E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
*** You’ve gotta know when to hold’em… : As former Bush 43 Chief of Staff Andy Card once quipped, you never roll out a policy proposal in August because no one is paying attention. Similarly, you probably don’t pick a legislative fight to make a larger political point during the December holiday season. Last night, President Obama announced the framework of a compromise that would extend the Bush tax cuts for all income levels in exchange for a 13-month extension of jobless benefits, as well as a payroll-tax holiday. ”Sympathetic as I am to those who prefer a fight over compromise, as much as the political wisdom may dictate fighting over solving problems, it would be the wrong thing to do,” Obama said. “The American people didn’t send us here to wage symbolic battles or win symbolic victories.” There are plenty of ways to look at this -- pick your term – compromise/pragmatism/retreat/capitulation.
*** Know when to fold’em… : The White House knew that they were holding a weak hand. With all the tax cuts set to expire at the end of this month, and with Republicans set to control the House and have extra Senate seats in January, Dems could have picked a fight. But if that happened, it would have likely meant that tax rates would go up in this struggling economy, creating havoc on Wall Street and in biz community; that there would be almost no chance to pass New START and the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” during the lame duck; and that there would be little chance of the next Congress being able to clear jobless benefits and even a payroll-tax holiday to stimulate the economy. You pick a political fight when the public is paying attention – and when you think you can win.
*** And know when to fight’em: The other way to look at this is that the Obama White House just doesn’t know how to fight and play political hardball. We recently heard this frustration from an advocate of comprehensive immigration reform, who wishes that the White House would fight on this issue to put Republicans in a box with Latino voters. "They just didn't want to play politics in the past two years,” this advocate said. “I hope they know that didn't work out for them." Make no mistake: Obama has to show some spine once John Boehner controls the gavel in the House. Maybe it comes in the State of the Union; maybe afterward. Yet we’ll re-raise our question from yesterday: For congressional Dems who want the president to fight on the Bush tax cuts, where were their spines during the spring and the summer, when THEY had a stronger hand to play? They were the ones who decided to punt on the issue until after the midterms. And question to progressive blogosphere: Why are you directing so much anger at the president when it's your congressional leaders who let you down?
*** What happens in 2012? The spin we’re hearing from the White House is that they want to re-litigate the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy heading into the re-election in 2012. If Obama wins re-election, they believe, that will serve as a mandate to get rid of those tax cuts once and for all. (However, critics will likely point out that Obama also got that mandate after 2008.) But imagine this: What if Obama used his State of the Union address to call for comprehensive tax-code overhaul -- like the deficit-reduction commission proposed -- to be implemented between now and 2012? That would end the Bush tax cuts and also serve as a realistic accomplishment that a Democratic White House and a GOP-controlled House could achieve. And speaking of deficit reduction, this whole deal adds approximately $1 trillion to the deficit -- $1 trillion that the GOP will now partly own. That has the potential to compel Republicans to become serious partners in deficit reduction for 2011-2012. Not to mix our poker-chess metaphors, but if the president is playing chess, then tax reform seems to be the most logical long-term policy fight to have, no?
*** Can the White House (and Biden) convince skeptical Dems? But before we truly begin to map out how this deal might impact 2011 and 2012, it first has to pass. And congressional Dems aren’t yet sold. The Washington Post: “The agreement has yet to win the support of Democratic leaders in either chamber, and senior aides said the White House will need significant Republican support to push the package through Congress.” So enter Vice President Biden, who heads to Capitol Hill to attend the Senate Democratic Caucus lunch at 1:30 pm ET. One particular Democratic complaint is the deal on the estate tax, which would impose a 35% tax on individuals’ estates worth more than $5 million. In fact, Obama addressed this in his statement yesterday. “The Republicans have asked for more generous treatment of the estate tax than I think is wise or warranted. But we have insisted that that will be temporary.”
*** Can Boehner and McConnell also make sure their troops sign on? But Obama and Biden aren’t the only ones who will need to do some convincing. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell will, too. The Republicans can’t afford many defections here, and it will serve as a test of their leadership skills -- and also a test of which House and Senate Republicans will never support anything that has the president’s name on it. The reason: This is the best deal Republicans will probably ever get from Obama.
*** Can the liberal blogosphere ever be happy when their party is in charge? The liberal disappointment -- and even anger -- over the deal is both surprising and unsurprising. It’s surprising because this deal has been telegraphed for weeks, and because it does include some serious stimulus (in the jobless benefits and payroll-tax holiday). But it’s also unsurprising because the liberal blogosphere -- which came of age during the Bush years -- has yet to embrace the trade-offs and compromises that are sometimes necessary when they’re the governing party. This is probably true for both liberal and conservative bloggers: It’s a lot more fun to be the opposition party.
*** Condi backs New START: All living GOP secretaries of state are now supporting the New START treaty, with Condi Rice publishing a Wall Street Journal op-ed calling for the treaty’s ratification with caveats.
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.
Leave a Comment:
Yesterday I stated that if President Obama moved to a compromise (middle), the media would make him out to be weakened. Well I was correct in that assessment as it is stated in the first paragraph.
After watching the recaps this morning from last night news segments, everyone attacked. But I was not surprised. The media has made themselves into an attack dog. It’s up to the viewer to decide whether the president made the right decision. The media wants a war. The president understands this and refuses to cave into the demand of bullies, whether they are the media or the Republithugs. If anyone blinks first it is the Republithugs, because now they have to make amends and move the country forward with Progressive policies that the president drives. Everyone else needs to deal with it. I applaud the president's efforts.
I can see the president’s decision as being a decision of promise. The American people that understand the impact of policy development and how compromise is an important part of continued Progressive movements from a group of Conservative "Do Nothings" is a part the Democratic Evolution of this country. The media will continue to attempt to thwart this in order to continue the sensationalized drama that is played out 24/7. Throwing up hands and saying forget it, is the true sign of weakness.
What I don’t understand is how Democrats that hold elected offices become drawn into the media by unknowingly commenting about President Obama’s decisions. Don’t get me wrong, some Congressmen say things that are not necessarily against the president, but the media take hold to their words and twist them to make it out as an attack on his compromise. They should know that the media will use their words against them.
The American public needs to understand that the deals brokered by the president and the Congress are deals that will continue to be made. Those that want the president to fail, will see the president succeed through these decisions that he has to make, not everyone else, just him.
The president will be marked by history as the “Great Uniter”. His detractors will be known as the “Great Dividers”.
United We Stand, Divided We Fall.
Oh, the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the FR lefty liberals will be a sight to see today!!!!!
Naw- we LIKE the idea of increased debt to China, remember??
Louis J;
I agree with you. President Obama was dealt a crapy hand to begin with and he played it out with what was available to him. While I feel that he gave up too much while getting very little in return I do not see what else he could have done. The alternative at this point in time would have run the risk of doing more harm than good. Should this have been addressed sooner, yes, but it was not and now we have to play out the game with what we got. This is what happens when you let a bunch of rouge politicians (and a minority to boot) dictate the course of this country. The republican party is holding this country hostage and it will not stop here. We will see more of this to come as they continue their assualt on the Middle Class in search of more power and greed for those that financed their agendas.
We are guaranteed a record deficit now by the party that claimed they wanted to lower the deficit. Hypocrits all of them and the American People are going to have to pick up the tab, once again.
There are going to be some very dark days ahead. No doubt about it and it is in line with their agenda as we know it.
China will be sending more 'lead' tainted toys with abandon!...but what about the kids and grandkids? The deficit piled on their yet to be heads!
Drive by,
We don't need to borrow from China to keep these tax rates in place. The money is the taxpayers to begin with and this will simply allow the taxpayer to keep his/her money.
We'll need to borrow to continue our spending programs, which should be reduced across the board to lower the deficit.
The fun isn't over yet. In fact, it's just beginning.
Now Congress has to approve Obama's and the Republicans agreement. The still very Liberal and Democratic Congress.
Better pop some corn before watching this one. The self-inflicted self-destruction of the Democrats will be interesting to watch.
No doubt that there were little options, but the options are likely there to curtail any devastating impact of an increased deficit. There is a difference between increased deficits and "Bush era" deficits. Bush era deficits were the results of a government that waded recklessly into spending without restraint. That was 2002-2006. Now that President Obama put certain safegards into place before having to deal with this, they (Republithugs) cannot repeat these mishaps.
President Obama is doing what is necessary. Yesteryears mistakes are not same for the present.
Basic Math evolved through the centuries to get us beyond the moon. The same can be said of philosophy and President Obama is practicing that.
Old practices and methods are good to a point, innovation is the future.
For weeks, I've watched in amazement (and with some amusement, as well), as delusional First Readers sought to simply ignore or willfully misinterpret the real-world implications of the electoral disaster suffered by the Democratic Party in last months' midterms.
It's now clear that President Obama doesn't have that luxury.
Yesterday, MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell reported that the White House was furious at lame-duck Speaker Nancy Pelosi for passing tax legislation in the House that had no realistic prospects of passage in the Senate...while President Obama was working tirelessly to craft a workable compromise with Republicans on extending the Bush era tax cuts, and a continuation of unemployment benefits,. among other things.
Pelosi's futile interference represents the past...she's no longer relevant to the governing process. President Obama is moving forward without her.
Welcome to the new reality.
Here is my take:
Obama and the democrats are the gift that keeps on giving- to the republicans.
In the wake of the mid term rout, democrats retained Nancy Pelosi as their poster child. Republicans got 63 seats this time- should go higher next time.
Also in the wake of his self-described shellacking, Obama chooses to hand the republicans the tax increase argument to use AGAIN in 2012.
With a Gallup approval/disapproval on taxes of 38% to 52%, you think maybe Obama recognized that his policy was a loser? No? Neither do I. He would not have saved it for the future if he could understand reality.
The fact that he has now ticked off his dwindling band of supporters is just icing on the cake.
Hey, First Read- maybe you SHOULD keep hyping Kerry. He cannot win, but a good fight for the nomination will be endlessly entertaining for those of us who plan to vote for the other party.
Our President made the best deal he could out of a mess that his own Party created. Instead of dealing with the tax problem BEFORE the November elections,his Congress kicked the can down the road. The Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. Trying to blame it on President Obama is a cope out. Congress needs to get some juevos, not our President. Lay the plaim where it's due, on the wimppy Dems in Congress.
Lynchmob,
Reduce spending across the board is a nice slogan, but no one is willing to do shyt about.... at least dems are being honest about raising the taxes - it's painful but needed; repubs on the other hand are planning to do nothing about it; but chant slogans like "wasteful spending and pork"...I'm not saying that these don't occur but the bulk of the budget are things the American public will absolutely protest if repubs or dems try to eradicate; they are:
Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Defense+wars, unemployment/walfare (11%), .... these account for over 85% of the budget...
We haven't even started talking about public servants like teachers, firefighters, police etc; farm subsidies etc...
So when people say we need to cut spending et al, and don't mention anything from the about how to get there, they are being grossly disingenuous and are simply regurgitating the talking heads from the pundits or their idiotic party. Let's be honest, the dems didn't create ballooned budget; they worked hand in hand with the repubs and the American people cheered when each program is passed.
When a politician runs for office, they only tell you what you want to hear to get elected i.e. nothing will be cut, not taxes will be raised, but we will balance the budget while also lowering taxes. And don't give me the lowering taxes would boost revenue, because it doesn't per history...it's a nice theory but it doesn't work.
And BTW, OBAMA saved the economy from a catastrophic collapse cause by GW Bush's policies. The only reason why the economy hasn't rebounded is because of the greedy corporations hording their money and fighting with Obama every step of the way.
All followed by
Um, you don't seem to be united even in the slightest. Your viewpoint of hatred of everyone who doesn't like progressive ideas is widespread. This is what Obama, Pelosi, Reid and others have been causing by shutting out half of the countries representatives. You're doing it, the media is doing it, and those of us left holding the bills for these spending policies are just in shock watching people like you try and throw parades for them.
What we're witnessing here is bipartisanship. I know it's hard to recognize after 2 years of the democrats refusing to do so, but this is what the country wants, needs, and demands.
Remember, both parties had approval rating percentages in the teens. Your blind faith puts you in with that 16% who like what they are doing on the left.
What part of sentences like "now is not the time", "during a recession is a bad idea", etc are you interpreting as they want to keep taxes low forever or do nothing? Right wing talk radio, Fox News, and almost every other non liberal media source is saying the same thing. Taxes need to go up, but not when 1 in 5 people in the country are unemployed or only working part time.
They repugs win and the Middle Classs looses - again: From ThnikProgress:
Update Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) threatened to filibuster the deal:
Would that be poetic justice or what. Pull a republican trick back at them.
Obama has got to get busy spending underneath the radar to make sure the deficit DOES increase. Can't have a stoppage of a tax rate increase proven to NOT actually affect government income as "estimated".
Just like the far left of today, spend like a drunken, wealthy sailor, then announce the world is going to end because of increased liabilities, and then blame the tax code (and tax paying Americans) for not paying adequately to keep up with their spending.
Tunde Akins,
Note how I didn't bring up parties or bash one side or the other.
I am fully aware of everything you typed. I didn't feel like typing all of that. But, for giggles, I'll address your post.
Public servants should be paid for by real estate taxes at the local level. I am not talking about cutting them. There is mismanagement at the state and local level that requires the federal government to bail out the states every once in a while. This has to stop. The taxes collected at the local level should be more than enough to keep police, fire, schools, roads and clinics operating.
I was talking about the wasteful federal spending programs. They need to be reduced by, let's say, 20% across the board. I never said "eradicate" them.
I am also aware that no politician wants to reduce these programs. But, this is what needs to be done. You don't increase taxes in a recession.
"We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle." - Winston Churchill 1903
President Obama promised tax cuts for the Middle Class and we got them. What he did not promise was to give the richest 2% an additional BONUS over and above what the average American was going to get. The republicans held the tax cuts for the Middle Class hostage until they got their bonuses. That is the fact. President Obama was not dragged anywhere, the republicans literally put the proverbial gun to his head and said give us our bonuses or you do not get tax cuts for the Middle Class. This was all about GREED and not what was good for America.
I thought the tea baggers were against increasing the deficit????
The Great Uniter? The ONLY reason he is compromising is he has NO choice. As for unification? Seriously? The common denominator is everyone is scared of the direction in which this country is headed and the sorry economic state of this country. Unemployment is rising, not the other way around.
In 2006 the Democrats seized MAJORITY control of the House of Representatives and minority in Senate, then MAJORITY control of Senate in 2009. Right about the time things went to hell in a handbasket. So don't espouse your tired rhetoric. Those that know, know better.
Remember, Remember the 7th of December.
Being in the middle class...I fail to see how I lose anything out of this deal.
People get to pass on their estate with a larger exemption. Which honestly sounds good to me. Should I one day be fortunate to accumulate wealth the last thing I want to do is have my children have to pay a 50% estate tax on MY wealth, that I've already been taxed on. Double taxing sucks, estates shouldn't be taxed at all its unfair for ALL parties involved.
