There’s a full revolt taking place within the Democratic party following President Obama’s tax cut deal with Republicans

You need to know this. There’s a full revolt taking place within the Democratic party following President Obama’s tax cut deal with Republicans. House Democrats caucused last night to discuss the plan and count votes for it. Let’s just say it didn’t go too well and another meeting is scheduled for today. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi admitted last night that there was a lot of “unease” within her Party regarding a vote on the compromise deal. She needs to convince at least 39 Democrats to support it. And among Progressives – that won’t be easy. Congressman Anthony Weiner said the President “shouldn’t count on [it],” and Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey – co-chair of the Progressive Caucus – said the bill is simply not popular within her caucus. So if Pelosi can’t get progressives on board – she needs Blue Dogs. But they aren't enthusiastic either. Earl Pomeroy – a member of the Blue Dogs – has already come out in opposition to the bill. And others deficit hawks are likely to follow since the compromise adds nearly a trillion dollars to the national debt. The White House is sending Vice President Joe Biden to Congress today to rally support – though he is likely to face a hostile audience. If the Democrats blow this deal up – and taxes go up – it will then be up to the Republicans to solve the mess. And with the Americans people in large numbers supporting a tax increase for millionaires and billionaires – Republicans will be in a tough position not to listen. So could President Obama’s plan backfire – and in the end actually help him with his base? We’ll see – but I’m not holding out much hope.


dwood's picture
dwood 12 years 15 weeks ago

And this country, of the 2%, by the 2%, and for the 2%, shall not perish from the earth.

MugsysRapSheet's picture
MugsysRapSheet 12 years 15 weeks ago

The Debt Ceiling ---------------------------

via DailyKOS:

“Before the ink is dry on this deal, the Republican leaders who demanded its passage will vilify the President as a reckless spender who just added a trillion dollars to the national debt. Then they will vote against raising the debt ceiling.” - Rep. Peter Welch.

Republicans are ALREADY refusing to raise the Debt Ceiling in March, negating any "stimulus effect" from this deal.

MugsysRapSheet's picture
MugsysRapSheet 12 years 15 weeks ago

Failure of Leadership ---------------

In 2008, candidate Obama called passage of the tax cuts for the rich, "a failure of leadership".

McConnell said on Meet the Press last Sunday that Republicans would likely vote to extend unemployment benefits. So this "compromise" is no compromise. They were going to do it anyway. They would of HAD to as the unemployed revolted.

As any child can tell you, "If you want a puppy, start out by asking for a pony." Extending the tax cuts permanently is the GOP's "pony". A "two year extension" until a Republican president can get in and extend them permanently is their "puppy".

Scooter's picture
Scooter 12 years 15 weeks ago

There should be outrage over the tax plan but aiming it at Obama is not appropriate. The GOP in an example of one of the most immoral maybe treasonous acts ever witnessed held, not only those 2 million who were going to lose their unemployment benefits but the entire country hostage in order to please 2% of the population. The rich folks. It is probably true that to increase the burden on the average american tax payer to the tune of 3,000 dollars next year would have had a very negative effect on the economic recovery. It is also true that to stop paying unemployment benefits to americans out of work would have been bad for the economy and incredibly painful. As it is, the deal struck by the president will keep those negative effects from happening. He also got some other things that will help the economy in the short and near term. Don't forget, the rich would not have been hurt if a deal had not been struck, just the middle class and those out of unemployment benefits and of course the economy. The president had no choice except to do what he did.

rambroff's picture
rambroff 12 years 15 weeks ago

I called in to the show yesterday and said we might want to think of Obama as a car salesman who has just sat down with prospective buyers and put together a proposal...he now must take that proposal back to his boss. His boss (Pelosi...Sanders...the American people) will tell him 'no way can we make that deal' is what must be changed. He must then re-engage with the other side. If a deal cannot be reached, my wife and I (middle class) will work with reverting back to the Clinton levels...and let the re-negotiation resume next year.

mshatz's picture
mshatz 12 years 15 weeks ago

Dems should propose the following:

End the Bush tax cuts for the top earners and use the revenues raised from the "tax increase" and estate taxes to pay veterans benefits and the tab for the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. None of which are being paid for now.

