Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 1:18 PM ET, 12/ 9/2010

House Democrats' last stand

By Greg Sargent

In a big effort to show force, House Democrats voted just now to reject Obama's tax cut deal, and this behind-the-scenes detail really captures the essence of what's happening:

By voice vote, the rank-and-file Democrats passed a resolution that said the tax package should not come to the floor of the House for consideration.

At one point during the meeting on the vote, House Democrats erupted in a chant of "Just say no!"

House Dems are refusing to support the tax cut deal in its current form and holding out for changes to some of its most onerous elements, most prominently the estate tax provision. Yet all indications are that it's going to pass anyway, with overwhelming Republican support, and it seems to be moving forward in the Senate.

That's not to say that House Dems can't have some kind of impact on the deal. In a statement after the vote, Nancy Pelosi pledged that Dems would not allow the measure to move forward in its current form, vowing to "improve the proposal before it comes to the House floor for a vote."

But it's anyone's guess what kind of concessions House Dems can win, and more broadly, there's something poignant about this whole scene. House Dems have erupted in anger and frustration repeatedly in recent months, taking tough votes on big items on Obama's agenda that then died or got badly watered down in the Senate. House Dems wanted a bigger stimulus, and it didn't happen. Senate procedural dithering was largely what soured the public on the process, harming Dems in the midterms. Yet House Dems are the ones who took it on the chin and are headed into the minority.

And here you have the same frustrations playing out again. House Dems were able to pass just an extension of the middle class tax cuts. But to no avail: Like a rerun of a bad movie, it failed in the Senate, and Obama decided his only recourse was to cut a deal to extend the high-end tax cuts.

Now their fury has boiled over one last time, to the point where they're chanting "just say no" in unison. For many House Dems, seeing Obama make this deal was the ultimate sell-out. Their effort to block it, or at least change it, is their last stand in the majority, and they're determined to make something of it. And yet the truth is that whatever does pass in the end is likely to be unacceptable to many of them, too.

By Greg Sargent  | December 9, 2010; 1:18 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, House Dems, House GOPers, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans, taxes  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Is DADT repeal in trouble again?
Next: How Obama can quiet the charge that he's "triangulating"

Comments

More signs of trouble...

"The tax bill is going to be debated first, which would seem to ensure the spending bill won't be debated until next week, but some kind of funding measure needs to pass by Dec. 18, when a stopgap measure expires...

The measure passed over Republican protests that it still spends too much money and caps an unprecedented collapse of the federal budget process in which not a single one of the 12 annual spending bills has yet passed Congress. Ten of 12 House bills haven't even been made public." NYT

So will the White House lead, follow, or run away?

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

What a bunch of whining babies complaining about the sh*t sandwich Obama gave them.

Hey, at least the White House has the Dean of the DC Press Corps with him:

"Obama takes his case to the independent center"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/08/AR2010120804224.html

As goes David Broder there goes the country ... 40 year ago.

Posted by: wbgonne | December 9, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse

"House Dems are refusing to support the tax cut deal in its current form and holding out for changes to some of its most onerous element." Greg

"The motion to oppose bringing the bill to the floor was made by Representative Peter A. DeFazio of Oregon, who is known as combative liberal voice.
NYT

Heh, heh, that's my guy.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Greg

I've got a set of questions - Mitch McConnell sent out the letter signed by all 42 Republican Senators saying that they won't go along with cloture on anything until the tax issues were dealt with.


NOW Nancy Pelosi and the House democrats have thrown opposition into the agreements on the tax issues, saying they won't call a vote on the Compromise.


Logically, the House democratic action PUTS A HOLD ON Don't Ask in the Senate - because the hold on the tax issues in the House would hold up everything else in the Senate.


With time ticking, I don't know if that is the best move.


McConnell knows all this. I don't understand the House democrats either. They have just a few weeks left in their terms. Obama could just agree with McConnell, Reid and Boehner to hold ALL the votes the first week in January. The House democrats - all they are doing is holding up the rest of the liberal agenda in the Senate for the next few weeks.


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 9, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Well good. Let this trillion dollar add on to the deficit pass under a Republican controlled house as a continuation of Bush's "Deficits Don't Matter" uncontrolled spending and diminished revenues doctrine.

A Trillion Dollars in infrastructure spending would create a lot of jobs.

Posted by: bcinaz | December 9, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

Key element left out of your post....this was a NON-BINDING vote.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 9, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Tell you what rainforest....you stick to what makes conservative republicans should do. The last person who should be giving Democrats any advice is you.

Posted by: kindness1 | December 9, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Great - now these fools can kill DADT and START with all this needless delay.

They were too gutless to pass this before the elections, and NOW they are insisting on "fighting"

Posted by: gorlando1 | December 9, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

These "Demonizing Democrats", instead of Cutting Spending, they'd rather use Class Warfare, Rob Peter to Pay Paul, instead.
Democrats wants to Increase Taxes to cover
their Over-spending.
This is Not responsible government.

Posted by: ohioan | December 9, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Maybe it's time for true conservatives to step away from the Republican Party and stand behind Libertarian candidates in 2012.

Just as it's time for true liberals to step away from the Democratic Party and stand behind Green candidates for 2012. After all, what can be more important than saving the planet?

Posted by: RealTexan1 | December 9, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

This is extremely important if it is true


WOW


Anna Mahjar Barducci of Hudson New York writes:


Iran is planning to place medium-range missiles on Venezuelan soil, based on western information sources according to an article in the German daily, Die Welt, of November 25, 2010.

According to the article, an agreement between the two countries was signed during the last visit o Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to Tehran.

The previously undisclosed contract provides for the establishment of a jointly operated military base in Venezuela, and the joint development of ground-to-ground missiles.


_________________________


If this is true, it is pretty serious. AND Obama should respond.


http://www.hudson-ny.org/1714/iran-missiles-in-venezuela


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 9, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Ohioan, have you met Skippy yet? Maybe you are cousins...

LOL

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 9, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Maybe all those Democrats should have done some shouting like that against dumb-as-**** Blue Dog Dems before the election, and held a vote on the tax cuts then?

Everyone calls Pres. Obama weak on this one, but it's a total failure of Dems in Congress, punting on the issue until there was literally no time left. Now they get all high and mighty about how good the deal is. Hypocrites.

All in all, this seems symbolic at best. They'll tweak something tiny and on the edges, and then probably swallow it. Hopefully that's what happens, so we can avoid the cuts for the income less than $250k expires.

And why, why, WHY is no one expressing anger towards the GOP in all this? It's their complete refusal to govern, at all, that's causing every freakin' problem Congress has right now. They want gridlock, they want the American people in pain. Perish the thought the media covers THAT.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | December 9, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Looks like tax cut deal and CR are the only things left that will get done in the lame duck and everything else is going to get flushed.

Posted by: Truthteller12 | December 9, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Looks like spending and tax cuts are the only things that will get done in the lame duck. Everything else is getting flushed

Posted by: Truthteller12 | December 9, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi doesn't oppose the stimulus idea that guts Social Security funding by 1/3? She promised she would protect Social Security. Not once during the campaign did any Democratic candidate say the would vote for economic stimulus, funded by gutting funding to the Social Security Trust Fund. Not one word about this policy.

We were all duped.

Posted by: AnnsThought | December 9, 2010 2:00 PM | Report abuse

my bad

Posted by: Truthteller12 | December 9, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Very few House Dems will admit their own failure to vote on tax extension before the mid-terms was a major mistake. Now they seem to have focused all of their anger and disappointment on Obama. Understandable that they would react this way, being human beings, but also striking (more pathetic than poignant) that they have no plan b if package fails, and no credible proposals to amend it. Very sad. Makes Pelosi's achievement in passing health care even more impressive.

Posted by: BillB10 | December 9, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Right and left wingers on both sides of the aisle need to come down from their mountain tops where the thin air has affected their brains and the clouds have distorted their ability to see those struggling on the ground.

If any of these individuals had a brain, they sure aren't using it. Anyone with a brain would see there is a need for compromise on both sides and a need for them to work things out together for the good of America and all her citizens.

Stop your bickering and start working together on real solutions - not just stop gap measures. We taxpayers are paying you to work on solutions not to put on a wrestling or boxing match.

Posted by: Nevadaandy | December 9, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Right and left wingers on both sides of the aisle need to come down from their mountain tops where the thin air has affected their brains and the clouds have distorted their ability to see those struggling on the ground.

If any of these individuals had a brain, they sure aren't using it. Anyone with a brain would see there is a need for compromise on both sides and a need for them to work things out together for the good of America and all her citizens.

Stop your bickering and start working together on real solutions - not just stop gap measures. We taxpayers are paying you to work on solutions not to put on a wrestling or boxing match.

Posted by: Nevadaandy | December 9, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Tell you what rainforest....you stick to what makes conservative republicans should do. The last person who should be giving Democrats any advice is you.

Posted by: kindness1 | December 9, 2010 1:36 PM


____________________________

Nice name - why don't you live up to it?

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 9, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Congress, take the rest of the year off - go home - let the tax cuts expire and do nothing, please! Your an embarassment. We will finally get some movement on the deficit, our children will thanks you and all you have to do is NOTHING. Got it? Go home already.
You can come back next year and amuse us with your stunning ineptitude and gridlock.

Posted by: sux123 | December 9, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Nader or Gore 2012. Enough said.

Posted by: RealTexan1 | December 9, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

BillB10 is right. Where were all these heroic Dems before the election when Obama wanted a vote on taxes? And what, exactly, given House rules, will they be able to do in January when the GOP takes over the House? Granted, some will be at home because they lost, but this is all a little too much theater and emotion and not enough common sense and real strategy.