Jobless benefits get extended for 13 monthes, so that families who haven't found a job yet can still survive which sounds ok to me. And the Rich 2% get a small tax break..which considering they pay almost all the taxes in this country to begin with why do you care? They aren't raising YOUR taxes to compensate for the riches tax cuts.
Sounds like you just want a tax break, and your reduced health care cost and the "give me attitude" sucks. I pay about 30% of my total income in taxes/social security. Guess what I'm doing just fine, I understand thats what it takes to keep the country afloat. As far as I'm concerned there should be a flat tax to be fair to EVERYONE regardless of income.
I don't sit around and say feel sorry for me I need more tax breaks. These top 2% deserve the money they have in most cases. They shouldn't have to shell out almost 1/2 their income for anyone it's rediculous to expect the top 5% of a country to basically run the country. They pay most the taxes and assume most the responsibility considering they own the businesses you work for. It's only natural they lobby the government.
Allen I would reply with something if you commented about something. But unfortunately, I don't see anything of coherent substance in your statement that has anything to do with my comment.
And now Obama continues the very same Republican/Bush policies that you Liberals say caused the problem?
The fables of the Great and Wonderful Obama will told for centuries around the campfire by the Liberals.
Mike 1738272-
Change the narrative all you want but the truth is the truth!
The Republicans and Democrats under the spell of GWB spent like drunken sailors for 8 years. Others like you continue to dismiss the facts with BS like “Can’t blame Bush for everything.” Well excuse me, but if his dumb a$$ started two unfunded wars and gave two unfunded tax cuts and an unfunded Medicare Part D program what part of that should President Obama take sole responsibility for?
George W. Bush is on record as saying to Matt Lauer and others that "I'll be dead before they figure out what went on this office" (ha! ha! ha!). That is not funny.
The country went to hell in a handbasket before Barack Obama even took office.
Get real!
People who keep blaming the President for sh!t that was not of his making lose credibility immediately. He will make his share of mistakes but please try to be objective about the things he does right.
America was founded on the principal that there would be no royalty running the affairs of the people and state. The tax structure should preclude the formation of an oligarchy or Plutocracy.
Good Morning America
The Burden Of Proof
Now is time for the Republican/Tea Party to focus on- job creation that they abandoned due to the uncertainty they so feared. I do not see complete capitulation Yes; the ball is in Mitch McConnell and John Boehner’s court. President Obama has a mob (metaphorically speaking ) of bitterly disappointed Americans from all over ever since the trade of $700 billion in tax cuts. No Drama Obama had to compromise to help the unemployment issue. It’s unfair to put all this drama on the President’s swagger. It was obvious in the President’s tone and body language he was not pleased in the compromise; neither am I.
Happy times are not here again; the Republican/Tea Party will not change. But it will be Happy Holidays for the pimps of prosperity and a New Year; in fact 2 of them! I’m also willing to bet they are still uncertain about creating jobs.
The burden is now to stop fighting and expose the hefty benefits apparently going to the richest among us to stop
deepest sympathy for Elizabeth Edwards
don't forget Pearl Harbor
======================================================
LouisJ
Yesterday I stated that if President Obama moved to a compromise (middle), the media would make him out to be weakened. Well I was correct in that assessment as it is stated in the first paragraph.
LouisJ
No mater what move the President had taken it would have a despicable gab fest.
We elected Obama to lead. He needs to show the people who voted for him that he is a leader. A leader can compromise on tactics but never on principles. When you are compromised your principles, you are no longer a leader, you are simply a negotiator. So what if the Dems congressional leaders punted their chances when they have a majority, many of them were replaced. What I know is Obama want to be like Clinton after his mid term in '92. The different here is Obama will lose the support of his base while receive none from the other side.
The media is right on this one. He is the weakess President in my 63 years! He will roll over on everything including his healthcare bill. This guy simply has no stomach to fight. On anything!!! Boehner and McConnell will push this guy around like a bully in a school yard!
Exactly Beverly. As you said, the ball is now in their (Republicans) court. They have no choice but to learn how to compromise. If they do not, then they will have to deal with the media. Oh the irony. But don't expect me to hold my breath on that.
Chuck... the media said that? President Obama is the weakest in your 63 years? You a board member for MSNBC? SMH.
Louis your a joke, if Obama would have stood on his convictions you would have said that was the right thing to do. I think you need some new chapstick.
Well, the President sold out the middle class once again for the elite. It has been D.C. for many long years, who has paved the road for such disparity. The real American Dream is for the elite and never for the middle class, poor, or the elderly. And to pay for these tax breaks for the elite, the burden will be placed on the middle class and elderly through cut backs on SS, Medicare, VA, lowered property tax deductions (which has the strong potential to promote even more home foreclosures), higher medical expenses, higher health insurance, etc., etc., etc. All those cuts just to cover the tax breaks for the rich. What part of this Recession and afterwords will be a burden on the elite? You will find out once again that this tax cut is very bad for our economy. It becomes the most fiscally irresponsible bill this year, the moment it passes as-well-as it does not create new jobs. We were willing to forgo those few dollars on the tax break because the amount was so small and did nothing to bring down the deficit. Shame on both parties!!!
Louis, you seem to have a lot more fight in you than Obama. The guy is Weak, period! He is the weakest in my 63 years! Never have I seen any President this weak. Name one thing he has fought on and stood ground! One!!
This move by Obama is a copycat move of what Bill Clinton did to gain a second term. There are no heroics, no policy shifts, no win or loss, except for Obama and his immediate family: he expects a political windfall. What he doesnt understand is that this time, no-one cares, it is the wrong move ALL americans want responsibility in government while providing a safety net and oppourtunity...NOT more business as usual. We have a uniparty.
I agree. The progressives need to start to look at that glass as half full instead of always half empty (or come up with a shorter glass...) Obama is a realist. The poorest people would be slammed in January if the tax cuts were to expire, no more unemployment (with a dollars to doughnut of $1.61 stimulous.) Let the rich whine. We know who they are..
Let the Republicans go on record as the mean, un-American, creeps that they are. Let Boehner, and Mac gloat. They look like the proverbial cat and canary. They are the villians. President Obama is doing the right thing here. Let's stop blaming the victims and support the decisions made under duress.
I was angry about it this past week, but after listening and reading, I've concluded that it is the right thing, the only option that was left to the Pres. that was in the best interest of the people.
Let us not forget who wanted and passed all these financial criminal laws in the first place: Republicans.
I get it. According to the "majority" between Democrats and Republithugs, the president was in a No-Win Scenario... a "Kobayashi Maru" test if you will. But hey, Captain Kirk's decisions were not popular but he saved the Enterprise more times than Picard. Captain Kirk went down in history as the greatest Starfleet Captain.
President Obama deals in the No Win scenario on a weekly basis thanks to the media. People that allow the media to dictate their thoughts will see the president as how the media see the president.
I support the president based on the fact that he is pragamtic and smart. He doesn't wade into policy recklessly. Decisions are planned and thought out. I will always have his back.
The problem with the "democrats are being pragmatic" argument is that the republicans ALWAYS seem to be picking fights -- and winning -- whereas the democrats always seem to be doing the same "rage and cave" dance. I might be more sympathetic to the argument that "this is not the time to pick a fight" if someone could tell me exactly when the democrats SHOULD stand up for what they believe in.
I can understand not insisting on progressive policies when the public don't support them. But most Americans DON'T like the idea of keep tax cuts for billionaires when so many regular folks can barely put food on their children's table. If we can't insist on getting rid of a tax cut for Bill Gates to help feed hungry American children, then exactly what IS the progressive issue that we should fight for?
Louis, I am Not a Republican but I clearly understand it when they talk about Liberal Arrogance! Who are you to say that everyone on this site is getting their information from the media and YOU somehow are different! What stupidity and arrogance. And please, spare me the Captain Kirk analogy. You are very immature. Pragmatism doesn't go far when you are constantly getting your Butt kicked!
Sorry if I am angering you Chuck. No need to get personal. We can agree to disagree.
obama should switch hands now and then.
speaking of weenies, the dems are such, they're weak and divided, they have the senate, plenty of seats in the house and the prez, not to mention the media behind them, but according to the whiners on here, it's the big bad republicans who are running everything. huh?
"The president will be marked by history as the “Great Uniter”. His detractors will be known as the “Great Dividers”."
Thanks for the joke. I needed a good laugh today.
Obama is in serious contention with Jimmy Carter as the "Worst President Ever".
In trying to avoid blame for anything, he left it up to Nancy Pelosi to initiate all legislative issues, and just sat back and hoped for the best - The sure sign of a very weak leader.
With Republicans soon in charge of the legeslative initiative (legislation is supposed to begin in the House), it's going to be block, stall, block for the next 2 years.
Congratulations on that "Change you can believe in:.
when all is said and done, the american people are 1 trillion dollars deeper in debt.
seems to me, nobody won.
The toll free number for the Congressional switchboard is 888-245-0215.
Call and ask to be connected to your House or Senate representatives and share your thoughts with them.
The media is run by 80 to 90% Democrats. Accept that fact and if you blame the media, you blame Dems. I know Fox is a huge network, but it is a small percentage of the overall media voice. The Democratic led media is most of the noise, but you just won't admit it Louis. Also, I see the Dems as the do nothings. You had an overwhelming majority, and floundered like a virgin in a back seat.
Everyone in here and on other blog sites seem to understand how Government works or should work. I take it everyone was in politics at one time. If you have never been in politics all you can do is state what YOU believe in, because you know what works for you, or you simply believe anything the media of friends, in your party, tell you. First, let me explain this. It makes NO difference what party you belong to. There is NO politician on YOUR side. Why do you think politicians spend so much money to get into office? First it the salary they get, because they know their salary is given by the American citizens through taxing. Second they know they will have a great retirement after serving only one year. Third, they know the power over the people feeling the media will give them. Fourth, they know they can get away with a lot of crimes that the normal citizen can NOT get away with. What everyone should know is the Congress has set the laws that mandate this country, not the President, so bashing or praising a President has no bearing on the blog sites. It just shows the anger that people spread because they grew into thinking what their party stands for. Take this statement and watch how many people can twist it around to mean what THEY think. If you take from the rich and give the poor, you are fighting the existence of America as we know it. Why? Because the rich did not have their money handed to them by anyone but the American people themselves. If you are rich and invest your money, then the company makes money off of YOU. If you go into a grocery store and spend money, you are giving it to the big grocery companies. If you go to a Home Depot or Lowes or WalMart, or Target and spend money, you are putting it in the owners pockets. Now, understand this. Every one of those companies employ thousands of people. Now there are people that are poor in this world and who do we have to blame for that? Certainly not the wealthy. People are poor for a reason that many people do not understand. It can be their lack of education, lack of mental capacity, drugs, alcohol divorces, and also, in this time of our lives, the economy. But understand, WE are the economy. Unless we support the rich by continuing to spend our hard earned money, will this economy ever recover. If you are out of a job, think about why. Years ago, Akron, Ohio was the tire giant in the world. Today Akron is almost a ghost town because when the tire companies closed, the employees that were there years upon years and ready to retire, were let go. So if you can understand that the people voted for the people that let business from abroad come into America. Years ago the only cars sold in America were made in the USA. Then Honda, and Toyota came of and the other auto maker abroad saw what was happening so they came over also. Sure they hired people, but the money you spend for a foreign automobile goes to another country to make the CEO and employees wealthy.
So, in closing, spread all the hate or praise you want to about the President of this country, but remember, we voted for the people that is giving our country away and we have voted for them for years, only believing they would deliver the poor from bondage, when they really just put the poor deeper into a hole. Politicians could care less about poor people because they know they are not the ones paying their salary. They appease the poop by giving them food stamps, welfare low cost housing. If you despise the wealthy, I ask, what about me do you NOT like. I got a good education, worked hard, all my life, and learned how to save money, not try to live like the Joneses. If you want to live in the dark ages, just keep on complaining and doing nothing about the problems in your life. If you job, in life, is to spread hate, then most of you are good at trying, but as it has always been said, EVERY person is in charge of THEIR OWN fate. Everyone have a very Merry Christmas, or Holiday, whichever you choose to call it. I call it Christmas because of my beliefs. Have a very happy and prosperous New Year also.
no joe, no bo, nj
With a Gallup approval/disapproval on taxes of 38% to 52%, you think maybe Obama recognized that his policy was a loser? No? Neither do I. He would not have saved it for the future if he could understand reality.
OK...I'm still laughing at this.
Yeah...I'm pretty sure the President doesn't base his decisions on anything Gallup might concoct!
Seriously...you do realize....the (R)'s will have to run on these gimmes to the rich don't you?
Me...I pray that unemployment is much lower for my fellow citizens. I pray that our economy is better for my fellow citizens. If all of that is true at the next election I could care less about the gimmes. But if they're not....2012....shellacking anyone?
Obama was in a no win scenario but why. The Democrats insistence the taxes be raised for those earning $200,000 and up, $250,000 for families, made it impossible to sell. If they had chosen to raise the increase to those who earned a million or more they would have fared much better. The Democrats proposal made it relatively easy to make an argument about hurting small business when it was not even necessary to do so. This would have not been true if the opinion level were higher. The Democratic were selling it as if it would only effect millionaires then why didn't do just that?
I know that there was a proposal during this current session do just this but by now it was too late. Sometimes you have to realize what you can get. The Democrats never learned this.
Lynchmod,
I know you didn't make references to either party (and I like your well reasoned argument)..... I did mention it because I'm simply pointing out as I see it.
And you talk about not raising taxes in this economy... the only reason why I agree with that statement is not because it isn't a good idea, but simply because big business are holding jobs hostage until they get their continued tax cuts - they are saying their are uncertainties and etc etc.... it's not the truth, they are simply doing this to spite the administration.
The stock markets have historically been aligned with GDP, job growth and unemployment levels, now while the stock markets have recovered and companies are pulling in record profits once more, where are the jobs? Oh yes, companies have figured out how to make an employee work more for the same salary - afterall everyone's scared they'll lose their job to the next well qualified unemployed worker lurking around the corner... so I'm simply just trying to say that the economy is not in a reason, just the people who live in America because corporations have figured out how to make money with less employed workers - the goal of every company is to afterall be lean (and trim the fat, as they say in my industry).
Now on the subject of taxes, keeping the taxes lower for folks making under $250k makes sense because they'll most likely spend it, which drive the economy up - a fact, but keeping it lower for those making more than $250 will in all likelihood not do anything to stimulate the economy (since these folks would hoard the money) - I used the phrase "in all likelihood" to not overgeneralize.
But we've seen from the past that when taxes have been lowest, the deficits have soared the most and has not to date correlate proportionally with job growth. So why extend the Bush tax cuts.... I say lets extend all of it, not because I believe it in, but simply because I'm hoping corporations would start to higher again... just in order to alleviate our unemployment situation.
Journalists lean liberal. Corporate news executives lean right.
Louis:
Your perception of Obama being a weak flopper is well founded. No wonder you could predict that others would also see him as a weak flopper.
And now that he has betrayed you, how does that make you feel?