This is a three-fer. It forces Republicans to argue against deficit reduction, supporting our veterans and funding the wars -- all of their supposed sacred cows. Since most of the men and women in the military are working class families who are suffering the biggest personal and financial burdens of the wars, why not have the wealthiest and most sheltered among us help foot the bill at a time of economic hardship?

Republicans would have to argue against the above and they would be unmasked for simply wanting more money for rich folks. To hell with the vets, paying down the war debts, etc.

Link the higher taxes on the rich and their multimillion dollar estates to paying for something specific that everyone is supposedly united behind: supporting our troops and funding the so-called "war on terror." Let's do this instead of passing the burden along to our children or slashing social services, etc.

This is my idea of triangulation. Let's deal some cards and see how the Republicans respond. Obama's game is: I playing the hand I'm dealt. He doesn't realize that he's the dealer! The tail is wagging the dog. Can we see some imagination out of the Dems for a change?

Your thoughts welcomed.

TimFromLA 12 years 15 weeks ago

Gun Control

The worst thing to do is to take away guns from anyone. You do that, like Bush did after Katrina, and all Hell will break loose. So how do you deter people from buying a gun? By allowing or stressing to someone the importance of firearm safety. No, not just checking the breech to see if a gun is loaded only but cleaning.

This picture is the rifle I had before I sold it. The inner working. I had to break down the rifle, scrub every part of the rifle of carbon and rust, air dry it and put it back together. Now tell me, what person under 21 would have the patience to do this? Not many. You clean the rifle so that the rifle will not blow up in your face, killing you. What the NRA fails to tell the people is that, after shooting your new firearm, you have to clean it too.

I had a rifle, but sold it after shooting it once.

doh1304's picture
doh1304 12 years 15 weeks ago

Re: Margolis (sp?) and Europe

She brought it on herself. She could have told the truth - that the '94 tax package was the largest tax CUT for the vast majority of Americans in history. (now Obama in 09?) It was an increase only of the progressivity. The largest tax hike in history was reagan's 82 tax "cut". Similarly, in total (federal, state, and local) taxes on income Europeans do not pay signifigantly more - we are pretty much in the middle. The trick is that we hide our taxes by diffusing them. The real problem is that our military and penal budgets are so high that we get much less for our tax money.

Listening to Republican lies.

Scooter's picture
Scooter 12 years 15 weeks ago

Good idea but

the tax cuts revert after the first of the year, no more unemployment and the republicans will have the house. The president won some battles here, it cost him 100 billion (to the rich) to get 700 billion for the middle class and unemployed. It was a trade he had to make.

cmoore68's picture
cmoore68 12 years 15 weeks ago

The Senate did not use reconcilliation to pass HCR. It passed 60-39-1. The White House spokesperson must have mispoken.

jbman's picture
jbman 12 years 15 weeks ago

Thom you should have listened to the right wing talk before you spoke. Limbaugh hates the deal. Say that again, Limbaugh hates the deal. Lets take a chill pill and give, the first black man with no birth certificate to be elected president, time to keep working his 86% successfull, to date, magic.

mblockhart's picture
mblockhart 12 years 15 weeks ago

I'm with the President on this, Thom. I'm going to have to stop listening to you and Ed and Olberman, et al, on this because it is devastating to hear you throw middle and low income Americans under the bus. You all are missing the point and you absolutely REFUSE to listen to reason or to the pleas of those of us who are suffering. I'm a middle American with adult kids who are struggling to survive. You think that we out here should just have our taxes go up and those of us on unemployment should lose their safety net, just so you can prolong this argument about high income taxes. We don't give a hoot if the 2% richest get to keep their tax cut for a couple of years. There are many good things in this bill that we know we will NOT get from a Republican-led House.

We've seen the President and the Democratic leadership try everything they can to get the Republicans to go for something, anything more than their tax cuts for rich folk. Those options have all failed and NOW we have to get what we can. And what we're getting here is NOT NOTHING.

The HIGHEST priority is on the recovery. We can deal with the deficit later. In fact, the deficit commission even said that we should NOT deal with the deficit before recovery was underway.

And the raising of taxes on the highest incomes will be an excellent campaign theme in 2012.