The rich will get what they want until they decide there is something they want more than more money--like social peace, or more order or personal safety or who knows what. The alternative is more people voting Dem and recognizing that the GOP is only there for the rich. But that won't happen until the Dems learn to use power better, or until something happens to change the rules of the game. But right now the Left is in a pretty powerless position and not using its power very well either.

Posted by: Mimikatz | December 9, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Funny, up to now Dems complained that being the Party of No was a bad thing.

Except when they want to do it, then just fine.

Obama has to fight his own Liberal Party of No - the Republicans want to go along with him.

So, Liberals will kill the deal, everyones taxes will go up on Jan. 1, and liberals will be blamed for it and killing a done deal even Obama wanted that could have prevented it.

And then Republicans can drive an even harder deal in Jan. after that happens.

Like jamming the health care bill thru and demolishing their own party in the election, liberals think this makes sense.

Posted by: buddy2105 | December 9, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi was raised from political death in the mid-terms for this moment. As she proudly tries to add new taxation on all Americans, she stands with obstinate Liberals who have absolutely no clue, nor care what happens to The People in spite of a profound shellacking.

I sincerely hope that she is arrogantly sitting in House Chambers as the inane and unwanted Obamacare is repealed whether that be next year or in 2012 when this corrupt, self-serving Administration is dispatched by the electorate.

Posted by: 2012frank | December 9, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Obama deserves to take heat over this stupid compromise--but so does Mitch McConnell, who sold out Americans with his new deficit expansion plan. DeMint & Palin have already voiced opposition, but the rest of the so-called conservatives have fallen back on blind support of their leadership that served the GOP just oh so well under W. Bush. Wake up, guys--just because Democrats think it's a bad bill doesn't mean Republicans have to automatically say it's a good one.

Posted by: SageThrasher | December 9, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I'd be pretty cheesed if I were a House Dem as well. But that doesn't change the overall math of the situation. Sixty votes is the threshold in the Senate and the Dems only have about 55 sure votes now and probably only about 50 sure votes in January. I'll go out on a limb here. Democrats will be very happy to have a 60 vote threshold in the Senate come January.

Posted by: willows1 | December 9, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi was raised from political death in the mid-terms for this moment. As she proudly tries to add new taxation on all Americans, she stands with obstinate Liberals who have absolutely no clue, nor care what happens to The People in spite of a profound shellacking.

I sincerely hope that she is arrogantly sitting in House Chambers as the inane and unwanted Obamacare is repealed whether that be next year or in 2012 when this corrupt, self-serving Administration is dispatched by the electorate.

Posted by: 2012frank | December 9, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

It's too bad the Democrats didn't want this fight before the election it might have made a difference in the elections. Nope, let's do it after the Republicans take the House majority and then not support the President's plan. What is their game plan if they don't get this bill through? Soup lines for the unemployed? I'm not in favor the rich getting richer, but if anyone thinks the Republicans are going to extend this kind of deal once they have the keys to house, then they are mistaken. The rich always get richer under Republicans and the poor get poorer. What an odd time to display guts.

Posted by: JoyP | December 9, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Given that the Congressional Democrats were pushed by the WH to take this vote months ago and balked, I'm starting to think this is all an act.

Maybe they have figured out that the only way to get Republicans, and Conservadems, to support ANYTHING is if Democrats and liberals oppose it. I wish they had figured that out before the Medicare Buy In idea was put forth.

Personally, I'd rather that ALL the tax cuts expire. But I'm okay with this package because the economy needs more stimulus. Even poorly designed stimulus, as the case may be. Also too, the Republicans would not have extended unemployment without this deal, and I care more about the unemployed than I do about partisan saber rattling and phony political machismo.

Posted by: HansSolo | December 9, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Let all the tax cuts expire. After all we're concerned about the deficit, right? Even for the middle class, the economy-boosting impact of a tax cut is minimal (and if you think a cut for the wealthy will stimulate economy then I've got great news for you--the Key Bridge is on sale for a low, low price).

Yes, the Republicans are holding unemployment benefits hostage to their budget-busting tax cuts, and they are scum for it. But everybody knows that negotiating with kidnappers is never the right way to go.

Posted by: csdiego | December 9, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Piglosi is irrelevant. The worst? Nothing happens 'till the Repubs take over the House and pass the tax bill with retroactive clause. Senate will have NO choice but to pass whatever the Repub House gives them and Obie will have to sign.

Posted by: illogicbuster | December 9, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Tell you what rainforest....you stick to what makes conservative republicans should do. The last person who should be giving Democrats any advice is you.

Posted by: kindness1 | December 9, 2010 1:36 PM

______________________________


The bottom line is if the democrats can not act in their own best interests, HOW can they be trusted to govern for the nation ???


Clearly, by holding everything up, the House democrats ONLY hurt the prospects for their own agenda - that just proves how unfit to govern the democrats are.


This is insanity - Sorry, but there is no other way to describe this irrational behavior. The democrats lost the election - and time is ticking. In a few weeks, the Republicans will have even more votes and more power.


It makes ZERO sense for the democrats to delay anything at this point.


It is like a football team down 14 points with 5 minutes to go - and acting to run down the clock - it's just not the way to play the game.

.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 9, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

They are posturing. Neither the Dems nor the GOP have been on TV enough. They need more face time before they vote.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | December 9, 2010 2:38 PM | Report abuse

"What an odd time to display guts."

No guts have been displayed.
Posing and posturing that is all.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 2:42 PM | Report abuse

"Wake up, guys--just because Democrats think it's a bad bill doesn't mean Republicans have to automatically say it's a good one."

Welcome to the future Rip, things changed since you fell asleep.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

The left's newly found concern with the deficit is touching. Or it would be touching if they actually were concerned.

Like most of the left, this is just demogoguery, plain and simple. After all I don't recall any discussion of the impact on the deficit when the monstrous stimulus bill was being considered. Oh no, back then it was all about mythic keynesian multiplier effects. yeah right.

so spare Americans the false piety. The psuedo sanctimony is fooling very few

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 9, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Yeah!!!--finally someone had the guts to stand up to the economic royalists--tell the rich they can have their tax cuts when we get the job creation benefits for the past 8 years that they promised us...

Posted by: staussfamily | December 9, 2010 2:48 PM | Report abuse

@Nevadaandy

The problem with your plan about both sides just "coming down off their mountains" and working things out is that you falsely equate the two sides, when they aren't equal in their purity obsession.

Right now the right is completely unwilling to budge. On anything. At all. Members previously thought as "moderate" are holding the filibuster line on things THEY SUPPORT for bogus reasons. There are at least a half dozen GOP Senators that want DADT repealed...more than the 60 needed to break a filibuster. But it STILL keeps getting stalled, just for the sake of stalling. Only one side is doing that, and has been on every piece of legislation for 2 years.

I'm willing to budge from left positions. I'm not even as far left as many on this blog would believe. But you have one side that is totally off it's hinges...and it's simply wrong to treat them like a legitimate political party when they refuse to act like one.

Dems: We think a public option would be the best way to cover all Americans with health insurance.

GOP: Dems want to kill your grandmother!

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | December 9, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi and her Playmates in the Pelosi Play Pin should read the following. They are really making a case to kick them all out in 2012! What blooming idiots!


December 8, 2010
Americans Support Two Major Elements of Tax Compromise
Liberal vs. conservative/moderate Democrats disagree on extending tax cuts for all
by Lydia Saad

PRINCETON, NJ -- Two major elements included in the tax agreement reached Monday between President Barack Obama and Republican leaders in Congress meet with broad public support. Two-thirds of Americans (66%) favor extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for all Americans for two years, and an identical number support extending unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed.

Support for Extending Tax Cuts and Unemployment Benefits, Among National Adults and by Party, December 2010

According to Gallup polling conducted Dec. 3-6, the slight majority of Democrats, as well as most independents and Republicans, would vote for a two-year extension of the tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003.

This differs slightly from a November Gallup poll giving Americans three options for extending the Bush tax cuts. That poll found 40% in favor of extending the tax cuts for all Americans, 44% in favor of extending them with limits on tax breaks for the wealthy, and 13% in favor of letting the tax breaks expire altogether. Nevertheless, the results of the new question suggest that, while the compromise position on taxes may not be their ideal, most Americans would support congressional passage of it.

In terms of extending unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed, more rank-and-file Republicans say they would vote against this than for it; however, the vast majority of independents and Democrats are in favor.

Posted by: wheeljc | December 9, 2010 2:51 PM | Report abuse

"psuedo sanctimony is fooling very few"

Holy jeebus, a political tongue twister.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

All, my take on how Obama can quiet the charge that he's "triangulating":

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/how_obama_can_quiet_the_charge.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | December 9, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

skippy, got an evidence that the GOP is concerned with the deficit?

yeah, didn't think so.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 9, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Most of the current deficit is leftovers from the Bush tax cuts and the legacy of funding two wars "off budget"-which are now "on budget"--Here's and idea: Don't start elective wars in the first place and don't make big giveaways to billionaires- WOW- just saved about $3 trillion right there- I am delighted that the GOP is so interested now in fiscal responsibility- clearly there are some big "elephants in the room" for them to shoot...

Posted by: staussfamily | December 9, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

BillB10 is right on point. You have all these Dems in-fighting over the Tax Cut. WOW!!! Nancy Pelosi pulled off a good cohesive group to pass HealthCare. Amazing!!!

President Obama came out the deal with waaayyy mmooorree......

Republicans - want $100billion Tax-Cuts for the Rich.