"Great Uniter", my foot???!!!! Give me a break. The only thing this man manages to unite is opposition. He had his chance when the Dems overwhelmingly controlled the House, the Senate and ran the White House. Obumma could have pushed ANYTHING through with that majority. But the Pelosi-led Dems decided to spend over a year getting Obamacare through and squandered any opportunities for repealing the tax-cuts, passing START, getting through meaningful legislation on immigration.
"Great Liar" might be a better description if you balance his campaign promises of lower health care costs, unemployment at or below 8%, closing Gitmo, etc, against accomplishments and defeats.
What the liberals are finally learning is that have a president that has no experience and little backbone. Everyone rejoiced at the gentleman who's only true qualifications was that he made a speech at the State Senate level arguing about the entrance into Iraq. Being able to sit down and hold hands only goes so far.
For as much as I hate Mrs Clinton there is not a doubt in my mind that far more would have been done under her. Even if nothing more was accomplished she would have made certain that all the country would know who cause it. Hillary Clinton would have made it known who was in charge of the argument. Yes I know that the House and Senate pass the laws but it also requires the President to be involved and Obama does not seem to be able to do that.
I wish to thank the Democrats who voted for Obama in the primaries you certainly made my job easier.
Hillary in 2012!
Love the Dem spin. No matter what "he" did the right thing. LOL...Wise up, the "progressive" agenda in the this country is a minority agenda. This has been proven, again, today. The mistake was electing an incapable, inexperienced meglomaniac to be president because he talked pretty. Well, it seems the country will not be fooled twice.
Oh, and great uniter? Gimme as break...anyone seen my race card?
And...someone down there wrote a beautiful post of thanks to our military. I wholeheartedly echo the sentiment. God bless.
@ Lynchmob, well said. This is the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives. Liberals, for some asinine reason, think our tax dollars belong to the Government and that tax cuts need to be "paid for". When actually the the tax dollars belong to us, the people, as we're the ones that worked for them and the government needs to figure out how they are going to pay for their spending/entitlement programs.
Tunde Akins
Dems are not all honest about raising taxes, they won't let the tax cuts expire on the middle class, or 98% of all Americans. Just sayin.
But you are right. We have to raise taxes across the board, everybodys. And cut services. One tax we can raise?
Significant Tariffs on Chinese goods.
ModerateMiddleAgedMan you clearly have not been paying attention. Yes, the democrats controlled the White House and both houses of congress for two years but the republicans have filibustered just about EVERYTHING the democrats have tried to do. Why? Because they knew that there were a lot of Americans out there that won't pay close enough attention to realize what is happening. That's not partisan conjecture on my part -- a number of key republicans came right out and SAID they were going to just block everything.
Their strategy worked because of voters like you that don't pay attention. The really sad thing for America is that this strategy has worked so well for republicans that democrats are bound to copy it in the future when the republicans are in power. By deliberately constipating our legislative branch, the republicans have achieved short-term political gains at the cost of dragging our nation's politics even deeper into the mud. In the end, it will be the American people that really end up losing.
I keep hearing the term "fight". In order for someone to fight, they have to acknowledge they are in an arena with an opponent. Maybe the American people are against "compromise" which is the opposite of "hostility" which mean they are all about "division".
If we are truly divided, not being united, then we will truly fall. Maybe President Obama is the only person that sees that. Republithugs will undoubtedly continue to posture on the "Do Nothing" platform. I'm glad there is a principled Principal watching over all the children running around the playground called Capitol Hill. When all the mudslinging has subsided and the smoke has cleared, the economy will be restored thus lowered unemployment and a reduced deficit.
8 years of Republithug sabotage cannot be solved in 8 years. President Clinton (II) will still be dealing with it, at least she will in a better situation thanks to President Obama. By then, maybe Sarah will be able to recognize the difference between a country and a continent which will increase her chance by .0001%. SMDH.
The House is responsible for all budgeting. Can't wait to see the balanced budget that House Republicans produce in January.
Mgin
Actually, The Republicans copied the filibuster strategy from the Democrats. The Dems have held congress for 4 years, not 2. And in all fairness the Dems probably copied from the Reps, and Reps from Dems etc.
I take slight offense at people that complain that because my party didn't have 60+ seats, we couldn't get anything done. When has Congress ever had 60+ seats? This issue is that they didn't get anything done. The Dems didn't put forth anything the Reps would sign. The Reps didn't do anything either. The Dems thought they had a "mandate" during Obama's election and ram rodded through unpopular legislation, be damned the people.
I'm not saying that had they worked together from the start, things would have been different. But they could have tried. It is the Reps time to push through legislation now. I'm sure I'll be on the Rep bashing bandwagon starting Jan 5th or so when they actually take office.
Since President Obama has proven time and again that he has No Will to fight or stand up for any of his principles, I would now demand that he dismantle the healthcare biil, eliminate social security, eliminate OSHA and give millionaires another tax break on top of the one they got!! Why Not, this guy will crumble!
I wish someone would tell my aging mother that it is not wise to pick a fight at Christmas time!
Louis J,
Obama the "Great Uniter"? That's laughable! He has divided this country more than anyone else in the history of the country. He has no desire to unite with anyone who disagrees with him, however, being the shrewd scheming politician that he is, he understands that he cannot ignore and alienate the Republicans and most of the country anymore. He is only working with the Republicans because he has to.
His detractors will be known as heroes!
You only want to be united with the rest of us if it means the socialist agenda is moved forward.
The Republicans should have only agreed to extending unemployment is it was offset with equal true spending cuts.
Where were you when the "media" was ripping Bush, Cheney AND their families to shreds?
Obama is not qualified to run the corner candy store,much less the U.S.Govt.,if BS were energy Obama would be a nuclear bomb.
You guys are taking this way too personal. Instead of not understanding and respecting the commenter, you instead collapse because you have nothing of substance to say. I am more than willing to converse instead of participate in petty personal attacks.
Are you truly sitting at home or work squirming in your chair from a comment I made? You truly are paranoid. But hey, to me it's priceless. It's always good to have a chuckle. SMH.
To A Concerned Middle Class Citizen:
How sad and misinformed you are from listening to all the mantra sound -bytes. The 2% rich do not pay the majority of taxes to IRS, etc. after using their many tax deductions. It is your larger group (middle class) that has paid more taxes as a group for many years, nor do they have the many tax exemptions loopholes so freely giving to the elite to hide from paying their taxes. Are you so naive not to know that there are many people out there, who do not and never did collect U.E. (such as: contract workers. every single part-time worker, etc., etc., etc.). And you call yourself a middle class citizen? Your 30% tax bracket pushes you well over a $150K. So it's no wonder you can survive just fine. And to think we served 25 plus years to include the war zone (along with the entire family forced out of work) just to preserve your right to say, "Our Middle Class Attitudes Suck and to Live With It". How selfish and self-righteous some persons can be to say that others are not entitled to their opinions?
Read your comments - don't really understand why it was "collapsed". I have to agree with you - in fact last night I told my husband that cnbc would be bringing on corporate leaders who would now rail against the proposed increase in the deficit. I strongly believe that no matter what the President does the media will attack it. Consider this - should the president have dug his heels in and watched middle class Americans continue to bear the brunt of this fledging economy? Should he have allowed unemployment benefits expire for the most needy just to prove a point? I think not. I urge every middle class Americans to look closely at this compromise and I strongly urge every middle class American who jumped on the tea party bandwagon to look closely at who funded those so called "conservative" campaigns. You all need to remember it was these guys who demanded tax cuts for the wealthiest people - many of whom stood up and said they should have been allowed to expire. However, corporate America who funneled millions into republican campaigns have now demanded their pound of flesh. My mother always said: Be careful what you wish for. I would change that to "be careful what you voted for". You all have chosen to give these guys back the keys to the kingdom. Now you can all enjoy their choices.
The Republican Party has dealt another blow to the Middle Class yesterday in their hostage takeover of the Tax Cuts Bill. Denying Tax Cuts to the Middle Class unless they got a big BONUS for the richest 2% we now have totally put the deficit into record territory (again) by the very same Party that has been screaming financial responsibility. The economic divide will reach new records where more wealth will be concentrated in the top 5% of the population. Job creation will suffer with the possible loss of 500,000 jobs that could have been created by President Obama’s plan and 60 Billion in lost revenues. The economy will still be slow. The only winners of this despicable deal are the richest 2% who again will get over 50% of the benefits and huge savings on the Estate Taxes as well. Below is an excerpt that shows what a failure these tax cuts were the first time around and now we are going to have to deal with them again for at least another two years. Thank you Repugs.
Read the complete article on: http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/002028.htm
Good Morning Navy:
Excellent post; Spot-on. On this 69th annivesary of Pearl Harbor I would like to thank you and all our brave service men and women for their efforts to keep this country safe. I have to believe that sailors and soldiers are not fighting for conservatives or liberals, but for all Americans.
Ron:
Thank you. Our military folks have always put this great nation ahead of their own personal well being and I am proud of every one of them. For them it is all about America not republicans, democrats, independents etc. They continue to fight for our freedoms and liberties so we can sit here and write on this board what we want. We shall never forget them, and to honor and to support them wherever and whenever we can.
Well done, US Navy. Hard to believe Pence would actually admit it. Add to him David Stockton (Stockman?), Reagan's guy, who now says that the tax cut mentality has been disastrous for America. Long time coming but this was clear after Reagan left office, he left Bush 41 with a mess that it took Clinton to clean up; then we got Bush 43 who was Reagan on steroids. It has puzzled me why the modern day conservatives keep going down the road to disaster. You can't have good government if you detest government; to have good government, you must recognize that government does and must play a role toward having a strong country.
OBAMA JUST ENDORSED AND EXTENDED THE BUSH TAX CUTS!
Why would Obama endorse the 10 epic failures?
You guys have blamed everything, the economy everything on the BUSH TAX Cuts and Obama has endorsed them.
So is Obama pathetically weak in not being able to stop the greatest failure since the Great Depression, or was it just politics all along?
If you listened to his speech, he did not endorse the tax cuts for the richest 2%. Quite the opposite. You sir are a liar.
Obama had 18 months with zero Republican votes needed to make a decision on the tax cuts. If he intended to end them and take all the credit/blame on the left, he would have. He was either too lazy, too busy ramming other stuff through, unconcerned with the middle class tax situation, or planning on spreading the blame for what his unpopular idea was after the November elections.
Every time you point your finger at someone else, 3 more are pointing back at you (try if if you dont' know what I mean).
Obama's endorsement comes when he takes his pen to sign the legislation. Obama will probably be on vacation in Hawaii when that happens. Should we expect him to sign it while on the beach, with hula dancers in the background?
JS1;
If you hate this country so much why don't you move out. Take Curly and Larry with you.
Wouldn't help, a person can get to the internet from anywhere these days.
OBAMA JUST ENDORSED THE EXTENSION OF THE BUSH TAX CUTS!
Why would Obama endorse THE EXTENSION of the 10 epic failures?
Tomato / Tomaato - Feel better?
So US Navy Dude, is Obama pathetically weak in not being able to stop the greatest failure since the Great Depression, or was it just politics all along?
The thing the you guys fail to understand, is that the whole 2 years you guys have been gnashing teeth about the Bush tax cuts, how it caused the collapse, the greedy rich on and on....if Obama would have addressed the issue anytime before Nov. 2, 2010 - he could have had what he wanted.
If he would have done it first thing before HCR and everything else, he could have had something tough on the rich - we would have had a little more certainty and maybe the situation wouldn't be so desperate.
Obama was great at campaigning. He is a lousy President (even a lousy Democrat President).
This is just the latest example.
Sorry Allen, I missed your comments before posting my reply.
You are one smart guy.
Last week it was "Obama better get some cajones and stand up against the Republicans", now it is "poor Obama, they held a gun to his head and he had no choice". Nice spin losers.

Because we live in a representative democracy. Why do Conservatives have trouble accepting that you don't get everything you want in a legislature?
Actually Allen, the minority always has control of the Senate unless the majority has a hard fast 61 (or 67 for treaties) majority that doesn't waver on any issue. ONE Senator can block a bill from even reaching the floor for debate, let alone a vote. That is what the Party of NO has done for the past 22 months. The Dems did NOT have a supermajority in the 111th Congress. They only had 57-58 + the two independents who didn't always vote with them, along with all of the Blue Dogs who often sided with the Party of No. So where was their supermajority. Over four hundred House bills are languishing in the Senate today, some from early 2009.
It is time to clean up the national electoral mess. Join the Popular Amendment movement to petition for the Constitutional Amendments Election/Campaign Finance Reform and Term Limits. Go to www.faircampaignreform.us to download the petitions and circulate them.
US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired
The economic ignorance of some people is amazing. To think that raising taxes will not result in slower economic growth is to defy economic logic. Any first year economics student will tell you that.
The reality is that the economy (GDP) grew by almost 40% during Bush's time in office, most of it AFTER the tax cuts in 2001 & 2003. Interestingly, government revenues grew even faster, despite the Bush tax rate cuts, and average employment increased by over 8 million net new jobs from 2000 thru 2008.
Obama's performance to date leaves a lot to be desired, but he still has 2 more years. I suspect he will try to move to the center to salvage his record, but it may be too little, too late.
I hope Hillary challenges him for the nomination in 2012, because she would make a great President - much better than Obama or McCain.
And any Graduate student in economics will tell you that the freshman doesn't know what he's talking about.
Navy,
I disagree with you and your anti-estate stance. I shouldn't have to liquidate my business to pay the tax in inheritance. Especially considering that I am in the uppper 2%, being a small business owner. After I die the gov't wants another 45% (Obama's plan). The company cannot afford to pass it on from generation to generation.
there has to be a better way.
If I read the voting score card correctly, a number of Dems also voted with the Republicans on this - so shouldn't this be a bipartisan not a partisan approval vote?
Navy, did I happen to miss the announcement of the Obama jobs plan? Can you expand? Our government doesn't have lost revenues - it appears that whenever they require money they just print it!
This discussion on taxes is a joke. If the 435 members of Congress wanted to actually solve this, it would be solved. This is nothing more than a continuation of the same old party hacks being the same old party hacks.
First off, what's this nonsense about Obama "not picking a fight before Christmas." He hasn't picked one, single fight PERIOD, let alone near Christmastime. You have to FIGHT if you want to be accused of avoiding a fight at a particular time, and since he has never fought once, this title of this article is misleading.
In addition,
that is 100% not true. I wish people would learn this and stop spouting the nonsense. The Dems NEVER ONCE had 60 votes in the senate, so they ALWAYS needed at least one republican vote to do anything (and/or a vote for Lieberman, but that's a Republican vote, so I repeat myself).
The Dems factually never had a filibuster proof majority, stop repeating that they did.
And yet they passed the healthcare bill without a single republican vote. So much for your point.
What we really need is tax reform. Get rid of tax loopholes and deductions and we would have the revenues to pay our bills. At an even lower tax rate, about 1/2 of what it is now.
Taken at the lowest rates on average, using 2009 taxpayer numbers.
if we taxed everyone at 17%--we would bring in $1.076 trillion dollars in income taxes, $15 billion dollars more than the estimated amount of $1.061 trillion for the 2010 budget. That is figuring all taxes at the lowest amount by percentage of payer.
