsibility for and correct, rather than turning their wrath on the unemployed as yet another supposed “rich” class to be further stolen from.