The President will get - $197 billion to the non-rich, $146 billion in business tax cuts to push JOB CREATION, plus an extension of the $280 billion middle-class tax cut.

Posted by: clifton3 | December 9, 2010 2:55 PM | Report abuse

BillB10 is right on point. You have all these Dems in-fighting over the Tax Cut. WOW!!! Nancy Pelosi pulled off a good cohesive group to pass HealthCare. Amazing!!!

President Obama came out the deal with waaayyy mmooorree......

Republicans - want $100billion Tax-Cuts for the Rich.

The President will get - $197 billion to the non-rich, $146 billion in business tax cuts to push JOB CREATION, plus an extension of the $280 billion middle-class tax cut.

Posted by: clifton3 | December 9, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

@bbq: "There are at least a half dozen GOP Senators that want DADT repealed...more than the 60 needed to break a filibuster. But it STILL keeps getting stalled, just for the sake of stalling."

?????

C'mon now - Reid is the one effin' this up. You're fooling no one (but yourself?)

BTW, special for Ethan:

"Why the Senate keeps holding votes on bills everyone knows will not pass"

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/12/09/why-the-senate-keeps-holding-votes-on-bills-everyone-knows-will-not-pass/#ixzz17e6LAefl

Posted by: sbj3 | December 9, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

staussfamily - That isn't the worst of it. Look at the national debt. Now look at how much it grew under various Presidents...

Hint: It tripled under Reagan and Doubled under W.

Now tell me who it was that said, "Deficits don't matter."

Republicans LOVE running up the debt. Especially if they can transfer that debt, via "Trickle Down" economics to the super wealthy.

Posted by: HansSolo | December 9, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

If the concern is that a lot of the wealthy may cut or prevent job hires then why not provide a tax incentive for the business they are in charge of rather than boost their income? How many of those making 250K+ are directly responsible for hiring employees? I'd guess (I know I shouldn't) that some proportion of these wealthy either inherited it, or or are responsible for a minimum (and not negotiable) number of jobs like doctors, lawyers, actors and sports players (the latter of course to a possibly negligible degree. It seems like a crude way to ensure job growth to just give them all tax reductions. I know there are already business incentives but proposing more to compromise would be much more helpful than flat out giving money to the wealthy. Of course there's nothing wrong w/ giving money to anyone, except when there are people trying to make ends meet, with no purchasing power on their own to afford necessities like food and health care, which are by the way much more efficient for productivity than luxury cars and 4-star dinners. Something's off here. Is it just that democrats are completely inept at explaining things or am I not understanding the message?

Kerrio

Posted by: augabog92 | December 9, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

BillB10 is right on point. You have all these Dems in-fighting over the Tax Cut. WOW!!! Nancy Pelosi pulled off a good cohesive group to pass HealthCare. Amazing!!!

President Obama came out the deal with waaayyy mmooorree......

Republicans want - $100 billion Tax-Cuts for the Rich. It's basically a return-on-investment to themselves (payback to themselves).

The President will get - $197 billion to the non-rich, $146 billion in business tax cuts to push JOB CREATION, plus an extension of the $280 billion middle-class tax cut.

Posted by: clifton3 | December 9, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

It'll come up and it will pass. This is just gamesmanship like Reid's 250K vote.

If I were Pelosi, I would let the Senate sweat a bit. The obstructionist jerks in the Senate have killed,maimed, and flat out ignored, plenty of good legislation that came out of the House. Let McConnell pee his pants.

Posted by: wd1214 | December 9, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

oh suzie my dear I am heartily convinced that the Republicans have the deficit first and foremost in their minds. Look at the tussle that DeMint has stirred up.

Basically what you are saying, my dear, is you'd rather talk about anything BUT the demogoguery of the left on the deficit.

Nice try sweetie. Really a nice try.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 9, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Skip, even though "Suzie" thinks I am a thumb sucking, infantile, spoiled tantrum pitcher...or whatever, don't you think your mock red-neck sneer, "sweetie" and "my dear" detracts from your incisive political analysis, your erudite insight?

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

From Rep. Capuano:

"I strongly support extending the tax cuts for everyone below $250,000 and I believe we must extend unemployment benefits for those still struggling to find work. As I’ve reported to you in the past, I am willing to negotiate on the details but negotiation and compromise mean that both sides have to give a little to get a little. That is not what happened here. Republicans basically got everything they wanted in this bill and Democrats simply did not get enough in return. What has been even more frustrating for many of us is that the "compromise" also includes a number of provisions favored by Republicans that weren’t even on the table, such as estate tax exemptions, another provision that favors the wealthy. As you know, I often vote on bills that do not represent 100% of what I want and I am not looking for perfection here either, but the benefits for average Americans in this deal do not outweigh its many costs. Today’s Caucus vote makes it clear that the House will not simply accept this deal without a fight. As always, I will keep you posted as this debate over tax cuts continues. It remains my sincere hope that Democrats, Republicans and the President can work together to craft a tax cuts package that recognizes two important realities: middle class tax cuts and extended unemployment benefits are still necessary because our economy continues to struggle; and we cannot add to our already high deficit by adding provisions that only benefit the wealthy."

Posted by: wbgonne | December 9, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Gotta love the extremist Republican party.


Always fighting tooth and nail for their Multi Billionaire Corporate overlords!


Nothing scares Republicans more in these days of economic uncertainty than whether or not some silver spooned sh*t head is going to have to pay taxes on their multi millions in inheritance...


.

Posted by: DrainYou | December 9, 2010 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Oh skippy, so nice to hear your terms of endearment.

LOL

Here's your GOP seriousness:

"GOP gets queasy over earmark ban"

After agreeing to kill earmarks, some of the most conservative GOP lawmakers are already starting to ask themselves: What have we done?

Indeed, many Republicans are now worried that the bridges in their districts won’t be fixed, the tariff relief to the local chemical company isn’t coming and the water systems might not be built without a little direction from Congress.


So some Republicans are discussing exemptions to the earmark ban, allowing transportation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and water projects. While transportation earmarks are probably the most notorious — think “Bridge to Nowhere” — there is talk about tweaking the very definition of “earmark.”

“It’s like what beauty is,” said Rep. Phil Roe (R-Tenn.). “Everyone knows what a bridge to nowhere is, or an airport that lands no airplanes, or a statue to you — everyone knows that’s bad. It’s easy to say what an earmark isn’t, rather than what an earmark is.”

The issue has popped up most frequently at the Conservative Opportunity Society, the caucus founded by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) in the early 1980s. During their Wednesday morning meeting last week, caucus members had a long discussion about how the Republican Party could redefine “member-directed spending,” as earmarks are formally called on the Hill.

Conservatives like Roe, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann and Iowa Rep. Steve King are among those trying to figure out a longer-term, sustainable way to get money back to projects in their districts.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46172.html#ixzz17eE3NJOv

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 9, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Maybe this is just payback by the remaining House Dems for what the American people did to them in November. Those left are probably mostly secure. So let the taxes for EVERYONE rise. Then the new House Republicans will be flush with money. If they don't right the ship pronto, they'll have no excuses. Not a bad ploy.

Heck, I'll probably get tagged for AMT anyways, so I'm cool with it.

Posted by: toshiro1 | December 9, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

shrink,

The tantrums (as you call it) may have been more effective last August and September. That was the time when liberals should have pushed congress.

Here's the thing...what plan does Congress have if they ditch the Obama compromise? Heard any details of it? What's their strategy? Got any info on that?

Throwing tantrums is one thing. But if they don't have a plan, or any leverage, what's the point? As someone else noted, it's posing and posturing. You may like that, and that's fine. I find it childish, especially now when a deadline looms, and it's Christmas, and a lot of struggling people are about to have their lot in life take a turn for the worse.

My bet is this plan passes, and with some of those who voted 'no' today voting 'aye' in the end....because they ran themselves totally and completely out of options. Pretty simple, really.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 9, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

Why would I believe the "analysis" of the republicans printed in politico? Why would any conservative trust that source? I certainly don't.

will earmarks be debated? Of course they will and I will note that the debate is between factions of the republican party with no voice from the left at all. At least none that I'm hearing. If Dennis Kuchinich supports a ban on ear marks (for example) please advise.

I have stated here repeatedly that I don't trust the Republicans. Spending went up when they were in the majority too. They strayed and paid the price at the polls. Unfortunately for Americans we seem to have politicians that get to DC and turn into career spenders. Democrat or Republican, it matters not. We threw the bums out only to see them replaced by even more rapacious spenders.

Getting that under control will take more attention from the voters which means less attention to other things in our lives.

Hanssolo here makes a typical mistake when he blames presidents for spending. The constitution makes it clear that the purse strings are held by the legislature. It is not the job of the president to impose discipline on the congress, it is the job of the people. Blaming Reagan, or Bush misses the point. When congress is focused on self control the country's finances experience better stewardship. Lauding Clinton of for surpluses simply compounds hanssolo's error. The surplus was the result of restraint in congress, not some over arching political ability possessed by the philanderer in chief.

Shrink, I was making an attempt at being snide. That you point out that I'm not good at it I will accept as a compliment.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 9, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Maybe they read you everyday, Greg. Certainly, they're just as obnoxiously stupid.

Posted by: jibe | December 9, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

"...may have been more effective last August..."

I don't know how long you have been fighting, but I have been for decades, I never stop. Last August, a year ago, five years ago. You fight Republicans or you lose.

"struggling people" what do you know about that?
Do you work every day with indigent people? If you do, then you are one of the good people. They need shoes, not blankets by the way.

Meanwhile no one cares about what you and I think of each other, least of all you and I...the fact is the Democrats squandered the historical leverage they had. Now they are looking for people to blame. The left? Yeah, lets blame them, everyone hates the left.