So the bottom 50% of the taxpayers would pay $1420 a year in income taxes-that is based on their income being $8250. While the top 1% would pay $63,402 each based on the lowest income value of $372,951. But we know that more money would be brought in, because more of the top1% makes more income than $400K.
So maybe some tax reform is what we should be working on, that alone would add revenue to the budget.
The service provided with this site is extremely poor at its best!! Posted messages are completely lost without an explanation, etc., etc. It does not allow for reviewing your message, since it goes straight back to the top of the article at the time of posting and your message no longer appears on the same page much less anywhere else.
I totally agree. This type of death tax is terrible. Now, if Obama wants to transfer the income tax to a wealth tax, i'll listen... but simply adding a tax on wealth when you die? Deplorable. Leaving a solid estate behind for your family is a very common dream! This type of tax is simply disgusting.
My point remains. The Dems NEVER had a filibuster proof senate, it's just factually incorrect to say so.
In addition, why do you think the Healthcare bill was so watered down (aside from Obama being the bestest of corporate buddies in the world)?? Because they had to use legislative trickeration (i.e. reconciliation) to get it past the filibuster and then vote with 51 votes.
The Republicans would not have called off the filibuster had the bill contained anything even close to a public option... (not that Obama actually wanted a public option despite saying so, again, back to that bestest corporate buddies in the world thingy...)
To begin, let's remember that Obama is the first "black" president, and there is still a lot of racism in our country (and always will be). That means Obama can never be "uppity" or an "angry black man." His professorial no drama demeanor is the only reason he was able to make history. That means the fight must be fought by others in the Democrat Party.
Also, keep in mind the time from now until 2012. There are a lot of things that could be further negotiated or implemented (write-offs, caps, etc.). Then in 2012, if the economy still sucks (and most economists are predicting it will), Obama and the Dems can say "We told you so," tax cuts for the wealthy will not create jobs or stimulate the economy.
The Republicans have been using populist soundbites and sabotage as a road back to the White House. Now they will no longer be able to play the minority victim role. Now they will no longer be able to whine about deficits being the Dems fault. Now they will have to take responsibility to propose real solutions, and if attempting to do so, they will fail. Entitlement programs can't be reduced in a popular way, and shouldn't be except improving efficiency.
Since the deficits were caused by the wars, tax cuts, and bail-outs, the only way to reduce the deficits is to end the wars, require more from the rich, and collect re-payment plus interest from banks and other companies that were bailed out. I believe the Republicans are setting themselves up to lose in 2012 (not that they'll have a candidate worth chicken crap anyway).
Actually EVERY recent President had approval ratings lower than GWB had in the early days after 9/11. If you want the rest of the story look here; http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx
Use the "Compare Presidents" tab and add up to 3 other Presidents to the trace.
Oh look, Barack Obama's approval rating is STILL better than Reagan or Clinton at this stage of their presidencies!
Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman are Independents. You can't arbitrarily count them into a super-majority.
right on the mark
Love the way the upper income folks are accused of getting a "BONUS" tax cut. Unless I missed something, their tax rates got extended like everyone else's. No bonus, no extra, nothing special for anyone.
Unless of course you die while you're rich. If you do that then whoever inherits your money has to pay taxes on money that has already been taxed.
And, lest we forget, Obama and the Dems have already rolled in a new tax on everyone - yes, everyone includes the middle class that they swore would not be impacted. You remember that little thing called Obamacare. First it wasn't a tax. Then in court.... oooopppppsss... we misspoke... that is a tax and we have a right to implement it.
Want an easy way to balance the $700B that is going to be "lost" because tax rates didn't go up on the wealthy? Get rid of Obamacare. That will save the $700B and put another $300B in the bank. I must be a genius to think of that one... and to think, I'm not a Liberal or a Politician... hell, I'm not even an accountant but I can read the cost of something and compare it to the expected income somewhere else and make rational decisions.
Sorry that Obama and the liberals don't like treating the classes equally, but they had the ability to treat them unequally for the last two years. Realistically, four years since Pelosi and Reid took over in '06 (you know, about the time the economy started to tank). On election day 2010 they got called to the carpet by the American people because they were driving the car towards a cliff. The American people intervened and turned the wheel to the right. Guess we're a lot smarter than Obama thought we were.
First of all, thank you for your military service. Second, please tell me when an American citizen has paid his or her fair share. If A person works his entire life to accumulate wealth, you believe that the Government is ENTITLED to 55% estate tax upon his or her death (keep in mind that these people paid tax on the income that was responsible for generating the wealth). You talk about fairness, how is it fair to DEMAND higher taxes from the successfull when the IRS statistics already show that the top 1% account for 40% of the total revenue to the IRS and the top 5% income earners account for 85% of the total IRS revenue, but you want and demand more. I suggest you get a book on finance and read about a subject called CAPITAL FORMATION, then you will begin to understand the problems with this Robin Hood tactic. Please explain to readers that own businesses how to pass it to their children when you demand a 55% tax on the estate...........
Sparky,
I'm a conservative thinker for the most part, and would align myself with the tea party. I go to this site to challenge my own political views and to keep myself politically active.
I have a question for you.
The idea of taxation on wealth rather than income was brought up to me recently. Furthermore, it was a flat tax on wealth. What do you think of this as a replacement? How favorably/unfavorably do you compare it to a flat tax based on income?
I personally, don't see anything necessarily wrong with the idea. It would probably promote the upper class that has settled down to be more economically active, which would be a good thing for the economy. Also, by basing it on wealth, wouldn't the tax revenues be a bit less polaric? Easier to budget?
Just wondering what you thought.
K Chad Roberts,
I would think that taxing wealth would be a bad idea. That means that you would have to keep up with everything that has value. Such as home, cars, boats, etc...
I have presented an easier fix, just get rid of loopholes and deductions and tax everyone at the same rate. (above post) and we could cut our tax percentage in half.
But the value of my home each changes now, so depending upon some government official, my wealth is going to change, and might I add, the value will always go up, never down, unless you put up a huge fight.
Good point, didn't think about that. Actually, now that you mention it, I had an experience that outlines the issue.
I bought a Honda Odyssey 1997 for 2k from a private seller. When I went in to pay taxes on it, they wanted to charge taxes on the value of the car, which ended up being 4.5k in their eyes. I fought against it, and ended up paying the taxes only on what I paid ONLY because I found an official site selling a similar car at the same price. The seller could have gifted it to me, and I would have avoided the issue all together, but I wanted to pay my due to Uncle Sam... and nearly got screwed over in the process. (Note: these were state tax laws I was dealing with, not federal)
I guess the whole problem with taxing on wealth isn't the idea of it... it's the practice of doing it. Too complicated to keep track of. Thanks for your thoughts!
Amen to everyone who states, close the loopholes. Make taxation easy to understand. As a small business owner who falls in the upper 2% (not my take home pay, but business profit left in + take home pay), I don't understand how the wealthy pay less than thier fair share. Mine is a flat 33% + 8 from the state. If the answer is loopholes, close them.
And it gets rid of the IRS loophole auditing portion too!
I am a 5th generation farmer on the AL/TN state line. In 1999 I converted one farm from grains to turfgrass production. The whole idea that the estate tax kills small businesses is a joke. In 2000, when the GOP was first pitching a pity party for the poor "punished successes" of the estate tax, the American Farmers Federation did a study to see what impact the estate tax had on family owned farms. Maybe you all remember the TV commercial that the GOP ran, showing the poor old farmers being put out by the government who were taxing "Dad" for dying. The Farmers Federation could not find ONE SINGLE family farm that had ever been lost over the estate tax. Not a single one. And I bet no one here can show me a single "small business" that did either.
But its a lot easier to win fights with an army of strawmen on your side I guess.
I'd add that since less than 2% of small business owners fall into top 2% of earners, every single one of them must post on Newsvine all day while their money piles up. Either that or a lot of people lie about being small business owners. Guess which one I think it is?
So, JCJ78
Clearly you have no problem exempting these businesses? Since they only comprise of 2% of the population? If you agree, you side with me.
KChad, BB hit it on the mark. Too much discrepancy and chance for politicians to play on the wealth issue.
I'd be good with a flat tax on income. We have it in the state I live in. There are a few deductions you can make, but it's nothing like the federal system.
What I'd be more in favor of is getting rid of income tax completely. Install a basic sales tax of a couple of percentage points that no one can avoid. Effectively I get taxed for being a consumer and consuming goods. The rate does not have to be that high to cover everyting that is coming in now.
I'm not in favor of a VAT. That from what I've seen and read is a bunch of crap and it tends to drive the price of goods into the statosphere and beyond.
wrong. look it up lt.dangle
They never had more than 58 (and that was only for a few months) and 60 required Sanders and Lieberman. They were not getting a vote from Lieberman (especially w/ hcr).
sorry, but as you said, you can't rewrite history.
Now the Republican Tea Party says that no one should be allowed to vote unless they own property. How's that for an arrogant attitude now that they may get their B.T.C.E. for the upper 2 %.
xxxxx
nobody mentions that the richest of the richest don't even pay regular income tax, they pay cap gains taxes on their already huge troves. and the republicans want to eliminate the cap gains tax entirely.
To Sheila, MD:
That very "small amount of money from the Tax Extension" will not not put food on the table for very long, pay the utility bills, pay the rent or mortgage, pay for prescriptions, put gas in the car, provide lunch money for school, etc. Just how far do you expect those people to stretch that returned dime? Of course the wealthy get more money back, but they'd never notice or miss it if they didn't (It's just the PRINCIPLE of their greedy traits). The people just want to have a good paying job to match their experience and EDUCATION. But where are the jobs, which the elite prefer not to spend for hiring, but had no problem throwing billions at the politicians during this recent and most disgusting campaign that went on for 1 & 1/2 years. The workers don't want charity or money from the elite, but they sure would like to see a more balanced distribution for bringing the deficit down. Now with the tax cuts continuing for another two years, there will have to be serious cuts elsewhere. And we all know where those cuts lie, which in the end have a far more serious consequences on the lower income families. Those cuts I'm referring to, are the social programs, which the Republicans call "Socialist". Also, you forgot that there are many part-time workers, contractors, etc., who do not ever qualify for U.E. , or any other benefits to include health care. We'd be better off using that several trillion to pay down the deficit instead of adding to it. So I say to you Ms. MD until you have walked even one day in the shoes of lower income people, I suggest that you might not be so quick to look down at others with name calling. And why did the Pres. and Democrats postpone this tax problem until after the election?? Would it be because they didn't want to have any negative influence on the election taking away even more votes from them, esp. form the Independents??? It's politics as usual even if you don't understand that simple concept. "There are none so blind as those who won't see!!"
You left out the single most important thing of all: CUT SPENDING. Tax cuts shouldn't ever add to the deficit, because those cuts in taxes should be balanced by cuts in spending. The democrats just refuse to do it. Cut backs run counter to their goal of growing a massive, all-powerful, big-brother totalitarian government.
Tax cuts generate economic growth and increases revenue to the government. Reagan knew it, JFK knew it.
We've passed the point of diminishing returns on tax cuts creating increased revenue.
It wasn't the tax cuts by Reagan which added to revenues it was the wholesale deregulation of industry. The false prosperity gave the appearance of cause and effect. Fraud and bank robbery are very profitable until you are caught.
cdahl-
Does your master put good food in your bowl, doggie? Does he scratch your little ears, and tell you what a good boy you are?
I do not agree with your caninie assessment that somehow just because the number of small business owners who are also sociopaths is low, that means they should be exempted from paying their share of taxes. Nice try, pooch.
Dec
2009
10:20am, EST
Senate passes health-care bill
From NBC's Mark Murray
In a historic vote after 7:00 am ET, the United States passed its health-care bill by a party-line 60-39 vote. The measure required a simple majority to pass.
Everybody needs to step back a little bit and remember last December. The Right thing didn’t come easy then either.
Economic Growth and Tax Reconciliation Act of 2001
Notice the Reconciliation part. This bill was passed by using the Reconciliation process. The deciding vote was cast by Vice President Dick Cheney because by using the reconciliation process in the Senate they did not require a 60 member vote but just a simple majority or in other words 50 with Cheney casting the tie breaker.
Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation act of 2003
Again notice the Reconciliation part. Here again V.P. Cheney cast the tie breaker vote for the simple majority required.
The only reason that these bills were allowed to be passed by this process according to the Byrd Rule on reconciliation is there was a provision within them for review if they were found to be contributing to the Deficit. That option was never exercised even when it became clear that the Deficit was exploding and these Tax cuts rather than balancing a Surplus were contributing to that very deficit.
On Saturday the Senate rejected both Bills from the House dealing with these Tax Cuts. The Stage is now set for the House to send either one of them back to the Senate with Instructions to deal with them thru the Reconciliation Process.
Either one of the House bills would be a legitimate process under the Byrd Rule because they deal with Deficit reduction. You could even add a year’s extension of Unemployment Benefits to them and they would still be a Deficit reducing policy. The only caveat that we need to keep in mind is that they would have to have Sunset provisions just like the original bills. Personally I think that Tax policy needs to Sunset every five years anyway so that we have a chance to review where these policies are taking us.
President Obama has negotiated a deal with the Opposition. While I think that he feels that this is the best he can do in his desire to move the nation forward it’s a bad deal for most of the country. It is time for the Legislators whose responsibility this is to deal with it to step forward and do what they are getting paid for. They need to quit hiding behind the President’s skirts like little children and stand up with the courage of their convictions if they have any. It’s also time for all the folks that supported and voted for the President to stand up and quit carping about what is and is not getting done. Some of you have brought us to the point where you think a bad deal is the only thing we’re going to get because you don’t want to pay the price. And rest assured there will be a steep price to pay for this. We have reached a point in our national debate where the Devil is going to get His pound of Flesh if He doesn’t get his way.
What’s it going to cost? I would imagine that DADT repeal wouldn’t happen. Can the Gay/Lesbian community live with putting this off in pursuit of the larger good and not withdraw their support?
I would imagine that the Dream act or any other Immigration Reform would be dispensed with. Can the folks (mainly Hispanic) live with that without withdrawing their support?
Can the Long term unemployed that’s being held hostage hold out till Christmas Eve? I know it’s a tough deal but when you’re dealing with the Devil you know that’s what it going to take. That’s what it took last year. The only help I can give you’ll there is to commit doubly to helping out just as many of you as I can. I would hope that most of us would join in that pledge. We need to step up and do what our Legislators won’t.
That’s the deal Folks. Just like Charlie Daniels’ Johnny before you step up and make a deal with the Devil for your Soul you better make sure you’re a pretty d@mn good Fiddle player. Otherwise you’re going to be subject to a heat wave in the near Future.
IR: No one on FR can tell a story like you. Well said!
My prayers and sympathies go out to the family and friends of Elizabeth Edwards. She was a class act unlike her Husband and deserved better. Sometimes life just doesn’t seem fair does it?
IR:
What Ron said.
What Ron said from me, too.
EXCELLENT posts, IR- BOTH of 'em!
