I guess I see your point of view, but I'm more skeptical in the downsides you mention, while more optimstic that the overall change is positive.
In other words, I don't think increasing dividend taxes completely destroys the value prop for a dividend. There's no question it shrinks the value prop, but dividends are still free money, even when it's about 25% less than it was before.
Meanwhile, a lower nominal tax rate still increases the EPS of companies like Intel who are paying near the top of the current tax rate. I'm sure Berkshire Hathaway considers both angles, so I disagree with your implication that Intel will lose a key investor because of the change. In fact, they may gain more investors who care more about bottom line growth than they do about dividend.
Meanwhile, I think it's unfair to view Warren Buffet as paying lip service, when it's a matter of policy. The pundits like to say, why doesn't he donate his paycheck to the government if he thinks his taxes are too low? While that conforms to the principle of the matter, I think Buffet is speaking on practicality, not on principle. If he donates his paycheck, it's a vain effort, and a drop in the bucket of federal revenues. On the other hand, if policy changes so that everybody has to pay a minimum tax rate, then not only is it more "fair" between secretaries and fund managers, but it would also be a material contribution of revenues towards closing the deficit gap.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