So long Democrats, you want to find out why you lost everything you had after the Bush/Cheney catastrophe, look in the mirror, yeah you.


Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 3:49 PM | Report abuse

"Shrink, I was making an attempt at being snide. That you point out that I'm not good at it I will accept as a compliment."

de nada

It is hard to be serious and funny at the same time. It is like an art form. That C3 person sure let me know how not funny I was, its ok, criticism builds character.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Great statesmanship! No wonder they reelected Pelosi.

Posted by: suegbic1 | December 9, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

As they have done with other liberal causes, democrats have formally declared war on Christmas just as they have with Christianity.

Posted by: fury60 | December 9, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

shrink,

Been a liberal my whole life. Been an active liberal since 1974.

""struggling people" what do you know about that?
Do you work every day with indigent people? If you do, then you are one of the good people. They need shoes, not blankets by the way."

This is what I know: I volunteer 2 evenings a week at our local food pantry packing boxes of food, also extra hours during food drives. A good friend is the exec director. I do what I can to help. I've been involved in the "Empty Bowls" movement for the last 15 years. Google it. I make bowls for 3 local events to raise funds.

Our food bank has been overrun with need, and we can't keep up. A lot of the people who are coming in are the working poor, many more are those who have lost their UI benefits.

As far as your "they need shoes, not blankets" the needs vary from place to place. Our local shelters are soliciting for blankets and coats, and shoes. It's cold here in Michigan.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 9, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Famous "Last Stands..." in fact or fiction:

General George Armstrong Custer...

The Alamo

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

Bonnie and Clyde

Thelma and Louise

Santino "Sonny" Corleone at the toll booth

Captain Ahab

Posted by: jade_7243 | December 9, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Famous "Last Stands..." in fact or fiction:

General George Armstrong Custer...

The Alamo

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

Bonnie and Clyde

Thelma and Louise

Santino "Sonny" Corleone at the toll booth

Captain Ahab

Posted by: jade_7243 | December 9, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Famous "Last Stands..." in fact or fiction:

General George Armstrong Custer...

The Alamo

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

Bonnie and Clyde

Thelma and Louise

Santino "Sonny" Corleone at the toll booth

Captain Ahab

Posted by: jade_7243 | December 9, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

pelosi and her lapdog democrats really don't care one bit about working americans,
but then, when you live in a $24 Million dollar Estate and fly a company 757....
you might have issues connecting with the regular folks, the ones trying to feed thier children....

good ridance to 4 years of spendaholic excess and a near total meltdown of america from the very politicians sworn to serve us...

some one throw a bucket of water on pelosi!

Posted by: simonsays1 | December 9, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

We are a Representative Republic which means simply that when the majority of the public speaks our representatives are supposed to listen. We spoke loudy in November and yet the arrogant liberals in the house insist on ignoring us. They cannot be gone soon enough!

Posted by: ransr01 | December 9, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

What if we were to allow the tax-breaks to expire but at the same time write a law allowing tax-payers to write off EVERY dollar that they invest in US business and industry?

Economically, this could give us the best of both worlds. We could accrue the theoretical benefits of "supply-side" economics while using tax policy to ensure that wealth accumulated in the upper brackets actually DOES "trickle down" as most people would rather invest money than pay taxes on it. Allowing people to retain control of their own money and invest it for themselves rather than taxing them and "redistributing" the wealth through direct government intervention would guarantee that those making the investments will have a profit motive and vested personal interest in putting the money where it will do them, and the economy as a whole, the most good. This is obviously far superior to having such decisions made by a bureacrat or offical who has no personal interest in making a solid investment and who may well lack the business savvy to make a wise investment or may even be basing his or her decisions on something other than economic factors. Moreover, using tax-policy rather than "redistribution" to encourage investment in America also avoid having to funnel this money through our huge and staggeringly inefficient federal bureacracy with its VERY sticky fingers.

Politically, such a plan could, I think, appeal to many on both sides of the aisle. Conservatives should be pleased that the "rich" are being "allowed" to keep control on their own money while the left should be pleased that the government is still taking steps to ensure that capital DOES flow down to the lowest levels of the socio-economic pyramid. I'd also couple this plan with severe tax penalties on businesses that "off-shore" jobs, which would, I assume, also appeal more to leftists though a lot of conservatives are none-too-happy with the plague of off-shoring themselves.

This is just an idea but I think it is a good one. The devil, no doubt, is in the details.

Posted by: andrew23boyle | December 9, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

"It's cold here in Michigan."

My job is all about the interface between the criminal justice system and the mental health system and the people who travel between the two. I have noticed more and more people arriving in transitional service venues who are shoeless, their feet bound in rags or multiple pairs of wet socks, like something out of Dickens.

A bad time to fight tax cuts for the rich...There is no good time to fight tax cuts for the rich and so there is no bad time to fight. Income disparity is something no one wants to talk about, as if it were an abstraction. It is America's nemesis.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

shrink: "A bad time to fight tax cuts for the rich...There is no good time to fight tax cuts for the rich and so there is no bad time to fight. Income disparity is something no one wants to talk about, as if it were an abstraction. It is America's nemesis. "

What makes you think I disagree with that from an ideological perspective?

However, the practical reality is that a whole bunch of additional people lost there UI benefits last week on December 1. Can we send them to eat at your house? Do you think there's a snowball's chance in hell that come January the GOP house will introduce legislation to give them money to buy groceries? If so, tell me more.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 9, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

The fight is permanent, it isn't a series of tactical skirmishes. Obama has failed to lead. He has tried to be a President that allows Americans to lead themselves. He stands in his best approximation of the middle and says, "follow me!" That would only work if the middle stayed in the same place. Republicans figured that out right away.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse


The Dems will lose their uniue and valuable position as GROWNUPS if someone doesn't muzzle the loud mouthed New York Rep. Weiner. Screaming inarticulately,
won't shut up. All the Dems need: a Tea Party syndrome clone.

Posted by: whistling | December 9, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse


The Dems will lose their uniue and valuable position as GROWNUPS if someone doesn't muzzle the loud mouthed New York Rep. Weiner. Screaming inarticulately,
won't shut up. All the Dems need: a Tea Party clone.

Posted by: whistling | December 9, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse


The Dems will lose their valuable position as GROWNUPS if someone doesn't muzzle the loud mouthed New York Rep. Weiner. Screaming inarticulately,
won't shut up. All the Dems need: a Tea Party clone.

Posted by: whistling | December 9, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Shrink2, let's think for a moment about the folks you mention. Those shoeless people in transition from the justice system to the mental health system.

What is the best venue for them? what level of care works best? I work in a building that once housed a state "mental hospital" before moving here my outfit occupied a building that was once a county TB hospital. Were those the right settings for their treatment? If so why are they abandonned now?

Isn't in possible that a return to the old model of "housing" some folks might actually be better for them? When I lived in the southwest I noted that many of the "homeless" fell into two categories: those for whom this was a lifestyle choice and the mentally ill (if that's un pc accept my apologies). Is letting folks who are barely capable of caring for themselves, who are lost and spiritually poor, wander about in our world being victimized by anyone meaner and stronger, the best we can do? I'm asking you because you're there, on the front lines of this.

I don't quite understand why we abandonned the old treatment model. Perhaps it amounted to incaceration by the state and was therefore determined to be illegal. but honestly I just think we're failing these folks by letting them lose on the streets.

I am sincerely interested in your insight.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 9, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

@frank2012
"care what happens to The People in spite of a profound shellacking"

~46% of the vote in House elections across the country was for Democrats (~48% in Senate races). It takes a willful suspension of critical faculties (or lack thereof) to accept and promote this kind of characterization.

GOP/TEA have "taken their country back". From the other half of the country, I presume?

Posted by: firebug2 | December 9, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

"I just think we're failing these folks by letting them lose on the streets."

Yes you are correct. Every one was someone's precious child growing up. Exactly as you say, safety is required before recovery can begin. I worry about being like a "cut man" in a boxer's corner. They send 'em in tazed, bloody, beaten, raped, malnourished, crawling with lice, shattered lives...we wash them, feed them, prop 'em up, give 'em a pep talk and shove them back out into the same circumstances.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 9, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Yeah lets give them their big tax cut. We'll see who is gonna be crying because their "expensive cars" are running on crappy streets. Who they gonna call when their house is burning, who are they going call when someone is breaking into their mansions? There goes your tax cuts you bunch of whiners. You the rich are complaining because people are taking welfare? well look at you, you are just the same. Go and spend your tax cut on some wine up in Europe. Tell me how many "JOBS" and where you gonna open your "business" with your tax cut so I can go and apply for a job? Yeah because you gonna have many positions open for the people.

Posted by: R3N364D3 | December 9, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

GOP insists that tax cuts for the rich should be extended because it's a bad time to raise anybody's taxes during a recession. Fine, but when is a good time? Didn't they enact the tax cuts in the time of unprecedented surplus (which, btw, Clinton wanted to spend on paying off debt)? So if economy turns around and is growing, raising taxes will be a bad idea because it may stifle growth? Is it OK to raise taxes in the time of war country needs to pay for? Apparently not, go support the troops by buying stuff you don't need with money you don't have.

Sales of Porche's are up 60%. Let's make sure rich people have enough money to support a German auto maker. What about people that have applied for 200 jobs over past two years and are still unemployed? Wrong time to be an American.