I wish more people actually thought about things like this...IR you are one in a million (figuratively speaking that is...I hope). Nice to finally see some progressive thinking rather than all this name calling and finger pointing that I constantly read. We need to work together to move forward. Stop the bickering and finger pointing that keeps us from getting anywhere while everything else around us slowly moves away before our very eyes.
Thank you all for the kind words.
NDIndependent am I right in assuming that that is North Dakota Independent. Please correct me if I’m wrong but that is such a beautiful part of the world I’m glad to hear from someone up there. Cold a s a well digger’s bottom about this time of year I’ll bet. Any way thanks for the kind words and I hope you get a chance to stop by and have a conversation often.
Plain & simple…Chris Christie is a thug who seems to get off on throwing his ample weight around!
It’s alleged that he a rising star within the GENOPEE? Mr. Christie certainly fits the description of a tea bagger… down to the tee!
Right up there with handcuffing reporters and literally putting a boot on the neck of dissenters…
The funniest thing is how NJNB holds this clown up as some kind of HERO!
Reminds me more of a extremely overweight ZERO!!!
He is a rising star because he asks simple questions. For example, why should the superintendent of a school district be paid more than the governor of the state? Should a federal government employee be paid more than the President? I think the answer is no in both cases. However, in NJ, some superintendents are paid more than the governor and so a cap was introduced. They tried to get round the cap by renegotiating the contract early and that is what the argument you report on was about.
However, it is good to see you take notice of Chris Christie because he is a rising star.
And that is exactly why the Left is attacking Christie. You can see the fear in the Liberals eyes are they make take these weak and pathetic swings at the man.
Hardly fear from liberals, more like incredulous that the right thinks Christie is some kind of hero. Yes, he asks the questions, yes he's made some tough choices but he is also an egotistical bully who threatens rather than negotiates. If we want educated Governors, we darn well better have highly capable superintendents and teachers or we are doomed; if we are unwilling to pay these people wages that are competitive with big business, we will have mediocre future Americans as the result of mediocre teachers and administrators. China ranks 1st in Math and Reading, the US ranks in the middle.
The only problem is Alan, he has demonstrated over & over again he will not tolerate anyone answering them... not even NJ's teacher of the year!
Of course... in the eyes of the low information voter... anyone who disdains education... automatically is a rising star!
Best to keep the masses stuck on stupid and having them continue to vote against their own best interests aka the Republican party! lol
PS: JoAnna - what part of alleged don't you comprehend?
Feisty. I checked out Roselle, Ill online. Does your white guilt and self-hatred stem from the fact that there are almost ZERO Black people living in your town? Why won't you people let any Black people live there? Are you the type of liberal that goes on and on about how evil whitey is and how wonderful all black people are, but then you refuse to live near them? I bet you clutch your purse and cross to the other side of the dtreet when the odd Black male comes down the sidewalk, don't you? You probably didn't let your children go to school with them either, did you? But you constantly make anti-white statements just to impress the few black folk on this board. How pathetic you are.
Here's a funny thing, Alan. In the free market, if people value the superintendent more than the governor and want to pay the superintendent more, why should the government step in? School superintendents are paid by local school boards.....unless you think that the state should regulate schools and pay schedules. The governor is paid for by the people of the state, and the Superintendent by people of the school district. Is a free-market Republican now saying that government should decide the pay schedule for local schools?
Hero? No. Not Christie. Besides hero-worship is a part of the Democrats Method of Operation. Christie is just one person that backs up his talk with actions.
FRH - I'm guessing that right about now, you would love for the Community Organizer to demonstrate some the same characteristics as Christy, I/O the push over he appears to be.
Feisty, thanks for bringing that incident to public notice, it's really no surprise. Conservatves politics is all about bullying. Conservative talk show hosts exhibit exactly the same behavior as you've just described. GW Bush was a bully, "the decider." Dick Cheney saying "FU" to a senator who dared try to engage in conversation on the floor of Congress. Mountains of anonymous money used to buy elections and no one should care because the Conservative SCOTUS overturned 100 years of law to make it legal.
If they want to take part in the state pension and health systems then yes. The state also supports the local school districts using revenues from the state income and sales tax.
What he has shown is the symbiotic and perhaps corrupt relationship between the elected school boards and the teachers unions. The fact they use unions dues, which is basically taxpayers money, to elect the same officials that they negotiate with seems to me a huge conflict of interest.
But that is not the issue here. Teachers had very good salaries and benefits. NJ suffered as part of the recession. The revenues to pay these benefits and salaries dropped, but the teachers union refused to give up anything. It then came out that teachers paid nothing for their health benefits. To workers in the private sector this was a shock, including union workers such as the iron workers union. By shining a light on how the public sector was benefiting, and what the private was having to pay to maintain their upkeep Chris Christie managed to extract concessions that benefit all the people of NJ in time of financial hardship.
You claim that this is the free market, well the free market rate for teachers just went down as the supply of money is no longer as large as it used to be because the number of taxpayers in NJ no longer have jobs. If teachers really wanted to take part in the free market then introduce a educational voucher and the "best" schools will survive and be able to pay the best teachers, and the failures will close and their teachers will have to find a new career. I am so glad you are for introducing free market competition into the public school system.
Very low blow. Obama and this administration are doing more to divide this nation every day. Just look at the hatred and intolerance you're spewing.
I'm sure slave owners and racists use the same words you do to explain why they hate other groups of people or think they're better/smarter than another race.
Yes, Liberals tend to be remarkably intolerant of bullies.
It's a curse.
Spin baby spin. It is the republican/tea party that is dividing this country. People like FOX News, Rush, Glenn Beck, Hannity and a bevy of others that on a daily basis spew lies, racial comments, bibigotry and hate. Get the facts straight.
In my opinion the republican party is becoming the party of thugs and bullies. Just look at the record of obstructionism and holding bills hostage for their own political agenda. This use to not be the case with republicans. They used to work together to get things done. No more.
It is the rebublicans that are trying to create a "Great Society" based on class. They opposse DADT repeal, want only porperty owners to have the right to vote, etc, etc, etc.
JoAnnaSmith1
And that is exactly why the Left is attacking Christie. You can see the fear in the Liberals eyes are they make take these weak and pathetic swings at the man.
The reason why the left is attacking christie is because he is a lying SOB, and owes the government 270 million that he is now suing the government in order to not pay it back, if this guy is a rising star, i would love to see how he argues in court why he should not have to pay back funds, he knew the Government would want back if he canceled the tunnel project.
i guess the rules for the tea party are different than when it one of their own, and No Jo Ignores my comments about this Goof, she knows this goof is wrong, and for all her smarts and degrees, i guess they did not teach her how to admitt a wrong, had this been Governer Quinn of Illinois, she would post every day about how he is cheating the government.
The deal yesterday, was a bad deal for everybody, with out going in to detail, it looks like the democrats got additional payroll tax reductions, the republicans got tax cuts for the rich extended for 2 years. the democrats wanted more unemployment extentions, the republicans wanted the estate tax to stay the same under the bush tax cuts.
every body got what they wanted except US, the deficts are going up by a trillion, but this time when we ask who is at faullt it will be both parties and they are now on egual footing if this blows up in our faces.
As a liberal I'm not happy but I'm not unset. you can't get everything you want when making a deal, deal. Some say the president looks weak, but he would look weaker if he hold out for everything like Peloic would have, (has anybody noticed how easy this was with out her involved,) No, the president is looking foward, to the next congress.
I believe it or Not, this is a good thing, i have hope for the next 2 years, Finnally getting compromise and a deal, deal done, As Much as every Bi*ch and cryed about this, it took 2 days of talk to get a deal. I have Hope.
US Navy - Maybe those who own property should be the only one's to vote? Along with all of the other people who are invested in this country... business owners, workers, those who have paid taxes. Maybe allowing all the free-loading leeches to vote is a very bad idea----Socialism begins and free enterprise democracy begins to end when the people can start voting themselves public money.
Here's the latest idea to be resurrected from the crazy John Birch Society of the 1960s & 70s, a group so far out of the mainstream that even respectable Conservatives like William F Buckley and Barry Goldwater disowned them. A group so nuts they thought Ronald Reagan was part of the hidden conspiracy to hand our sovereignty to the UN and Trilateral Commission.
Now they're the mainstream of Conservatism. JBS cofounder Fred Koch must be very proud somewhere, knowing that his sons Ed and Charles have devoted so much of their fortune to keeping his ideas alive.
History will not look well on this period when the Republican Party mainstreamed crazy in their lust for power.
I don't know about you John... but I'm kinda enjoying that the insane clown posse aka the tea baggers are feeling so empowered they're not even attempting to hide this nonsense!
Keep in mind the tea baggers are demanding to be identified as Constitutional Conservatives and when they post crap like this only proves nothing can be further from the TRUTH!
And you're right on the money about how history will reflect on those who are certified bat sh!t crazy!
Feisty
Plain & simple…Chris Christie is a thug who seems to get off on throwing his ample weight around!
It’s alleged that he a rising star within the GENOPEE? Mr. Christie certainly fits the description of a tea bagger… down to the tee!
Yup, that's right just ask Dick Morris who brought us that moron, Sarah Palin. Little Dick who can toe suck better than a B movie actor said ...
THE GOP PRIMARIES OF 12 WILL BE HELD ON FOX NEWS
http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/the-gop-primaries-of-12-will-be-held-on-fox-news/
I saw the look of hope Hannity's face when lil Dick mentioned Cristie as a presidential hopeful.
The funniest thing is how NJNB holds this clown up as some kind of HERO!
Dr. No will defend him because he is anti-Obama. . Twice Christie has proved he is corrupt.
Reminds me more of a extremely overweight ZERO!!!
Very good analogy, Feisty
He reminds me of a Mafioso.
LOL Bev! There was something 'sexy' about Tony Soprano... unlike this fat a@@ who comes across as a SLUG!
jody, iowa - sounds like you are describing many of the FR liberal posters here today...
I love it!!
ok razzle-dazzle boy johnb, get that gyro spin of yours up to speed. used to be teabaggers that the kochs turned loose, now you want to say that the old J. birch society have taken over the conservatives what will it be next month, next year?? Always someone to blame, guess that is why there are no mirrors in your home. Forget about reagan and bush already? Are you glad that FR allows you and your cronies such latitude (I should say bias) in your posts?
I seem to recall that there was another organization also happening about the time of the trilateral commission new headlines but its name escapes me. And let us not forget the other secret worldwide organization of wealthy individuals that meet on either an annual or semiannual basis to discuss their plans for the world.
And we conservatives will be ROTFLOAO that you liberals went crazy in your own lust for "cradle to the grave" government and devastating economic policies that are still unfolding. I just hope that businesses have a clearer view of the US economic policy over the next few years to be encouraged to creating more jobs.
Keep in mind that for every $ spent by the wealthy it will trickle thru and stimulate the economy by $1.64 or more.
Do your research "american."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Koch_Family_Foundations
Here's some coverage of the Tea Party direct from the John Birch Society website;
http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5927-tea-party-convention-in-nashville
From coverage of a Tea Party summit;
My hands are getting tired from slapping you around "american", how 'bout you at least put up some facts in defense of yourself?
What moronic statements.
johnb - still having problems with answering direct questions I see. I just love it and I see that drinking fiestys' proprietary drink "hate-or-aide" is really getting you wound up. Cool!!
Rather surprised that you didn't expound more on the "John birch society", "trilateral commission" or the "council on foreign relations". Of course you wouldn't! That would just mean that you would have to search for "liberal" articles exposing them for what you believe them to be. I do like the conspiracy theories that are attached to the latter two though.
your comment...
Is just priceless! Defend myself...against what? Your foolishness in generating sarcastic remarks or pics (BTW I did enjoy the picture of yourself with your family, too bad you edited out your moms head). http://coacheshotseat.com/coacheshotseatblog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Jethro.jpg
And you do try so hard to come off as an elitist, please tell us, do your eyes cross when you look down your nose at us?
Keep up your rhetoric on how bad conservatives are and I will "keep on, keepin' on" as well. LOL, "slapping me around! ROTFLMAO!!! good one!!
I just showed how the original founders of the JBS, his heirs the Koch brothers, the current JBS, the Tea Parties, and Conservative think tanks are all connected by funding and coordination. That was a direct answer with evidence for anyone with eyes to see. Your argument by dismissal only makes you look more ridiculous. To top it off you accuse me of using "Liberal articles" when I linked DIRECTLY to the John Birch Society. Frankly it doesn't matter if you agree with me or not. You've given me yet another opportunity to put the facts in front of people who wish to decide for themselves and prove you a Conservative liar.
siasd
CU Farley, you're suspended for a month for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
Seriously, a whole paragraph about how you think another Viner is racist because of their username? Really malicious.
johnb - you start with a comment of only property ownersw should vote (4.16) and imply (not provve) that this is a basic philosophy of the john birch society and then by some magic thinking on your part make all conservatives members of the john birch society.
Then you go to 4.21 and try to tie the property line further with the JBS and teabaggers to my question in post 4.20.
by what obtuse and shiny pointy hat thinking have you even proved this? Not even your post 4.25 has proved it. All you have proved, in a very general way, is that many organizations have common (but limited in number) beliefs. Duh!!! so what?
I do so love your "logic" in presenting a brief overview of the JBS, followed by a news release and then capped off with a left leaning 'new yorker' article (hence my reference to you looking for liberal arguments to prove your point). I would imagine that the 'think progressive' web site would also want to educate their own followers as well.
If you consider yourself as illustrating credible "facts", please do keep up your posts as i am sure others will appreciate your living on a seperate plane of illusion.
BTW, Keep in mind that for every $ spent by the wealthy it will trickle thru and stimulate the economy by $1.64 or more.
That would depend on where the first "trickle" starts.
"Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, members of the Senate and the House of Representative: Yesterday, Dec 7, 1941--a day which will live in infamy--the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan." President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Take a moment to pause and remember Pearl Harbor on this day which lives in infamy.
The Compromise. The details are still too vague to really analyze the agreement between the White House and the republicans but for the middle and lower income earners in this country, it is a win to be assured their taxes will not increase in January. It is a big win for the unemployed who struggle because they cannot find work--a thirteen month extension eliminating this topic for over a year. As a liberal, I believe President Obama did what was best for the middle class and not what was politically popular on the far left. Yes, I would have preferred to see the tax cuts on the richest 3% expire but it is reality that blue dog democrats were voting with the republicans as witnessed by Saturday's Senate votes. The U.S. is still in economic recovery from the very deep hole Bush and the GOP dug. Why prolong the fight when that would have resulted in nothing gained except pain for the middle class and the unemployed?
Those who will claim the republicans won are not entirely accurate because they were forced to compromise as well. Their selling point is they extended tax cuts, costing about $95 billion, for the 3% richest people in the country--something that over 40% of republicans did not support and a large majority of all Americans did not support. Their other selling point, they held the middle class and unemployed hostage to protect 3% of the population. A bit like Chris Christie's bullying.
The early morning local news did some interviews with people regarding their reactions to the compromise; they also read some on-line comments. With few exceptions, the reaction was positive especially about the extension of unemployment benefits; that President Obama did the right thing by compromising. There was one negative who used the GOP talking point that the unemployed are lazy or they would find jobs but were fully supportive of extending all the tax cuts.