Where are YOUR priorities, Thom?

brisa's picture
brisa 12 years 15 weeks ago

How can anyone view the current political scene as anything but pure theater. Are our elected leaders responsive to the voters? Go ask Paulson. Just how dominant is the shadow government? Three examples to consider.

1. National Security State infrastructure continues to be put in place. We are told that we must be irradiated or sexually violated in order to fly on a plane. (Of course, the commercial freight it the belly of that same plane is not screened...but I digress.) We are told that an "underwear bomber" got on board a plane last Christmas and we must guard against such threats. Credible eyewitness testimony (American attorney Kurt Haskell and wife) relate how this "terrorist" was escorted around security without a passort and placed on the flight by unknown official personnel with a non-explosive bomb in his underwear. To this day we are told that this apparent intelligence operation is the reason for the need for enhanced airport security.

2. It seems the only terrorist plots that are being exposed are those that are planned and executed by the FBI. The most recent case in Oregon (who it just so happens has opted out of participating in the DHS joint terrorism task force) involves a somewhat disturbed Arab from Sudan who after 15 months of encouragement and training is given a plan, a fake bomb and a truck...all provided by the FBI. As he executes this plan he is arrested and charged with attempted terrorism. This is only the latest case of entrapment as other terrorist plots sensationalized in previous years have had the same genesis.

3. The country, sick of extra-consitutional behavior of the executive branch (not to mention bonafide war crimes) throw out the Republicans in favor of the African-American, two year Illionois State Senator with a background in constitutional law and community activism expecting change. His mandate was to end the unconstutitional and illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanstan, end domestic surviellance, end institutionalized torture and rendition, investigate bank fraud, among other things. What did they get? More of the same authoritarian, secretive policies of the Bush years and worse....he protects his predecessors from prosecution for their criminal conduct. The questions raised by credible 911 atrocity forensic evidence are extremely disturbing. ( I'll believe science over government spokesmen or blovinating newsreader television personalities every time.)

The privitization of covert acitivies was revealed during the Iran-Contra affair of the Reagan years. While the congressional investigation was only a limited hangout (a fraction of the program was revealed), one could see that a totally covert, independently funded program of significant proportion, run by a handfull of men in critical postions could and did operate in total secrecy. Little coincidence that the same crowd who contolled that operation came to power again with George Bush,jr. It's a sure bet they have learned from their mistakes. No doubt in my mind that the shadow government has been operating all along. The only question I have is are they the ones formulating and executing the agenda...and to what end? To my mind, at this point, that supposition seems more likely that not.

mblockhart's picture
mblockhart 12 years 15 weeks ago

I forgot to say that in 2001 the tax rate for median incomes (say about $50,000) was 27.5% for both married and single filers.

In 2010 the tax rate for the same median income was Married 15% and Single 25%

So for a married couple the tax rate will go from 15% to 27.5% Jan 1. $7,500 in taxes to $13,750 or $6,250.

For a single person at that same income the rate goes from 25% to 27.5% Jan 1. $12,500 to $13,750 or $1,250.

From Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History Income Years 1913-2010

Elsewhere I've heard that unemployment compensation averages $290/week, $15,080 yr, assuming consistent benefits which is rare.

jbman's picture
jbman 12 years 15 weeks ago

Its the economy Thom Thom 140 billion for the wealthy and 600 billion for the rest of us. Plus the only tax cut is on income under 106,000. Read the economists' opinions for goodness sake.The elephant in the room is the economy. Right now that elephant is sitting on the republican side of the table, in two years, it will be firmly on the democrats side.

[ohwcd[o's picture
[ohwcd[o 12 years 15 weeks ago

In answer to the question "Is it time for a revolt, or is it too risky for the 99-ers?" It's clearly time to revolt or the whole middle class will be 99-ers. The Democratic Party and their leader (The President) STILL need to get the message that they are losing support because they have no spine.

gurjeet 12 years 15 weeks ago

I already told OFA that this deal is a very bad idea.......................this will increase the greed of the 2% and perpetuate the plight of the rest of us! I hope The President we voted in is listeniong to us!