Posted by: firebug2 | December 9, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

skippy,

A lot of the people who used to be cared for in state facilities still are....jails and prisons. Maybe shrink can point to statistics about the numbers of incarcerated persons who are mentally ill.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 9, 2010 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Tax cuts to the rich and unemployment benefits are important issues, but pale in comparison to the elephant in the living room that is, the size and expense of government. I wonder if Obama will ever consider that the government is too large and too expensive and downsize it by about 30%. Since he is a Lame Duck downsizing government would be an appropriate parting gift and amends to the people who supported him who he has consistently failed to support.Obama leave in style, make amends and find something to occupy yourself that you are better equipped to do. As a progressive/independent II once sent him money, get no pleasure in seeing how he acted once elected and hate to admit that Hillary was right when she said we didn't know him, unfortunately we knew her only too well.. Free no log-in editorial cartoons http://www.saintpeterii.com

Posted by: saintpeterii | December 9, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Tax cuts to the rich and unemployment benefits are important issues, but pale in comparison to the elephant in the living room that is, the size and expense of government. I wonder if Obama will ever consider that the government is too large and too expensive and downsize it by about 30%. Since he is a Lame Duck downsizing government would be an appropriate parting gift and amends to the people who supported him who he has consistently failed to support.Obama leave in style, make amends and find something to occupy yourself that you are better equipped to do. As a progressive/independent I once sent him money, get no pleasure in seeing how he acted once elected and hate to admit that Hillary was right when she said we didn't know him, unfortunately we knew her only too well.. Free no log-in editorial cartoons http://www.saintpeterii.com

Posted by: saintpeterii | December 9, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

In 2008 it has been determined the cost of war is at $3 trillion. What the media and politicians are not revealing is the estimated 35,000 disabled
troops and their families that we taxpayers must support and rightfully so. The cost could well be $5 trillion in 2011.

Posted by: rheckler2002 | December 9, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

A local USA economy = economic growth and new wealth for the USA!

Food for thought: The war is killing the economy not medicare, Social Security, public education or food stamps!!! In 2008 it has been determined the cost of war is at $3 trillion. What the media and politicians are not revealing is the estimated 35,000 disabled
troops and their families that we taxpayers must support and rightfully so. The cost could well be $5 trillion in 2011.


1. The U.S. health care system is typically characterized as a largely private-sector system, so it may come as a surprise that more than 60% of the $2 trillion annual U.S. health care bill is paid through taxes, according to a 2002 analysis published in Health Affairs by Harvard Medical School associate professors Steffie Woolhandler and David Himmelstein.


2. Social Security adds to the deficit Reality: It's not just wrong—it's impossible! By law, Social Security's funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can't add one penny to the deficit.


3. Benefit cuts are the only way to fix Social Security. Reality: Social Security doesn't need to be fixed. Baby boomers were being planned for decades ago.

But if we want to strengthen it, here's a better way: Make the rich pay their fair share. If the very rich paid taxes on all of their income, Social Security would be sustainable for decades to come. Right now, high earners only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,000 of their income. But conservatives insist benefit cuts are the only way because they want to protect the super-rich from paying their fair share.

4. Politicians forget to tell the news media privatizing Social Security will add $700 billion to the deficit annually for the next 20 years.

5. Letting tax cuts for the top 2 percent—which were never meant to be permanent—expire as scheduled would pay down the federal debt by $700 billion over the next ten years.


6. Medicare is NOT free. Millions of people using medicare insurance STILL pay into medicare insurance every month.


7. The military industrial complex requires 60% of every tax dollar.... way tooo much money. REDUCE THIS BY 50%!


8.Social Security is NOT free. People paid for it!


Food for thought: The war is killing the economy not medicare, Social Security, public education or food stamps!!!

Posted by: rheckler2002 | December 9, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Miller,

What a complete and utter sense of futility you iliberals are Inadvertently, I believe, you infused in my brain exactly what I've been thinking with all this tax cut/hike mumbo jumbo. You talk about what great things can be done with all the gazillions of extra tax dollars (in your mind anyway) the wealthy will give you! But, wait a minute, aren't we going to buy down the deficit?? You know, actually use the extra dollars to pay off the big credit card bill in the sky you and your ilk are outrageously and irresponsibly ballooning out of proportion. Pretty soon we'll have the proverbial "lead balloon" that will drop right on our descendants heads.

When you write more checks than the checkbook can handle, you don't just keep adding money - would that we could - to the checkbook.. Somewhere you have to stop writing the bogus checks. I also would like the warm fuzzy that, if I give you money to pay you reckless overdrafting that you would pay it off! Imagine that. One of the main reasons I would go down in flames before I would agree with taxing the poor "rich" folks (contrast intended) is that you'll want more tomorrow. And why do I trust the government to do better with their money then they can?
Is there any room for serious debate with you posers? No. Blame the GOP. I don't blame them. They make sense/cents.

Posted by: gary928 | December 9, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

THIS IS DEFINITELY WORTH WATCHING AND PASSING ON TO EVERYONE ON YOUR EMAIL LIST…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=JVAhr4hZDJE&vq=medium#t=19

Posted by: wheeljc | December 9, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Republicans or Democrats, who cares. This is way too expensive!! - or is it back to the same old? I hope not, I have kids.

Posted by: rluchetta21 | December 9, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

The dummies should have forced a vote BEFORE the mid-terms.
Me thinks they're howling about their own incompetence!

Posted by: bluejay31 | December 9, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

So ... the Democrats in Congress are ... REVOLTING?

Sometimes the one-liners just write themselves.

Posted by: paletadelima | December 9, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

The House should just rewrite the package and send it back to the Senate with a take it or leave it note on it. We are stronger than some give us credit for being and we can take our lumps and come up fighting, with or without the blessing of the White House or the Senate Republicans.

Posted by: ronjeske | December 9, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

I tried to explain why the proposed $120 billion cut in employer taxes by reducing the employee contribution to 4.2% is not only wrong, but it is defunding the very employer tax fund which provides support for retired employees, injured and handicapped employees and survivors of employees so that their widows or widowers and children can have support, that Social Security was intending to support in its creation, only to have my comments get sucked into limbo.
I doubt that any employed person who thougt about this would want a tax cut and for their hard earned retirement disability or survivors income benefits to be replaced by the General Fund. This account is equivalent in most respects to workers compensation which employees pay into ,and ,in some cases is the only coverage employers provide as they do not duplicate retirement, disability, or survivors benefits with other coverage unless it is a State law requirement or they have privatized these benefits.It appears to be an accounting trick to coverup loss of income from the Employer trust fund account by making it appear to be in the future when it is happening now, and made up for by General Taxes Revenue, which currently finances Supplemental Security Income for those people who do not have enough employment quarters to qualify for the other programs and it is based on need.
I think the US government would do better to concentrate on strenthening its ability to make money out of its current resources instead of mismanaging its oil and gas reserves and not getting the maximum income possible from them, let alone enriching foreign corporations like BP instead of our own national companies and corporations which could be easily allowed to exploit our own resources in technology sharing agreements to promote economic self-sufficiency to the extent possible.
I heard the comment that this defunding of the Social Security employer trust fund accounts was going to make the Wounded Knee massacre of Sioux elderly , women, wounded, and children, look like a cakewalk. For shame, why would someone propose a cut so henious at Christmas time, that the elderly , handicapped, and survivors, like Tiny Tim the child of Bob Cratchet,be shifted to the poor house instead of being supported by the account intended to support the families of workers and not shuffled off into the ranks of the needy and never employed instead to be treated like indigents instead of the families of, and the backbone of America, that they are, the employed, without whom the tax structure and income of the US would not exist in its magnitude and breadth? I could not sleep at night if someone gave me a deal like that to have a measly 2.4 % more of my check every month if it meant that millions of peoples lives were going to be affected or them lose their income as widows, orphans, retired people, or handicapped workers unable to return to work, so I could have more take home pay while they have none, and lose their homes or lives.

Posted by: carol_olden | December 9, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Conservative baloney. This action plus what's going with the cyberwars against the multinational corporations trying to defund Wililinks represents the beginning of the international attempt to fight the international corporate forces of "friendly" fascism as exemplified by the GOP and the Tea Party in this country and their funders -- the multinational corporations and the wealthy elites. There are two kinds of Republicans -- the wealthy and Suckers. Which are you?

Posted by: allyourbasearebelongtous | December 9, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Conservative baloney. This action plus what's going with the cyberwars against the multinational corporations trying to defund Wililinks represents the beginning of the international attempt to fight the international corporate forces of "friendly" fascism as exemplified by the GOP and the Tea Party in this country and their funders -- the multinational corporations and the wealthy elites. There are two kinds of Republicans -- the wealthy and Suckers. Which are you?

Posted by: allyourbasearebelongtous | December 9, 2010 6:49 PM | Report abuse

And why, why, WHY is no one expressing anger towards the GOP in all this? It's their complete refusal to govern, at all, that's causing every freakin' problem Congress has right now
-----------------
Another dumbass lib that just doesnt get it. The complete "refusal to govern" translated means we will not let the dems buy their demographic on the back of the people in America that actually do pay taxes. We also do not recongize the socialistic "spread it around" agenda that zero has tried to take America. Liberalism is a disease!

Posted by: steelers01 | December 9, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Here is Obama's track record:


Supported $ 3,400,000,000 or $ 3.4 BILLION in 'loans', bailouts and guarantees given to Wall Street from the public coffers.

And

Accelerated the largest shift of debt (i.e. losses) from the private sector to the public in American history.

And

Supports Billionaires enjoying all the benefits of our country, but pay only 15% on their incomes (carried interest).