Chris Matthews gave an excellent final thought last night. He said that President Obama gets yelled at by the far right and the far left but most of America is centrist; the President is responsible for everyone and held responsible for the results something neither the far right or far left are. He does what he thinks is best for the people.
Obama was dragged kicking and screaming to reality yesterday. All the bluster of him raising taxes on the evil wealthy, all the bluster of him campaigning against the so called Bush Tax Cuts, all the bluster of him calling the Republicans greedy, all the bluster in the end meant absolutely nothing. Just a bunch of words. Just a bunch of empty rhetoric.
Barack Obama: All hat - No cattle.
Good Morning Jody: Our President has said that every day he is in office he will work for the middle class. He has done just that! When you negotiate you don't get all you want, but he did get tax relief for middle class Americans, plus unemployment benefits for those who are still having difficulty finding a job.
You're right, Joanna. It reminds me of the way that Clinton was dragged kicking and screaming into reforming welfare. The Dems didn't want anyone to know that reform would work (which it did) because so much of their base relies on handouts and is dependent on the government, either too lazy or too stupid to take care of themselves.
So, JAS1, you are a fan/supporter of Texas former Governor Ann Richards?.....
....nice to know that you quote her and her sentiments about your hero George Bush!
So that settles it, correct Libs? Conservatives have been saying for years now lower taxes spur economic growth.
Now it looks like the Liberal leaders, your Liberal leaders, agree.
And Farley, as it was true for Welfare Reform, it will also be true for Unemployment Reform. People will take jobs they don't want to take once their eligibility for those benefits have expired. Doing so will get them back into the working environment, allow them to show their skills, and allow them to produce at a level that improves their standing in the work force. It's tough love, but it beneftis both the worker, and the economy. The Democrats of course will continue to coddle the worker. Tell them they are victims. Tell them the only thing that can help them is their government.
Joanna Smith, the usual baloney sandwich from you. Ever occur to you that it was the GOP who were dragged kicking and screaming--they fought for the millionaire bonuses but not for the unemployed so the GOP gave up $200 billion in 13 months extension of unemployment benefits and got $95 billion for 3% of their wealthy friends.
Thanks for proving that the right truely is dillusional and often siasd.
No, Joanna, you misinterpret so often that it is laughable--liberals do not believe that tax cuts for the rich gets the best bang for the buck, we never claimed it was no bang just minimal in comparison to the 97% of middle Americans. The more money you have doesn't translate into spending it all, the more you have the more you invest and save because you only need so many "shiny" objects. President Obama said as much last evening. How many jobs did all those tax cuts create from 2001 through 2008 create? Clinton raised taxes and created 23 million jobs, Bush cut taxes and netted 1.5 million jobs in 8 years and in the process, Bush created massive debt. The proof is there if people take the time to look at it.
Jody, I missed what Chris said last night so thanks for bringing his comments up. The left is no different from the right. At least today. For the right to assume President Obama is a far left socialist is just not so. He isn't.
I don't know what's going to happen with the left wing of the Democratic Party. They have some very talented intelligent commited activists. No question. But to continue bringing President Obama down brings down everything. Having a Republican win the White House in 2012 is a catastrophe waiting to happen. Especially with today's Republicans.
Disappointments with our presidents is nothing new. That's life. But I think it is imperative that we have a Democrat in the White House. What I hope activists concentrate on going forward is dumping some of these GOP Senators.
The activists are due for some victories. They could have no better victory than changing the make up of the Senate, one election at a time.
I am WAY too young to actually remember Pearl Harbor- it happened years before I was even born- but I have heard first hand stories from my relatives about that day.
Both my parents come from large families, so many relatives never came home from the war. Interestingly, however, both my great grandmothers sent four sons to the war,fortunately all eight came home healthy, including one who went through the Battle of the Bulge!
It is important to remember the sacrifices that have been made on our behalf to preserve our freedom. I had hoped to see a re awakening of it in the aftermath of 9/11. Sadly, we seem too eager to forget.
Pat, Boston, MA-
I wouldn't look for the Democrats to gain much ground in the Senate anytime soon...they'll be extremely lucky to keep the small majority they have at present.
In 2012, the Democrats will have 23 Senate seats up for re-election...the Republicans only 10.
The Democrats are far more exposed to possible loss of seats in the Senate in the near term than Republicans.
The elections last month were a far better opportunity for Democrats. They had 19 seats up for reelection, the Republicans 18...and Democrats lost 6 seats.
Both sides wanted to extend the tax cut for the middle class. I don't see that as compromise at all. That was bipartisanly supported ideas. It's refreshing to see this finally happening after 2 long years of partisan bickering by the Democrats who couldn't get anything done even with supermajority.
Lower taxes is not an expense. Overspending is an expense. Since Democrats took over congress in Jan 2007, the borrowed debt of our entire history to that date doubled. Everyone who's researched knows that line about the 2 wars isn't the cause. The entire budget for national defense INCLUDING the wars is only 5% annually. You should be digging into that other 95% to find out where 20X the cost of war is going. Cut foreign spending & stop the bleeding of jobs over the borders with unfair trade acts designed to help the corporations hire sweat shop labor at the expense of our economy.
Income isn't an expense, it's income. How 'bout we cut your income and see if it's easier for you to pay your bills.
Oh, and defense is 24% of the budget, not 5%. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/budget_pie_gs.php
Jody, Iowa
The early morning local news did some interviews with people regarding their reactions to the compromise; they also read some on-line comments. With few exceptions, the reaction was positive especially about the extension of unemployment benefits; that President Obama did the right thing by compromising. There was one negative who used the GOP talking point that the unemployed are lazy or they would find jobs but were fully supportive of extending all the tax cuts.
Felicia Robbins talks about the expiration of her jobless benefits and her life with her five children at a Pensacola, Fla. homeless shelter on Tuesday, Nov. 30, 2010. Robbins lost her job as a juvenile justice worker in 2009 and her last $235 unemployment check will arrive Dec. 13. Her 10-year-old car isn't running, and she walks each day to the local unemployment office to look for work.
http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//101201/480/urn_publicid_ap_org6199e2fb34e54f17a1b468f63ee9ff04/
==================================================================
This rhetoric from the rightwingnuts is so stereotypical towards people who are fighting for jobs where there is a ratio of 5-1.
Chris Matthews gave an excellent final thought last night. He said that President Obama gets yelled at by the far right and the far left but most of America is centrist; the President is responsible for everyone and held responsible for the results something neither the far right or far left are. He does what he thinks is best for the people.
It's so nice to hear Chris return to his voice of reason. Frankly speaking, I'm sick of Ed Schultz ranting and raging. Yesterday, he tried every opportunity to shove his interpretation of the President's failure including Luis Gutierrez. He kept cutting Gutierrez off yelling and screaming.
My activism goes back to Dr. King's days. I would just like to suggest to Ed Schultz and the other lefties, if they keep that up will lose in 2012 ; thus the Supreme Court.
Stop feeding the enemy; Ed. If you must rile the troops up, drop that divisive rhectoric and put the blame where it belongs on the Republican/ Tea Baggers.
John, nobody is cutting federal income, it is just going to remain the same. And to answer your question, what would you do if your income did go down? I know I would cut spending everywhere I could. That's the problem. We are telling the government you get enough money already, I don't want you to give me any more just learn to exist with what you already get. Cut the spending....
Really? Then why did the Bush Administration base their budget projections on expiration of these cuts? They must have assumed they wouldn't be renewed, correct? The only alternative is that Republicans were dishonest with the American people on that point.
Elections do matter. And it looks like the Tea Party has won.
The tea party won an additonal chunk of national debt to China?
Cool.
Wow, the TeaBaggers wanted a bigger deficit.......who would have thunk it? What a coup!
Hallelujah! I was so worried I was going to have to stash more of my vast wealth in my offshore accounts but now I don't have to! Hooray. I guess I could invest my money in small businesses but have you seen how much it costs here in America? I gotta guy in India who'll hook me up. Republicans, I should throw a party for all of you (hell, I got the extra cash now, right?) for saving me a lot of dough. Kinda sucks the poor and disabled people get help too but we can't win em' all.
Palin 2012!!!!!
No big surprise there, the National Debt consistently gets fatter when Conservatives get their way.
That's what is confusing to the Libs. Politics is a process, just a means to an end. Today the People get to keep their money. Tomorrow spending bills will be passed to reduce/eliminate the deficit. A lot of sacred cow programs the Democrats have endorsed for decades will get cut with those bills, and Obama and the Democrats will scream, nash their teeth, and wail like the crying women they are, but again, the Democratic Senate will pass the bills, and Obama will sign it.
How do you expect this to happen when the brand new Republican "leadership" can't find anyone in its party with the kiwis to serve on the House Appropriations Committee?
Thanks for pointing that out, Da Noid. Conservative Republicans already know they can't deliver on their promises. No one on their side wants that hot potato, just in case the public notices and they can't deflect blame for their failures onto the Democrats. That'll be a difficult assignment in a body where they hold the majority.
It was inherited..lol.
Like most of the wealth of those who fund the Tea Party, the Republican Party, and the Conservative Movement in general. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=1
JoAnnaSmith1
Elections do matter. And it looks like the Tea Party has won.
I see it differently because tea Baggers are a subset of the obstructionist Republican Party which the President is exposing.
John B.
So are you saying that Obama is a conservative, because according to the records, his administration has added about $2.6 trillion to the debt--2010 about $1.4 trillion deficit spending & asking for about $1.2 trillion in 2011 spending. I am pretty sure that deficits add to the debt, but I could be crazy.
Feel free to confirm for yourself;
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
John B,
Don't need a history lesson, was just wondering if you thought that Obama was a conservative now that he has helped to add $2.6 trillion to the debt. But I guess his $2.6 trillion is because of Reagan and the Bushes.
Smile, it was said in jest:)
Gotcha, sorry I came "loaded for bear."
I don't think Obama is a Conservative, but clearly he isn't as liberal as Conservatives would paint him, either. People who thought they were voting for a Dennis Kucinich or Bernie Sanders were destined to be disappointed. People who think they got one are just mistaken.
I wonder if Obama is a Muhamed Ali fan as much as I am?
Yesterday, when I heard the news about the compromise, I was instantly so mad I couldn’t see straight. Then, I gave it some thought. Then, I wasn’t so sure this was a mistake at all (except for the increased deficit, of course).
I’ve been saying that the unemployment situation wouldn’t be resolved any time soon. Not in 2 years, not in 4 years, likely not in even more years. So- why not give the Repubs the rope to hang themselves with (not to mention loosen a lot of tea bagger support for the Repubs along the way)?
10 Years of these tax breaks haven’t created jobs. Two more years won’t either. Now, in the run up to 2012, Obama can say “I told you, but you wouldn’t listen”. The media can parade all the voting records out there of the people that voted for this failed, deficit-increasing tax policy. Obama can say “see- I tried to work with the other side, despite my reluctance to do so in the best interest of the country”. He can also garner the support of all the people that were saved by another 13 months of being able to eat and buy shoes. And- the unemployment continuance will come up again just in time for the 2012 election cycle. Not a bad positioning, I’d say.
But suppose I’m wrong, and the economy picks up in the next 24 months. ON OBAMA’S WATCH. That would help his re election a whole lot, wouldn’t it?
I think Obama’s IS an Ali fan.
Rope-a-Dope, anyone?
That is an insult to the GREATEST fighter of all times. In Zaire, Ali outwitted a younger, stronger opponent who was perceived by all to be practically invincible. McConnell and Boehner are a couple of middling politicians, nothing more.
Ali was the master of the psychology of winning, turning his opponent's strengths against them ...Obama is more like the character "Bull" in the 80's TV sitcom "Night court";
Bull is entrusted with the care of a chimp who escapes. When asked what happened he says "He outwitted me"...
The republicans are that chimp...
Obama hasn't even stepped into the ring yet. The RE-peat-the-lie-to-the-PUBLIC-ans have been working up a sweat and think that they are winning while only fighting his shadow.
They are in for a big surprise.
Drive-by, great observation; I had a similar reaction of disappointment at first and reality of how good this deal is for most people, especially for the unemployed. As the evening wore on and people looked at the whole package, it is a win for the middle class. The economy is limping along, in 2012 it will be much stronger and that will be a better time for Pres Obama to threaten veto on cuts for millionaires and billionaires.
The job growth reports all the way up to 2007 would like to have a word with you. They're wearing boxing gloves and look angry for some reason.
drive-by-ob: I don't know about the rope...but I'll concur you've got a dope.
The way the deck is currently stacked, the corporate people and the wealthy folks will always come out ahead, no matter what the law says and no matter what the tax code is.
Thank God President Obama is willing to make sure that the neediest among us are not forgotten while those paid to stage faux political fights play games with their lives.
President Obama is a man among boys (and girls).
Well Allen, up to 2007 we were in the slowest recovery of job numbers in decades. Then the speculative bubble burst as houses of cards set up with insufficient oversight thanks to deregulation collapsed.
Happy now?
You Dems crack me up,your all saying Obama did the right thing by compromising his principles when in fact just a month ago you were singing his praises on no extension of the Bush tax cuts for the rich, you can't have it both ways. Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country, now those were some great words from a real Democrat.
DBO- I do not post much on this board, but I read it every day. You, by far, are my favorite.
Can't have it both ways? You mean like "Obama's a knucklhead, because he won't give away the store to the rich folks", and now he's a weakling, because he 'gave away the store to the rich folks"?
Y' mean 'have it both ways' like that?
Thanks, dapenate, but there are a LOT of folks that post on here that are WAY better than me.
Jody, Ron, IR, John B, Feisty, Pat, Clara, USNRet, NewDay, Gingerbread, Louis J, Bev and many many many more.
And of course MY fave rave, JoAnnaSmith!
(Ok, did I finish that quart of Jack already......?)
Driveby since you have a problem with comprehension by both ways I mean you would have said he did the right thing regardless of which decision he made, so which was the correct decision. I'm not quite sure what you mean by giving away the store to the rich when all you are doing is continuing with the same tax rate.
That reduction in the tax rate over the last ten years is responsible for $2 trillion of our debt.
Which would be acceptable if it had brought unemployment down to 3%. It failed to deliver the real prosperity it "promised".
“I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.”—Will Rogers
Will had an excellent point, and I don’t really have a problem with it. The Democratic Party really is the big tent party, with tolerance for a wide variety of opinions and agendas. It’s a place where people as diverse as war hero Max Cleland, Liberal for all causes Dennis Kucinich, and union favorite Dick Gephardt have been able to find a home. If only more of today’s Democrats had a backbone.
Lyndon Johnson is known to have told Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. “You go out there Dr. King and keep doing what you’re doing, and make it possible for me to do the right thing.” LBJ understood that he couldn’t stand in the bully pulpit all by himself without becoming a target.
Where are the Democrats who will make it possible for Barack Obama to do the right thing? We know what we want. The party is mostly unified on purpose, but very few are brave enough to stand next to the President and say “you’ll have to come through US.” It’s time for Democrats to quit whining about how President Obama only got half a loaf and go get the rest of it. Stand together or fall separately. You don’t have to belong to an organized political party to understand that.