Joe Phillips LCSW's picture
Joe Phillips LCSW 12 years 15 weeks ago

Progressives should dump Obama and go for a primary challenge or we will be forever taken for granted. Voting for the lesser of two evils is too predictable in a non parliamentary system and Nader seems to be right. We need to stop calculating and start standing on principle. We need to look father ahead than one issue or election at a time. Machiavellian thinking such as the enemy of my enemy is my friend is morally wrong and now it has also been proven to be so predictable that it is actually less effective than just doing the right thing.

Lukester 12 years 15 weeks ago

When Bush was President from 2001-2007 he had a Republican congress and did as he pleased. Obama has done the same for the past two years with a Democratic congress.

Now Obama puts together a bi-partisan proposal and Democrats complain?

Many Americans are tired of this partisan nonsense. Neither Democrats or Republicans have a monopoly on leaders, crooks, good ideas and bad ideas. I'll take this type of bi-partisan proposal any day of the week over any partisan proposal from either major party.

BlueDogProud's picture
BlueDogProud 12 years 15 weeks ago

What in the hell ever happened to common sense ? I have served in the Military , Army National Guard & USAF active duty . I have hunted & fished all my life , and have a number of friends and a member of my immediate family in law enforcment , therefore I can speak with some knowledge about gun control legislation . Presently retired , and physically unable to climb the hills anymore , I no longer big game hunt , so I have no need for a rifle. I keep a .357 Magnum revolver for home protection and a superimposed 20 Ga shotgun to shoot skeet and the occasional grouse , or pheasant , truth is ?, I miss my bird dog more than the shooting . Point is this ? Why in the hell does anyone besides law enforcemnt and the military need automatic and sem-automatic pistols and rifles ? If I can't stop a house breaker with six rounds from my Colt or get my deer , elk , or bear with any good lever action , pump , or bolt action rifle of the proper calibre with a half dozen shots or less , than I'd better give it up and buy all of my meat at the butcher shop . Assault rifles and high capacity semi automatic pistols ;are designed for one pjurpose ?, to take human life , and for most of us who have had the misfortune to have done so , it's sure as hell nothing to brag about . My fellow hunters and target shooters , get your heads out of your arses !, and lets reach a common sense gun control bill that will let the hunters & shooters do their thing , and save one hell of a lot of lives !

whyvette's picture
whyvette 12 years 15 weeks ago

Maybe he's playig chess after all...

Obama is forcing the Democrats "make" him do the right thing. With the current opening salvo on the Bush tax cuts, he can run on "I tried to work with the Republicans", all the while letting Nancy Pelosi and Bernie Sanders do the heavy lifting behind closed doors. Me? I roll the dice by letting all expire and daring Mitch and the Boys to deny a middle-class tax cut on New Years Day.

changeX's picture
changeX 12 years 15 weeks ago

Obama (Republican) 2012

Pres. Obama dealed out the Public Option > I cancelled my name from his newsletter. Since then it has been all whishey washy. President Obama is playing liberals and progressives like a fiddle he is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He is one of them and doing a darn good job leading us along thinking otherwise. Go Obama (Republican) 2012.

GeeHitesman's picture
GeeHitesman 12 years 15 weeks ago

I gotta say....Right On!

Magonista 12 years 15 weeks ago

We have been past the time for revolt since I was born! With a two-party system what is there to revolt against? If you're mad at Dems you vote R? You can challenge the Pres. in the primary but he went hard right after winning the last primary. There is no way to hold electeds accountable in our system.

We need to fundamentaly change the electoral system, but it seems that we need the current politicians to do that. Lots of work to do!

jplieurance's picture
jplieurance 12 years 15 weeks ago

Very simply: It is time for a revolt. I would urge the congress and senate to vote it down, and then let the Republicans deal with the mess. Their wealthy members are going to be pissed as will that part of the base from 'the other end'. They'll be scrambling.

However, it's painfully obvious that the GOP narrative will then be that President Obama couldn't even seal the deal with his own party. I guess that's the president's problem because he hasn't shown very effective leadership and needs to develop a backbone - as does Harry Reid.

whyvette's picture
whyvette 12 years 15 weeks ago

Brilliant Triangulation above! You could have worked in the Clinton Administration. You have my vote for best daily post.

changeX's picture
changeX 12 years 15 weeks ago

Why say BushTax CUTS?

The only topic to discuss it putting the tax code to the NORMAL rate. The trick is to distract us from the topic.