And

Gave 100's of 1000's of 'mandated customers' to the insurance industry and guaranteed the industry will get to keep 15-20% of the 'premiums' received from the new 'mandated customers' (oh, if a 'mandated customer' cant afford to pay the insurer, taxpayers will pay the insurer , but the insurer can still keep 15-20%). Only 80% of your and my premium has to be spent on actual health care services.

And

Expanded the invasion of Afghanistan, maintains a policy of pre-emptive war (starting wars to avoid wars), continues Bush-era torture, renditions, etc policies.

And

Signed on to the non-reform of the financial industry (six largest banks still too-big-to-fail, and investment and commercial banking functions still greyed - so, your and my deposits are at risk).

And

Supports manipulation of the system, so banks can borrow from the government at 1%, to buy government bonds that pay banks 3.4%; thus, 'making' 2.4% by simply shuffling paper. (This is a great trick! And illustrates clearly why a huge finance industry provides nothing to the nation)

And

Now, promotes 'the compromise' which leaves the budget to be 'balanced' on the backs of the middle class while tax gimmicks will persist for the wealthy and corporations.

As someone who voted for Obama in the primaries, in the general election, contributed to his campaign and the campaigns of many other Democrats, I can tell you that if this rip-off goes through the Democrats might as well join the Republican Party, because effectively - as many have said over the years - there is no difference.

Mitch McConnell for President and Barak Obama for Vice President --- That's where we are right now and in 2012 that might as well be the single party ticket.

If there are any Democrats, it's time (past time) for them to wise up and stop this guy.

Posted by: theworm1 | December 9, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Here is Obama's track record:


Supported $ 3,400,000,000 or $ 3.4 BILLION in 'loans', bailouts and guarantees given to Wall Street from the public coffers.

And

Accelerated the largest shift of debt (i.e. losses) from the private sector to the public in American history.

And

Supports Billionaires enjoying all the benefits of our country, but pay only 15% on their incomes (carried interest).

And

Gave 100's of 1000's of 'mandated customers' to the insurance industry and guaranteed the industry will get to keep 15-20% of the 'premiums' received from the new 'mandated customers' (oh, if a 'mandated customer' cant afford to pay the insurer, taxpayers will pay the insurer , but the insurer can still keep 15-20%). Only 80% of your and my premium has to be spent on actual health care services.

And

Expanded the invasion of Afghanistan, maintains a policy of pre-emptive war (starting wars to avoid wars), continues Bush-era torture, renditions, etc policies.

And

Signed on to the non-reform of the financial industry (six largest banks still too-big-to-fail, and investment and commercial banking functions still greyed - so, your and my deposits are at risk).

And

Supports manipulation of the system, so banks can borrow from the government at 1%, to buy government bonds that pay banks 3.4%; thus, 'making' 2.4% by simply shuffling paper. (This is a great trick! And illustrates clearly why a huge finance industry provides nothing to the nation)

And

Now, promotes 'the compromise' which leaves the budget to be 'balanced' on the backs of the middle class while tax gimmicks will persist for the wealthy and corporations.

As someone who voted for Obama in the primaries, in the general election, contributed to his campaign and the campaigns of many other Democrats, I can tell you that if this rip-off goes through the Democrats might as well join the Republican Party, because effectively - as many have said over the years - there is no difference.

Mitch McConnell for President and Barak Obama for Vice President --- That's where we are right now and in 2012 that might as well be the single party ticket.

If there are any Democrats, it's time (past time) for them to wise up and stop this guy.

Posted by: theworm1 | December 9, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

How stupid they all are. They want economic collapse. Do they not understand that it is THEIR childen's and grandchildren's future they are destroying. What idiots. It is the private sector, so called rich, small business people who will be hurt by the tax hikes. The Dems did not learn that tney will be booted next election just like some of their colleagues. Just plain stupid.

Posted by: eaglesnest1 | December 9, 2010 7:39 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans just blocked US health aid for 9/11 workers.

But according to the Republicans we can afford another 680 billion to line the pockets of billionaires who aren't paying their fair share to begin with because the sickeningly wealthy and bloated "conservatives" are the true "heroes" --

-- Clap hands, teanuts.

Posted by: jakrdy | December 9, 2010 7:39 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans just blocked US health aid for 9/11 workers.

But according to the Republicans we can afford another 680 billion to line the pockets of billionaires who aren't paying their fair share to begin with because the sickeningly wealthy and bloated "conservatives" are the true "heroes" --

-- Clap hands, teanuts.

Posted by: jakrdy | December 9, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

The myth is perpetuating itself. The tax issue is NOT about CUTS. It is about avoiding tax INCREASES. As far as a stimulus effect goes, nothing will change. A limit of certainty for two years is inadequate for businesses to invest capital and realize any growth. President Barak Hussein Chavez is playing the Republicans as fools. Wake up America, it's about the spending of a bloated government nanny state.

Posted by: wwwilins | December 9, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

I hope this sell-out to the wealthiest "Americans" gets blocked in the senate.

Posted by: Jihm | December 9, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Just a few points:

I have noticed that here in Australia an increased number of US citizens moving permanent (?) A couple of MD's I've got to know. Yeah, not 100's K's! But?

Your economy "WILL NEVER" recover! In real terms...the competition Asian other developing nations have total control of "Labour" therefore $$$$$$!

Obama aka Uncle Tom has given those that need the least the most...what a champion for the American people! It would seem he was planted by the conservative agenda (neo-cons) for the wealthiest Americans to move to "safe" off shore nations like Australia/Britain... look at the Australian $... 100's of Billions in investment...via Stock Exchange for the US elite to park them funds safely!

As a nation (historically) you guys don't put up with B/S...it's time to revolt...again...it's in your blood or was?

John Stewart (I believe a patriot) is delivering comical relief, when the US people need to be...on the streets and bring down the "injustices" of government! John Lennon said it over 30 years ago..."get on your feet and into the streets...Power to The People.. Right On!

Posted by: porpie9254 | December 9, 2010 8:20 PM | Report abuse

It would be an abdication of responsibility and power to succumb to bunch of weak, incompetent, ignorant opponents who have exhibited without doubt their incapability of running the country (except into a ditch).
If you fear people this easy to show their incompetence, then you should step aside.

Posted by: kacameron | December 9, 2010 8:22 PM | Report abuse

The party of No wants unequality in the USA ...aka treason to the US Constitution...
The people just want to reduce the budget by ending Congressional retirement plans, term limit them to 5 years, and cut their salary.

:)

Posted by: dottydo | December 9, 2010 8:30 PM | Report abuse

The party of No wants unequality in the USA ...aka treason to the US Constitution...
The people just want to reduce the budget by ending Congressional retirement plans, term limit them to 5 years, and cut their salary.

:)

Posted by: dottydo | December 9, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

The dems have super majorities in both Houses of Congress as well as the White House. AND ALL THEY DO IS WHINE....too bad they didn't LEAD and are slowly being relegated to the back bench again. Ba-bye.

Posted by: powerange | December 9, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

The liberal Dems couldn't care less about whether the Obama-GOP package adds to the deficit.

What they do care about is taxing the wealthy to pay for more domestic spending. That's the only way they can enact more social programs without sending the deficit through the roof.

They're furious at Obama for having foreclosed that possibility.

Posted by: sinz52 | December 9, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Pelosi and her dems have just perpetuated the LARGEST TAX INCREASE IN HISTORY of the USA if the tax package fails to pass before the lame duck session is over.

Most of the dems will not be back. Republicans take over the house in Jan. Alot of the new republicans are from the Tea Party group. Or they were elected by the Tea Party.

Obama got alot more from his negotiation than I expected. In Jan 2011 the new house members will be reluctant to give up so much to Obama. Since he can not have the LARGEST TAX INCREASE IN HISTORY on his record, Obama will have to bow to the republicans. Then, congress will pass the tax bill the republicans want without the concessions to Obama.

Pelosi has just demonstrated how dumb she is. She has much too high an opinion of herself. She just may cause the downfall of the whole democrat party. Good ridance.

Obama is already out in 2012.

Posted by: annnort | December 9, 2010 9:01 PM | Report abuse

These liberal so and sos are lying to us again. I was for a compromise but now I am not. Tell me how extending the tax cut is adding to the deficit? Did these liberals expect this big tax hike because this is not a tax cut? The only thing adding to a deficit is the spending that the Democrats added to the compromise.
Let us wait till the new Congress gets in and do it right. Lets work to get these know nothing liberal Democrats who could give a rats royal about this country out of office in 2012. And we need a new President that is not a marxist radical. Our family is fed up with these sorry so and sos that had no hesitation adding to the deficit with this no jobs 863 billion dollar stimulus that only padded the upward palms of special interests. They had no hesitation laying on an unwilling citizenry the most pathetic horrific Obama care bill.

Posted by: greatgran1 | December 9, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

Good. Let the Bush tax cuts die. We're broke. People without jobs can't pay taxes anyway, lower and middle income tax payers will not be signficiantly damaged. And rich folks can weeee weeee all the way home.

Posted by: BBear1 | December 9, 2010 9:40 PM | Report abuse

The truth here is that the voters in the last midtern election voted for 2 more yesrs gridlock which is what they got and what they deserve for creating this bungled tax deal in the first place.

The GOP is holding the president and the Democrats hostage to their dirty underhanded scheme: trading overly excessive tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% in exchange for extending unemployment benefits which barely pays peanuts and a 1 year payroll tax holiday.

WHAT???!!! This is all that the honest, law abiding hardworking American citizens who work hard from paycheck to paycheck to make payments in taxes, banking fees and for their retirement savings have to show for it???!!! This is totally immoral and as a result we are getting screwed again as we always had by the greedy GOP and their corporate greed masters! I'cant believe that even the Democrats are falling for it just so that they can get the unemployment benefits extended but then now they are recapitalating all too late to oppose the tax cut deal. It looks as it will pass and as a result the middle class and the poor will lose while the rich get richer all the time!