Well said John. We need to stick together.
The wisdom of middle America, John B. Some liberals will yell for awhile and blame President Obama but most democrats recognize the reality that is the US Senate with its blue dogs who stand mostly with the GOP. Keep fighting but get the best deal possible now and sooner or later, things fall into place.
Maybe it's just me ,but when you say we need someone to stand up to the Repubs. or Dems. what your really doing is dividing the country, wouldn't you rather have someone who can unite taking a little from this side and that side to do what is right for the entire country, just a thought.
The biggest difference in the makeup of the voter demographic last election cycle was in the 18-30 yar olds. In 2008, 21 million of them came out to vote, overwhemingly for Barack Obama. They were the ONLY white demographic that voted for POTUS Barry O. in his historic election. They handed him the Democratic Primaries in both states that formerly housed the Capitol of the Confederacy. He then promptly ignored them until three weeks before the election when he started robotexting them to come out and vote. In 2010, nine million of them came out to vote, while over eleven million stayed home.
If he can get just half of those eleven million to get back out in 2012, then the five million vote margin by which the GOP won in 2010 is beaten. Doesn't seem like it would take a hell of a lot at this point to do that. Repeal of DADT, START signed, economy in recovery would look good to run on "We couldn't do it all in one term, you need to send us back to finish with a supermajority now that the obstructionist Blue Dogs got culled." I can see why this was the play that they WH chose. I still don't want to see the Rich Tax Cuts extended, but I might trade a two year extention for that supermajority and a 2nd term. In my humble opinion, if the Dems wanted to get young people out in record numbers again, they should be doing one thing: getting legalization of marijuana up for referendum in as many states as they possibly can. This is the only "wedge issue" that they can play, Karl-Rove-Gay-Marriage-Style, to motivate the kids to come out. And the leadership in the Democratic Party are even dumber than they look now if they don't play it to the hilt.
Doesn't matter what happens, my new demographic, white voters 30-55 are NOT gonna vote for Obama, regardless of what happens in the interim. They've already made that much obvious. They really, really, resent having a black man for their POTUS. They're afraid that it means that they are irrelevant and that the world is passing them by. And for good reason. They are, and it is. Still, they hate to be reminded of the fact that America isn't THEIRS, and THEIRS ALONE. The old white folks won't vote for him either. I find humor in the fact that in all likelihood they'll be stymied by their own kids and grandkids. Don't get me wrong, I know full well that ALL white people didn't vote for John McCain, my parents and grandparents are included among them. But statistically, the break was pretty clear, and it was generational. I hope that this means that cultural racism is dying. I'm not sure that it does, at all, but I hope so.
Right now, the plan is to vote in the TN primary as a GOP and try to get Sarah on the ticket. Surely he can beat the canuck with the clown car vagina, right?
Chuck, Mark, Domenico and Ali: Interesting analysis this morning.
I sat down last night with a nice hot cup of tea and then fastened my seat belt. I thought it was going to be a rough ride on MSNBC. And then something happened. Lawrence O'Donnell came on. I thought I would just watch a few minutes and then flip over to the football game. But I ended up watching most of his program. And I was pleasantly surprised at what I heard. Mature, thoughtful analysis of what President Obama is up against with this damn Congress we have. There is so much talk about President Obama not fighting. But Lawrence said something striking – he said he sees politicians on all these cable shows, fighting mad, yet all the while quietly knowing the outcome is not going to be what we want. It's just theatre. This isn't what President Obama does. There was no way he could convince the GOP and SOME Democrats not to cave. They don't freakin' care.
As someone on DKos said, in January the Senate will be composed of 51 Democrats, 47 Republicans and 2 Independents. One of those independents is Joe Lieberman. One of those Senators is Ben Nelson. Another is Joe Manchin, another is Jim Webb. All of whom voted against ending tax cuts for the wealthy.
That's a vote of 51 vs 49 in the Republican's favor.
I felt bad for activist Adam Green last night. He just wants what is best for America. And is willing to do the hard work that it takes to do what he can to make a difference. He put everything he had into this tax cut campaign. It's hard not to respect him. Most on the left just sit back and whine. It's just emotional tantrums. Mr. Green at least does something. He may not vote for President Obama in 2012 unfortunately, as he is someone I would want on my team. But from what I can see, voting out President Obama will not change anything. Our Congress sucks - both parties. More so the GOP.
Blaming the president is a waste of precious time. GET RID OF THE GOP. Until that happens, nothing will change. Nothing. They hate us. All of us. They don't give a damn about the deficit and the unemployed.
Senators should serve two terms - one term in Congress and one term in jail.
Despicable, despicable people. Mitch McConnell the worst of the bunch. The absolute worst.
Thank you Lawrence O'Donnell. Great program last night. One of your best.
Good Morning Pat:
I enjoyed the line "Senators should serve two terms - one term in COngress and one term in jail.
Congratulations to your Patriots. They look stronger each week.
Hi Ron. Yes the Patriots looked good, but I never thought the Jets were as good as people said they were. Next up for us is Chicago Bears. Should be an entirely different match up.
The two term line is actually a joke I read somewhere but thought it was pretty funny. And it seemed an appropriate time to use it. lol
Pat. I agree. Lawrence O'Donnell's show was excellent last night, he is wise and recognizes the reality. Enjoyed his comments about the yelling and theatre because it is so true. The discussion with James Gailbraith and ??? was also intelligent and logical thinking, both agreed this is good for the short-term. Chris Matthews had an excellent final thought last night on the yelling as well.
Pat and Jody:
Both Lawrence O. and Chris M. were right on last night!
The President has said on more than one occasion that the does not do "theatre" so I don't know why these loud Progressives keep yelling for him to come out swinging and any other "fight" metaphor you can think of.
Progressives have a short memory. The President has not changed his calm, deliberative approach to problem-solving that he brought to the office on January 20, 2009.
Who did these people think they were getting? A loud-mouthed Progressive. Not!
The "collateral damage" the President spoke about yesterday represent real living breathing human beings...not just campaign rhetoric. He could not abandon them just to wage a "principled fight"
Sheila, the left hate the Republicans. And when the word "compromise" comes up, smoke comes out of their ears. They want President Obama to treat the GOP the way they treat him. Part of me agrees with that. But he's not in a position to behave like that. He's the President. It is he who has to sign the legislation. Everyone else can play games. He hated that the tax cuts for the greedy may be extended for two years. You could see it in his face yesterday.
I would love it if he didn't give them the time of day. Like they do with him. He can't. He just can't. And the Democrats did put him in a bind when they didn't vote on the tax cuts before the midterms.
Blame them.
Pat, Boston, MA:
I had to chuckle at your comment that "part of me agrees with that" because I wish the President could treat the Republicans the way they treat him. I frequently create the dialogue in my head that the President could use. It makes me feel good. But as you stated, 'he is the President' and cannot behave in a boorsih manner.
It would be worth the price of admission if the President could really say what he is thinking when dealing with the likes of Mitch McConnell.
Well said John. We need to stick together.
Kudos to the Prez for finally working with the Repubs. Anything that makes libs get their panties in a bunch like this has got to be good for the country.
And...Remember Pearl Harbor. You all remember that, right? That was the day when the racist, imperialist Nips attcked us and brought us into WWII. We then proceeded to make them our collective bitch. I wasn't sure if yall remembered it since so many of you have trouble remembering 9/11, which was only 9 years ago.
And FDR knew it was coming, just like Cheney knew 9/11 was coming. People are expendable for geopolitical advantages.
Shouldn't you be in Memphis trying to prove Elvis was murdered, you tinfoil-hat wearing waste of sperm? Even the most brain-dead libs don't think 9/11 was an indide job, even though they do everything they can to disrupt and undermine our efforts to prevent another one. Get a job, go get your wheelchair outfitted with blinky Christmas lights, or go walk your 35 cats. Just do SOMETHING to keep yourself off the internet for 8+ hours a day.
Why the vitriol and ad hominem? Liberals don't have some monopoly on the truth. It has nothing to do with left/right.
Cheney isn't a Republican. He's a neo-fascist.
PROVE to me that MUSLIMS were flying the planes on 9/11. You can't..........Why? Because it isn't yet any kind of truth. It's just a story you were told, and were brainwashed to believe.
Way to keep it classy, Slappy!
In Farley's mind, any sperm that doesn't go down his throat is a waste.
Wow racist imperial Nips , you mean the Japanese military following the orders of the Emperor, kinda like our military following the orders of our President. Racist naw no racist here
Paul cockpit recordings on the black boxes proves who was flying ,but keep believing your conspiracies
wlee:
That's interesting. The black boxes for Flt.11 and 175 were claimed to have never been found.
The other two flights, the black boxes indicate the flights never hit the ground or Pentagon.
You are talking about "evidence" which has not been certified or cross-examined. This means you are unable to prove what you obviously are brainwashed to want to believe.
Get informed and try again.
Wow....Paul scares me...and he should you all as well.
OK how about the phone conversations with the tower and the family's of the people who perished on FLT 93. So what hit the Pentagon. If you want to talk about the JFK assassination I'm with you, but the Towers that's another matter.
wlee:
I appreciate your curiousity, but it is a little late in arrival. The phone conversations have never been substantiated. Ted Olson's claim that his wife Barbara called him has been disavowed by the FBI.
The Towers? Have you seen WTC7 implode?
Towers 1&2 were hit by aircraft. Each building was 110 floors. Each floor had 4 inch thick concrete floors surrounding the core. If the collapse was only fire and gravity driven, you would have 500 inches of concrete piled in layers at the base of the towers at the end of the collapse. Instead you have essentially none. NONE!!!!!!!!! Where did it go? It was turned to microfine dust on the way down! The only explanation for that is explosives.
Reality Check: Chill out. We're here to share thoughts, ideas and observations.
Paul several test have been performed debunking your theory, even if we did it for what purpose we import less oil from Iraq then we did before 9/11
When I ask you a question, try to answer it.
We didn't do 9/11 to import oil from Iraq. We did 9/11 to get the PATRIOT ACT passed through Congress.
What "several tests" by whom on what proved anything to whom?
What a relief, What a relief! At last, For the last two years or so, Oblaba has been flittng from here to
there and everywhere barely touching upon the proposals that he gave Congress to mull over. He has
been a very slippery fellow to pin down , always , slip and sliding, evading and ducking the main business
of the people. Now, at last the Repubs, has now got him to argue and to at least govern and to pass
some tangible legislation for the American people's welfare. He has been vacationing , playing games,
campaigning and shooting off his big mouth for the past two years. Now, that reality has finally hit home,
he has angered his base and his followers because he has been ducking the issues all this time. He has
only himself to blame and his base is damn mad with him. They are going to run against him.
Just think, Juven- now we will get to see, once and for all, if tax breaks for the wealthy create jobs.
Neat, huh?
Let's all watch.....
republicans will say cut taxes, small govt. cut spending, and what have they just done in less than a month of past election, they've added 1trillion to the deficit....now the drama begins.
Yes, we'll sit back and watch...and my crystal ball tells me that in the short term we'll see businesses hire but in two years they'll just start laying people off and they'll give us the same chicken-s*** excuse that it's because the Bush Era Tax Shift is about to expire and that we need to extend it or they'll keep laying off more workers.
God Bless The Trickle-Down Miracle!!!
Da Noid
For more trickle down miracle.....knock on china's door and it shall be open. GOPers, who's mortgaging our children, grandchildren feature?
Ahh, it's as if neither party gives a squirt about the people............... stunning.
It isn't just the president I'm mad at, it's the Dem leadership, the Blue Dog DEMS (DINOs, one and all), but most especially it's the money-grubbing, soulless, greedy ba$tard Repubs, most notably McConnell & Boehner. With this agreement, I hope a few more people will wake up to the fact that McConnell & Boehner are not "real" fiscal conservative Repubs, they just hate all things Obama and will do ANYTHING to beat him, regardless of the cost to the country. And this deal will carry a huge cost. I don't ever want to hear anything from these guys again about how terrible the deficit is and how it's all Obama's fault. It's YOUR fault now, McConnell & Boehner; with this deal you guys own it.
All that said, it isn't over 'til congress votes.
You will never be able to pin the deficit on the RE-peat-the-lie-to-the-PUBLIC-ans.
They will always win the argument by appealing to latent racism. They will point to spending on social programs and the implied waste of spending on lazy people. Emotion over rational, wins every time.
"Emotion over rational, wins every time". Yup, especially amongst the teabaggers. Dear Feisty: thought of one more lie that should actually win! From the Republican party and their ilk: "no spending without knowing how we will pay for it". Or " WE MUST NOT ADD TO THE DEFICIT!" The Republicans now own AGAIN this economy and the long term damage to the country. Each of you who worship at the feet of the Robber Barons have lost any credibility whatsoever.
Budgets and tax policy come out of the House of Representatives. For the next 2 years they own everything that gets done in that venue.
Be careful what you wish for.
I said it yesterday, and I'll repeat it here. Obama's failure is not that he compromised so much, it is that he waited too long to get involved, and was essentially handed the bad hand after the election. Obama should have sat down Harry Reid and demanded that Reid hold a vote on the extension of the middle class tax cuts before the election. That would at least have put the Republican candidates on the record for voting against the extension, and would at least have scored significant political points (and perhaps might have helped save a few more Democratic seats). Instead, he let the timid Democrat leaders in Congress dominate the policy process and was forced to accept a mediocre compromise.
The truly baffling thing about this compromise is that it was for only two years, which means we get to see a repeat of this issue in the middle of the presidential election. And what presidential candidate worth his salt is going to allow a tax hike (expiration of tax cuts) during the election season? Can anyone say Mondale?
Welcome to the Obama Tax cuts. Yes my fellow first read posters, I said Obama Tax cuts. He could have vetoed this chicken crap compromise but he is going to put his signature on it. Someone mentioned Rope and Dope above, I get no pleasure in saying it but yesterday I saw an outmaneuvered beaten and defeated President announce this compromise.
Lame Duck and next two years Welcome to Gridlock and worse. This is one part where it would have been better to do nothing and have all cuts expire.
Reposting from yesterday -
1. Obama breaks his promise to not allow tax cuts for the rich. All Bush tax cuts are extended for two years. By the way the Obama cuts (small increases in paychecks and aid for school are not included). Unemployment extended for 6 months. Obama not only doesn't veto it, he claims a great bipartisan victory in his State of the Union.
2. Dream Act - Goes down to defeat, many Democrats, who earlier supported it, use it to say this is frivilous legislation that the public doesn't want. Of course further needed comprehensive immigration legislation is pushed to the bottom of the everyone's priorities. Fearing 2012 elections, Democrats drop any push for immigration legislation. Various states put forward Arizona type legislation.
3. DADT - Democrats and Obama agree to more studies to see the effects in the Marines and Army combat forces. Debate pushes into the new Congress - New senator Rand Paul holds up a vote indefinately.
4. START treaty debate pushes into next year. It finally passes in February only after back door deal is made with Republicans for Obama to call off Afganistan withdrawl timetable. On a side note, watched Liz Cheney say Obama is on the right course on Afganistan and is pleased with his commitment there. It is never a good idea if you are doing what a Cheney wants.