I am beginning to believe that the book Adam Smith's "The Wealth Of Nations" is a manual for coporations on how to create ponsi scemes than for people to understand how local and global economies work. IMOH what we all have been learning about in high school and in college about how our economy works has all been a fraud!

I have a friend who lost his job at AOL two years ago and his uemployment is about to run out. I have another friend who works at FedEx field who told me that they are about to layoff their staff in January and so far I am the only one including my brother who still have jobs thank God. I work at PGCC Community College while my brother at DC Metro. I pray for my friends everyday and hope that the economy gets better next year.

If the bill passes the senate the rich will get excesively richer and the GOP and the corporations will get what they always get big tax cuts while everyone elese will get peanuts which will bearly be enough to pay the bills, keep roofs over their heads and not enough to pay healthcare. I'd rather in this case take the uemployement benefits and the 1 year payroll tax holiday just for the sake of my friends and they would too.

But if the bill doesn't pass then Republicans and Democrats in the house look out join the unemployed in the uemployment lines in the next election 2 years from now!

It took just two years for the voters to wreak our goverment and expose it to 2 more years of gridlock. This time the anger is lingering in just under 1 month and this time from it will be from all sides of the isle!

Posted by: msims2 | December 9, 2010 10:09 PM | Report abuse

The truth here is that the voters in the last midtern election voted for 2 more yesrs gridlock which is what they got and what they deserve for creating this bungled tax deal in the first place.

The GOP is holding the president and the Democrats hostage to their dirty underhanded scheme: trading overly excessive tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% in exchange for extending unemployment benefits which barely pays peanuts and a 1 year payroll tax holiday.

WHAT???!!! This is all that the honest, law abiding hardworking American citizens who work hard from paycheck to paycheck to make payments in taxes, banking fees and for their retirement savings have to show for it???!!! This is totally immoral and as a result we are getting screwed again as we always had by the greedy GOP and their corporate greed masters! I'cant believe that even the Democrats are falling for it just so that they can get the unemployment benefits extended but then now they are recapitalating all too late to oppose the tax cut deal. It looks as it will pass and as a result the middle class and the poor will lose while the rich get richer all the time!

I am beginning to believe that the book Adam Smith's "The Wealth Of Nations" is a manual for coporations on how to create ponsi scemes than for people to understand how local and global economies work. IMOH what we all have been learning about in high school and in college about how our economy works has all been a fraud!

I have a friend who lost his job at AOL two years ago and his uemployment is about to run out. I have another friend who works at FedEx field who told me that they are about to layoff their staff in January and so far I am the only one including my brother who still have jobs thank God. I work at PGCC Community College while my brother at DC Metro. I pray for my friends everyday and hope that the economy gets better next year.

If the bill passes the senate the rich will get excesively richer and the GOP and the corporations will get what they always get big tax cuts while everyone elese will get peanuts which will bearly be enough to pay the bills, keep roofs over their heads and not enough to pay healthcare. I'd rather in this case take the uemployement benefits and the 1 year payroll tax holiday just for the sake of my friends and they would too.

But if the bill doesn't pass then Republicans and Democrats in the house look out join the unemployed in the uemployment lines in the next election 2 years from now!

It took just two years for the voters to wreak our goverment and expose it to 2 more years of gridlock. This time the anger is lingering in just under 1 month and this time from it will be from all sides of the isle!

Posted by: msims2 | December 9, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse

The truth here is that the voters in the last midtern election voted for 2 more yesrs gridlock which is what they got and what they deserve for creating this bungled tax deal in the first place.

The GOP is holding the president and the Democrats hostage to their dirty underhanded scheme: trading overly excessive tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% in exchange for extending unemployment benefits which barely pays peanuts and a 1 year payroll tax holiday.

WHAT???!!! This is all that the honest, law abiding hardworking American citizens who work hard from paycheck to paycheck to make payments in taxes, banking fees and for their retirement savings have to show for it???!!! This is totally immoral and as a result we are getting screwed again as we always had by the greedy GOP and their corporate greed masters! I'cant believe that even the Democrats are falling for it just so that they can get the unemployment benefits extended but then now they are recapitalating all too late to oppose the tax cut deal. It looks as it will pass and as a result the middle class and the poor will lose while the rich get richer all the time!

I am beginning to believe that the book Adam Smith's "The Wealth Of Nations" is a manual for coporations on how to create ponsi scemes than for people to understand how local and global economies work. IMOH what we all have been learning about in high school and in college about how our economy works has all been a fraud!

I have a friend who lost his job at AOL two years ago and his uemployment is about to run out. I have another friend who works at FedEx field who told me that they are about to layoff their staff in January and so far I am the only one including my brother who still have jobs thank God. I work at PGCC Community College while my brother at DC Metro. I pray for my friends everyday and hope that the economy gets better next year.

If the bill passes the senate the rich will get excesively richer and the GOP and the corporations will get what they always get big tax cuts while everyone elese will get peanuts which will bearly be enough to pay the bills, keep roofs over their heads and not enough to pay healthcare. I'd rather in this case take the uemployement benefits and the 1 year payroll tax holiday just for the sake of my friends and they would too.

But if the bill doesn't pass then Republicans and Democrats in the house look out join the unemployed in the uemployment lines in the next election 2 years from now!

It took just two years for the voters to wreak our goverment and expose it to 2 more years of gridlock. This time the anger is lingering in just under 1 month and this time from it will be from all sides of the isle!

Posted by: msims2 | December 9, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse

The progressive, liberal Democrats have three tiers, three caste and three estates in their strata of ostensible socialistic egalitarianism. Of course, this might be said of any political or religious party or faction throughout history.
First, there are the powerful progressive plutocrats, either the wealthy liberals such as the executives and bail out recipients of Wall Street, the private owners of the Federal Reserve Bank or Hollywood moguls. Rich progressive Democrats wield power with the millions or even billions of dollars of dollars they control. As Simon deMonteforte said at Runnymede, “He who controls the purse strings is the true king”. One of the reasons that the wealthy endorse a strong, even socialist government, is the ability of a government to charter a virtual monopoly, like the British East India Tea Company, The Laws and bureaucracies of a despotic government can also be used to crush and quell any competition that a real free market, capitalist government would allow.
Power craving progressive politicians and bureaucrats often ally with elite, aristocratic wealthy financiers, bankers and financial moguls. Some conspiracy of aristocracy, oligarchy and nobility has always sought absoluter power and control over the common citizenry. There will always be petty bureaucrats and politicians who seek to rule, regulate and tax every aspect of life like some autocratic divine right king. The bloated bureaucracies of our government, like the EPA or IRS, contain unconstitutional virtual dictators, funded and empowered by Congress to issue decrees, diktats, fines and regulations that become more onerous, burdensome and expensive.
The second tier in the socialist-progressive strata is the proud and principled. These individuals espouse the liberals’ religion that government is God and liberals are the infallible priest of this deity. Their progressive pride leads them to believe they are the equivalent of Plato’s enlightened philosopher kings, the epitome and sole arbiters of truth, fairness, justice. Professing a hypocritical sense of virtue, these proud progressives are willing to foist and foist their exaggerated concepts of generosity and fairness by extracting the sweat, toil and taxes from their less enlightened neighbors and redistributing this largess to others more worthy. Perhaps liberals have a Robin Hood complex. Perhaps progressives have the Platonic delusion that they alone see the light and the substance, while we, the plebeian proletariat and bourgeoisie are either evil or greedy? Liberals may condescendingly claim to tolerate or endorse every diverse political or religious entity. However, these Democrats rage with politically-correct demagoguery at anyone who dares to disagree using any conservative, Christian, Capitalist beliefs. .In either case, everyone who is not a committed liberal must be lead about and controlled. A true liberal, progressive Democrat cannot tolerate dissention, disag

Posted by: ServantusDei | December 9, 2010 11:38 PM | Report abuse

I haz cheese, but no burger, Whether or not our bases now belong to you or us, they still need to be covered and it appears that we are going to be thrown to the wolves here and not supported by an action so insane I do not think I should analyze it, but will.What in the world would cause someone to propose, let alone espouse, cutting the tax load of a group of people who are working and paying for a program which is self-supporting, in favor of shifting the tax burden to the general public, which has not been paying for everything the US public electorate wants, resulting in having to borrow money to meet obligations? Why would someone that high up propose something that crazy? If the employed are not complaining about the amount of payroll taxes that they are paying, why reduce them? Please do not let anymore recommendations come out of this group of people bent on destroying the Social Security administration and the programs paying for themselves at the US government level, that other agencies have borrowed from, to the tune of 8 to 9 trillion that are owed the Social Security Trust Fund accounts.What do they expect people to do if there is not enough money for Social Security and the US's creditorswon't lend them the money to cover the $120 billion dollar shortfall- move into the agencies owing the Social SEcurity Trust Funds money and live there instead? How many handicapped and retired people and survivors do you think the military could absorb as part of a cost sharing payback plan? Maybe the elderly and handicapped and children and survivors can live in military barracks and just sleep shifts to save money and all eat off of the military budget, or shack up with government officials and their employees,who adopt a family on retirement, disability or survivors and pay for them for a year or have them move in with them and live with them,as after all, it is only for one year a one time cut. Why, people could put up with anything couldn't they, if it was only for one year.After all, their one year's worth of payments for housing,food,health can just be put on credit.Oh, that's an idea, maybe college dormitories could be used to, while the students are at classes, the elderly,handicapped, children, and survivors could sleep there, and eat on shifts, with the extra money saved of not having to provide them with homes or food or health care by not gathering taxes at the current level a way for people to buy maybe a new refrigerator or stove if they make $50,000 per year and have 2.3% less of taxes taken out of their check every month. By God, what are these people thinking that a new appliance is more important than the lives of more than 8 million people whose lives would be affected if they suddenly did not have retirement, disability, or survivors benefits?If employed people making $50,000 per year can't afford to buy a new appliance without paying less payroll taxes, then they need financial counseling and a savings plan, not less taxes

Posted by: carol_olden | December 9, 2010 11:44 PM | Report abuse

The progressive, liberal Democrats have three tiers, three caste and three estates in their strata of ostensible socialistic egalitarianism. Of course, this might be said of any political or religious party or faction throughout history.
First, there are the powerful progressive plutocrats, either the wealthy liberals such as the executives and bail out recipients of Wall Street, the private owners of the Federal Reserve Bank or Hollywood moguls. Rich progressive Democrats wield power with the millions or even billions of dollars of dollars they control. As Simon deMonteforte said at Runnymede, “He who controls the purse strings is the true king”. One of the reasons that the wealthy endorse a strong, even socialist government, is the ability of a government to charter a virtual monopoly, like the British East India Tea Company, The Laws and bureaucracies of a despotic government can also be used to crush and quell any competition that a real free market, capitalist government would allow.
Power craving progressive politicians and bureaucrats often ally with elite, aristocratic wealthy financiers, bankers and financial moguls. Some conspiracy of aristocracy, oligarchy and nobility has always sought absoluter power and control over the common citizenry. There will always be petty bureaucrats and politicians who seek to rule, regulate and tax every aspect of life like some autocratic divine right king. The bloated bureaucracies of our government, like the EPA or IRS, contain unconstitutional virtual dictators, funded and empowered by Congress to issue decrees, diktats, fines and regulations that become more onerous, burdensome and expensive.
The second tier in the socialist-progressive strata is the proud and principled. These individuals espouse the liberals’ religion that government is God and liberals are the infallible priest of this deity. Their progressive pride leads them to believe they are the equivalent of Plato’s enlightened philosopher kings, the epitome and sole arbiters of truth, fairness, justice. Professing a hypocritical sense of virtue, these proud progressives are willing to foist and foist their exaggerated concepts of generosity and fairness by extracting the sweat, toil and taxes from their less enlightened neighbors and redistributing this largess to others more worthy. Perhaps liberals have a Robin Hood complex. Perhaps progressives have the Platonic delusion that they alone see the light and the substance, while we, the plebeian proletariat and bourgeoisie are either evil or greedy? Liberals may condescendingly claim to tolerate or endorse every diverse political or religious entity. However, these Democrats rage with politically-correct demagoguery at anyone who dares to disagree using any conservative, Christian, Capitalist beliefs. .In either case, everyone who is not a committed liberal must be lead about and controlled. A true liberal, progressive Democrat cannot tolerate dissention, disag

Posted by: ServantusDei | December 9, 2010 11:48 PM | Report abuse

You guys should stop complaining because, one the health care we have now isnt as good as it was supposed to be. also the law has just been signed so give it some time. so if u want to say u have the right to choose tell that to ur congress men or state official. If you do not have insurance and need one You can find full medical coverage at the lowest price check http://ow.ly/3akSX .If you have health insurance and do not care about cost just be happy about it and trust me you are not going to loose anything!

Posted by: williamdawson | December 10, 2010 3:05 AM | Report abuse

You guys should stop complaining because, one the health care we have now isnt as good as it was supposed to be. also the law has just been signed so give it some time. so if u want to say u have the right to choose tell that to ur congress men or state official. If you do not have insurance and need one You can find full medical coverage at the lowest price check http://ow.ly/3akSX .If you have health insurance and do not care about cost just be happy about it and trust me you are not going to loose anything!

Posted by: williamdawson | December 10, 2010 3:05 AM | Report abuse

Finally, for the first time since Pelosi became Speaker and the Democrats have been the majority in the House, the Democrats pulled a GOP. They actually managed to come pretty near a unanimous vote to try and stop the tax bill. Where was this togetherness back when it would have meant something to the country? They were quibbling about minor points of contention and refusing to cooperate with one another, while the GOP voted as a unified bloc. Thus the Democrats accomplished little during their time in power and have now lost have the battle. It will only get worse before it gets better. The Democrats have this urge to eat their young, rather than nurture them and it has cost them the House. Next, the Senate, the the WH. Having refused to act in support of the president, the democrats have driven him, their leader, into the "enemy" camp, to compromise and attempt to get something done on a bipartisan basis. The Democrats are "furious"(??), too bad, they should have been supporting him from the beginning. Now they have only themselves to blame for the stupidity of their actions. I detest GOP politics as politics and policies for the rich and big business only, but I find I detest the Democrats even worse here, having forfeited their majority because they were a bunch of prima donna individuals. Done in by Dumbness..... What a way to go.

Posted by: flyfisher_20750 | December 10, 2010 3:46 AM | Report abuse

"...his only recourse was to cut a deal to extend the high-end tax cuts."

When will you understand there ARE NO CUTS! Idiot! An extension to maintain for the past 10 years the current tax rates keeps things as they have been since you were 10 years younger and 10 pounds lighter.

Posted by: edmondsonpr | December 10, 2010 7:05 AM | Report abuse

"...his only recourse was to cut a deal to extend the high-end tax cuts."

When will you understand there ARE NO CUTS! Idiot! An extension to maintain for the past 10 years the current tax rates keeps things as they have been since you were 10 years younger and 10 pounds lighter.

Posted by: edmondsonpr | December 10, 2010 7:06 AM | Report abuse

"...his only recourse was to cut a deal to extend the high-end tax cuts."

When will you understand there ARE NO CUTS! Idiot! An extension to maintain for the past 10 years the current tax rates keeps things as they have been since you were 10 years younger and 10 pounds lighter.

Posted by: edmondsonpr | December 10, 2010 7:07 AM | Report abuse

ServantusDei,

Your long diatrabe sounds so much like those whack job conspiracey theories of Glen Beck blaming everything on FDR. This also sounds like, with the use os such key words as those of socialist-progressive, capitalist, egalitarianism, elite sound like they came from those of Rush Limbaugh and Bill Oriely.

In fact I read in the washington post the people that voted for the republican house members in the midterm elections fit the profile of white, male, 50 and over. They tend to be staunch conservatives and they would like to roll back the clock to the 50's becuase they aren't used to the rapid change in today's society. They can't stand having an African American president in the White House and it's one of the few reasons why they use words such as socialist, elite, ect. as do the people of the tea party also fit that same profile.

If anyone thinks that racism died when Barack Obama became president is a fool. It's still alive and well as a result of how the midterm elections turned out. Besides I'm a proud African American and my people know how to spot racism no matter how subtile it my be seen or unseen we can spot it. How? Becuase my mother and grand father had to sit on the back of the bus and they taught us how to spot racism. What's the real conspiracy here folks? I've got the truth here for you to see and guess what the common pattern is in between all of them:

1. For example, republicans in the house want to vote against the citizens of Washington D.C. from getting voting rights becuase they know very well that DC is a majority-minority city. They will do everything in their power to prevent them from getting that most fundamental right granted to them by our Constitution that every Aamerican has. We know what republicans fear the most: that by giving DC voters that right they can vote against every republican and every piece of anti-goverment legislation in their sites.

2. Republicans also want to keep the DC government from controlling its own budget. DC Mayor Vincent Gray is going to have lots of trouble trying to get congress to allocate its budget requests to bring down a $175 million deficit in which he has no choice but to either cut programs or raise taxes. Republicans want to make Vincent Gray's term into a disaster because guess what!?: he's black.

2. Republicans also want to systematically deny Elenor Holmes Norton full representation for DC becuase guest what if you hadn't figured it out the obvious: she's black too!

3. Republicans also want to totally cut spending on the school lunch program becuase of their flimsy bogus claim that it costs too much!!??? Oh no! That really can't be becuase the real reason is becuase these kids come from poor homes and from families on welfare and guess what that translates into: the kids are black.

So why Vincent Gray got elected as mayor of DC? Because most of those people who voted for Vincent Gray live in the Wards of SE. DC. They are poor & black.

Posted by: msims2 | December 10, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Great theater Dems. Angry looks like posturing. Dem leadership at its best. You make P.T. Barnum proud!

Posted by: Herbert1 | December 10, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

House Dems seem to be the only ones who are actually listening to the majority of Americans and trying to help us out.

It sounds like Obama stopped listening to us. Does he not realize that the majority of Americans don't want the rich to get richer while the rest of us are just trying to coast by?

Why Republicans support giving enormous tax cuts to the smallest percent of Americans who also have the largest majority of the wealth in the nation, is a big puzzle. Do they not realize that these rich people aren't paying taxes at all now? Don't they realize that these tax cuts will only help the rich have more?

The tax cuts to the rich won't help to stimulate the economy, it will only help the rich get richer, while the majority of Americans continue to pay the taxes that keep us going.

Giving these tax cuts to the richest Americans will ensure that our government will have to continue to borrow money from China and any other nation that will loan to us.

What is the point here? To see how poor the country can get? Then will the richest Americans bail us out? Or move to another country?

And to Herbert1 with his "humorous" comparison of House Dems to P T Barnum, trivializing someone's appearance rather than listening to the serious content of their message. Are you so rich that everyone is beneath you and is a mere clown to you?

Posted by: dalilobo | December 10, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company