5. Obama and democrats fearing the 2012 elections continue to let more companies opt out of requiring companies like McDonalds to provide health care benefits. More democrats become open to tweaking/fixing , Washington speak for gutting, Health Care reform.
6. Disregarding the ill deserved goodwill Obama showed toward Bush/Cheney war crimes, House begins frivilous investigations against Obama and top ranking democrats.
7. GOP continue to rail against the deficit, however agree to raise the debt ceiling, only after Obama and democrats agree to work on fixing debt commission suggestions to include more cuts against social security and Medicare entitlements. Obama leans toward GOP backed debt commission talking points.
If these happen Obama will become weakened and more irrelevant. However, I wouldn't be willing to look at a primary challenger to Obama. Edit - I would be willing to look at a primary challenger to Obama. My reason is that I would bet the challenger would be to the right of Obama. Edit - Perhaps a true democrat willing to stand by their principles will run, I'm sure hoping they do.
All of you Progressives whining about the President not standing on principle and how he should not have capitulated or compromised don’t live in the world of the unemployed.
Principle will not put food of the table, pay the rent, pay for utilities to keep the heat and electricity on, put gas in the car, pay for prescription medication, or provide lunch money for the children in school. Until you have walked a mile in those shoes keep your wailing and gnashing of teeth to yourself.
Real people in the real world... That was the thought process the President applied when dealing with the “collateral damage” of waging a fight with the ignorant Republicans who actually believe that BS about tax cuts create jobs even though they have been admonished by their man Alan Greenspan that it just is not so. You cannot reason with them because they also think that the $70 billion for tax cuts for the wealthy don’t have to be paid for. Just like they thought it was ok to add trillions to the deficit with the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. They are insane!
The President probably got the best deal he could given that his own party let him down when this could have been negotiated sooner.
To Sheila, MD:
That very "small amount of money from the Tax Extension" will not not put food on the table for very long, pay the utility bills, pay the rent or mortgage, pay for prescriptions, put gas in the car, provide lunch money for school, etc. Just how far do you expect those people to stretch that returned dime? Of course the wealthy get more money back, but they'd never notice or miss it if they didn't (It's just the PRINCIPLE of their greedy traits). The people just want to have a good paying job to match their experience and EDUCATION. But where are the jobs, which the elite prefer not to spend for hiring, but had no problem throwing billions at the politicians during this recent and most disgusting campaign that went on for 1 & 1/2 years. The workers don't want charity or money from the elite, but they sure would like to see a more balanced distribution for bringing the deficit down. Now with the tax cuts continuing for another two years, there will have to be serious cuts elsewhere. And we all know where those cuts lie, which in the end have a far more serious consequences on the lower income families. Those cuts I'm referring to, are the social programs, which the Republicans call "Socialist". Also, you forgot that there are many part-time workers, contractors, etc., who do not ever qualify for U.E. , or any other benefits to include health care. We'd be better off using that several trillion to pay down the deficit instead of adding to it. So I say to you Ms. MD until you have walked even one day in the shoes of lower income people, I suggest that you might not be so quick to look down at others with name calling. And why did the Pres. and Democrats postpone this tax problem until after the election?? Would it be because they didn't want to have any negative influence on the election taking away even more votes from them, esp. form the Independents??? It's politics as usual even if you don't understand that simple concept. "There are none so blind as those who won't see!!"
I have lost faith
 Let's be clear about one thing...Obama was NOT dealt a crappy hand...Obama did NOT inherit anything. Obama KNEW which cards were on the table. When he chose to run, he ACCEPTED what was ahead of him. So, all this crap about poor Obama, doing as well as he can considering everything that was left for him...BS! One takes on a job knowing the job description...if you don't like the duties, you don't take the job! Very simple.Â
When he chose to run, it was Feb 2007, long BEFORE the economic collapse of Sep 2008. Guess the right will believe anything because obviously, nothing is ever the republicans fault even when economic history proves they are to blame from Reagan to Bush to Bush.
Oh really Jody?? If the Republicans are to blame for years and years of economic mis-management....it only took from Feb 2007 to Sept 2008 to completely fall apart and Obama didn't see it coming? yeah, he was totally blind-sided right? Your argument makes no sense! He said we needed "change".....well, I'm still waiting. Oh yeah...it's all the Republicans fault for never agreeing right? You still managed to push through a healthcare bill that most of the country doesn't agree with...unless of course, you live in Nebraska where you are exempt from having to participate. Or you are a member of government and you don't participate.
I agree with tejano...you knew the job was tough when you took it...stop blaming everyone else!!!
Tejano-1101722
Another one of those specious arguments.
Are you suggesting that President Obama started two unfunded wars, two unfunded tax cuts, $10 trillion dollar deficit, etc.
If not, then by definition he inherited it on January 20, 2009.
Did he know it was a mess when he chose to run for the office? You betcha. Did he know the Republicans would vow to make him a one term president and cheer for his failure at every turn?
I don’t think so.
They voted No every Obama initiative because they could not because they did not believe he was trying to do some good. They chose to obstruct rather than legislate and they should refund the taxpayers for a year’s salary because they did absolutely nothing but show up and vot
Another one of those specious arguments.
Are you suggesting that President Obama started two unfunded wars, two unfunded tax cuts, $10 trillion dollar deficit, etc.
If not, then by definition he inherited it on January 20, 2009.
Did he know it was a mess when he chose to run for the office? You betcha. Did he know the Republicans would vow to make him a one term president and cheer for his failure at every turn?
I don’t think so.
They voted No every Obama initiative because they could not because they did not believe he was trying to do some good. They chose to obstruct rather than legislate and they should refund the taxpayers for a year’s salary because they did absolutely nothing but show up and vote.
Hillary Clinton for President in 2012, Obama does not have any spine, plus he needs more time for basketball.
And she would be facing the same GOP Senate obstruction, and the same blue dog dems voting with the GOP. That's the reality of a partisan Congress. Want to blame someone, blame the right people--the GOP and the blue dogs because they are the ones who on Saturday voted down the democrats' legislation to extend only those cuts for 97% of the people. President Obama doesn't get to vote in Congress and neither would any other democratic president.
The only thing that concerns me is the lowering of the social security tax by 2% - will he propose keeping it low in order to cut benefits? or will he do the right thing and raise the upper income limit that can be taxed?
Otherwise, kudos for once President Obama. You did the right thing here. He knew he couldn't get any hikes through - good compromise.
It is for just one year and some analyst yesterday said the deal actually improves social security solvency but I did not catch why; there must be something to it because it was also said this would help sell the deal to democrats. Who knows but we'll find out as the details of the basics which were announced are revealed. I don't think a one year deal would have a large negative impact but that's just opinion.
This should draw a flame or two. Heads up, Republicans! You should NOT deal. It's extend the "tax cuts" or nothing. And it's not because of "revenge" or any other stupid ulterior motive. It's to get people off what amounts to welfare roles and back to work. Sure, the economy is sour but handing out money is not the answer. You need to combine a good jobs/small business package with the tax cuts; you need to make a small but dramatic move at cutting spending (to be followed up on next year) and thus spur the economy the good old fashioned way. You do not need to set the tone for "bipartisan cooperation", a phrase the Socialists like to bandy about but have never and will never, sign on to. You need to get the country moving again and that won't happen compromising with this bunch. BTW, if you must increase revenue, let's re-introduce the 40% of those who pay NO taxes to taxes.
Guess you buy that republican lie that the unemployed are lazy, no goods, like stray animals. Please, get real. There probably are some, just like there always are some, who take advantage but most would rather have a job. The reality is this: there are 5 applicants for every job including the minimum wage jobs. Would you take a $7.00 an hour job which would limit your ability to look for a job paying more like what you earned previously? No, you wouldn't. Would you and your family live on an average of $300 a week if you have a chance at earning $400 or $500 at a new job? No. Please, do not make such sterotypical, prejudiced and factless comments. There are many republicans who are unemployed, it isn't just democrats.
Here's an Idea take the 7 dollar an hour job while still searching for a better one,if there are 5 to 1 people looking for minimum wage jobs then why are there so many illegals working here
Again at Jody....have you ever heard the phrase "it's easier to find a job when you already have a job?" Having a job does not limit your ability to look for a better job, that is just ignorant. You take the $7.00 an hour job knowing that you will continue to look for something better. And how about this concept...get a second job, get an education, get re-trained in a field that is hiring. There are more options than collecting unemployment. You also probably support all the free healthcare and benefits to all the illegals....way to go!!!
@ Jodi, Iowa
Guess you buy that democratic lie that all republicans believe that the unemployed are lazy, no goods, like stray animals. Please, get real.
Please, do not make such sterotypical, prejudiced and factless comments.
Maybe not all of them, but enough of them in positions of power;
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/feb/23/heller-government-creating-hobos/
What an a$$hole, this Heller.
There are dependent classes of people in this country only because opportunity has been witheld from them.
It is human nature to want to work and better yourself and your plight. That nature stops when you can see that you are being used as a slave.
In this sputtering economy, allowing taxes to rise for EVERYONE that actually pay federal income tax, basically 53% of us, would be utterly insane. A temporary extension as opposed to snuffing out the fragile jobless recovery as most rational economist agree would occur, seems a prudent course of action. Yes, and even those evil 2% of Americans must be included considering the enormous portion of the tax burden they currently carry. For those who so thoughtlessly pontificate what other tax payers need to pay, feel free to cut that little extra out of your pie in April to the treasury. Often many of the most vocal reside with the other 47% on the bleechers who pay no federal income tax, yet always advise those of us actually in the game what we need to pony up to the tax table.Â
Some of what you say is true. But I disagree with your dismissal of the 47% as basically freeloaders on the rest of us--they do not pay federal income tax because they do not earn enough money; they do pay state, local, gasoline, and sales taxes which hit them harder than the rest of us. One good part of the Bush 43 tax cuts was the tax breaks provided to low income earners and their families. Instead of complaining about their lack of federal taxes, everyone should be asking why we have 47% of America barely making a living wage and what we can do about it. I also disagree about the tax burden on the wealthy. Yes, they have more money so they pay more in taxes but many also pay at a lower federal tax rate than the rest of us because much of their earnings are placed in tax shelters, deductible, or capital gains.
Jody,
The top 2% pay 14% of the income taxes collected. So your statement would not be correct. They also have far fewer deductions and loopholes than existed before the tax reform act of 1986. My dad was making $29,000/yr in 1955. that's over 200k in today's dollars and I can guarantee you he paid far less income tax as a percentage of his income than someone earning 200k today.
The last part of your ststement I totally agree with. An hours worth of labor today doesn't even come close to buying what it did 30-40 years ago. This is a huge problem.
They're getting a pretty good deal then, Doug. The top 1% control over 34% of wealth. By that measure their taxes should more than double. http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/courses/so11/stratification/income&wealth.htm
Raising taxes is NOT the answer...............the more money you give government, the more they will spend!!!!!
Who honestly does not see that ???????
The government needs to stop spending, cut all subsidies, get rid of special interest groups, stop paying the welfare hand outs, shrink government..............it's common sense. If you keep giving government more and more taxes they will keep wanting more and more to spend.
I've been tightening my belt for quite some time now..............it's about time the government did the same thing! I'm not rich but make a decent living and work darn hard for it. I pay my taxes and it's a good portion of my pay.
How much of your hard earned money do you want to give the federal government.........no matter what your pay scale is? Enough is enough. This government needs to get out of peoples lives and businesses. Every time the government mettles............it costs us our livelyhood!
In my years as a voter, spending has never related much to revenues regardless of party. There has been one single golden shining year in the past 30 or so in which the budget was balanced.
So if we fight two wars, no one should pay for those wars? If we want to keep America safe from terrorism, no one should have to pay for it? No one need pay for roads, bridges, schools, fire or police--it's every man for himself and I've got mine, go away and leave me alone. Sounds like conservative thinking except they yell the loudest when a flood, earthquake, oil spill or other catastrophe strikes them.
yeah Jody....damn the Republicans, we never do anything right. I'm sorry, when was the last time we had a castrophe we didn't pay for??? We pay for not only ours, but every other country's!!!
I totally agree, they more they take, the more they spend. I have to cut back on things when I don't have the money for them....what a novel idea!!!!
BTW, bridges, fire, police get paid at the state level....I don't re-call any federal governmnet paying my property taxes for those things!
That's it, I'm never voting again! Even when we win, we GIVE it all away... Done. And they said Jimmy Carter was weak... At least you knew where he stood!
Not voting is probably why republicans won the House. Your thinking is like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Congress and the White House, democrats and republicans compromised, worked together to get the best of both views. Neither side has all the answers. Why is compromise such a bad thing now? The partisan saber rattling has accomplished one thing over the past 30 years, both left and right want to fight rather than govern, and God forbid either side compromise for the good of all.
His decisions are not about what's best for the Country, they are about what's best for Obama. The transparency he promised, was not about his Administration, it was about him.
If it was about President Obama, he would have vetoed any bill containing bonuses for millionaires. Liberals would have cheered and middle class America would have been hurt. One thing this President does not do is act on what he thinks is politically beneficial--if that were true, he would not have pushed health care reform or loans to the auto industry.
Jody,
The so called rich already pay the vast majority of the taxes in the country, yet you believe that allowing them to keep more of their own money is a "bonus". Typical liberal, socialist logic!
How about the 47% of this country that pay absolutely no federal income tax start paying the same percentage of their income that the so called rich pay? What about the 47% paying "their fair share"?
That would give the government even more money to waste, boy, you'd be doing back-flips, just think of all the waste, graft and corruption! Makes your heart twitter doesn't it?
Well, the bottom 40% of Americans hold 0.2% of wealth, so it wouldn't be hard to overtax them. The top 10% of Americans held over 70% of wealth in 2004 (more now) so it shouldn't be difficult to work out why they pay the majority of taxes. That's where the money is.
John B: Please, don't quote facts facts or reality to conservatives, they abandoned both years ago. Anyone with a mind can see that supply-side economics is a miserable failure at every level, that the class war is over and the rich have won a clear-cut victory, and that the biggest danger to American democracy is a middle-class being hollowed out by off shoring both wealth and jobs, the growing inequality in America, but conservatives can't see any of that. Soon they will be telling Americans that shared sacrifice means that rather than a billionaire abandoning his blessed 15% tax rate on income from dividends and interest, we all have to deal with an end to Social Security. If our tax structure was the same as it was in 1950, we would not have any deficit at all.
Because they aren't. The House isn't, and for the most part, the Senate isn't either. And certainly we expect more spine from the head of the executive and nominal head of the party.
The problem I have is that the new definition of "bipartisan compromise" is "The Republicans get everything that they want." And it's been that way since the 2008 elections.
Republicans didn't want to extend unemployment benefits so your argument isn't complete. Blame the Senate, the dysfunctional system where the "tyranny of the minority" rules the majority via filibuster. The President cannot do what the Senate will not do.
The president can't do anything without congress doing their part. I blame them for not acting sooner and putting the president in this position. We need to get rid of the blue dog democrats. They are dividing the party. It is a shame.