It is really like my wife shopping at the Nordstrom sale and labeling it as savings. Are we all this easily manipulated?

No Bush Tax Increase on average folks + stop ever-extending unemployment compensation. Hungry angry people simply have to find means without free money to keep them quelled. Use common sense, this is prolonging the pain. With the 60's tax rate business would be forced to reinvset in American and employees would be NEEDED. See, this all trickles down.

changeX's picture
changeX 12 years 15 weeks ago

who cares what the pigman says

changeX's picture
changeX 12 years 15 weeks ago

the highest priority is

letting the tax rates adjust to normal rates

changeX's picture
changeX 12 years 15 weeks ago

playing chess as a closet Republican

changeX's picture
changeX 12 years 15 weeks ago

wrong topic BlueDogProud, go clean your gun

micka 12 years 15 weeks ago

I am a 99er and before losing job was middle class. I was willing to give any advantage I might have to stop the 2% and their GOP gophers from getting away with robbery again.The more I read of the compromise President Obama made, the more inclined I am to agree with him. He got more than I first thought with giving less than I first thought. I owe him an apology and will wait to see if he was correct.

MrXtramean's picture
MrXtramean 12 years 15 weeks ago

He should have let the tax cuts expire. The unemployed benefits would back fire into their faces very quickly given the President and Democratic members get in front of the media and say, "Republicans are blocking unemployment benefits..." and then tell the Republicans we want a tax cut for the middle class starting at $250k. If they don't like it, let the unemployed get even more pissed and other the $250k bill again. Then, maybe just maybe, offer a tax cut up to $500k, but no higher!

Obama is worried about people. We get it. We all understood when we voted for Obama, that the Bush tax cuts were going to expire and that he'd try and keep the tax cuts for the under $250k, but it wasn't a promise. We knew and I expected, for the tax cuts to expire. The country simply can't afford the Bush tax cuts, the Obama stimulis tax cuts and now these tax cuts. He thinks he's selling us a win by adding $1 TRILLION to the debt in 2 years! So guess what? EVERYTHING will have to be cut, cut,cut to the bone. And that includes education Mr. President, who thinks in his speech that talking about having a strong educated people is the way to big for the future, well it is, but it won't happen because of cuts.

Fox News has already started gearing up to blame Obama for balloning the debt. So come 2012, he's going to be blamed for the debt by the Tea Partiers and Republicans. And the Republicans didn't give up nothing. They've played smart through this so far. They have a plan and it will blow up in Obama's face, why? Because he fails to fight and call their bluff. If you give in to bullies, you'll never win. But stand up for what's right, and maybe you get respect.

eseltzy's picture
eseltzy 12 years 15 weeks ago

It is time. If not now when. Of the many things we need to fix from the past 30 year slide of the middle class and commenserate rise of the wealthy and ruling class, the largest problem to address is the direction of wage imbalance. For, from that problem comes control of political power, access to medical services, freedom of family, job, and lifestyle decisions, quality of education of our children, and so on.

The wealthiest will use their extra $100,000 to buy more lobbying and correspondingly bigger tax advantages whereas the $50,000/year earner will use their extra $4,000 to pay the mortgage and save their house for another month. The wealthiest will get two more years to strenthen their stranglehold on the systems that send them larger proportions of money from the ever shrinking middleclass taxpayers.

Enough. Draw this line in the sand and fight for it, even if it means defeat and the debate escalates to rock band decibal levels. Do we really need to lead the world in excessive ratio of CEO to average worker salaries? That's the best we can do? Let's have a damn fight about how much CEO's and Hedge Fund Managers need to make before the rest of us can get a job paying enough to own a moderate home, feed and educate a family and live out old age in some ease. I for one welcome that debate...that fight.

amgernert's picture
amgernert 12 years 15 weeks ago

Wouldn't Chinese Checkers be more appropriate?

hankgagnon's picture
hankgagnon 12 years 15 weeks ago

It is time for a revolt.

This is the beginning of the end of Social Security if this bill is passed. Obama is doing the same thing Clinton did, Compromising for short term benefits that will destroy the Middle Class in the long run. Clinton compromised and gave them Fee Trade which single handily has taken down the Middle Class in this country. Now the Right Wing have their sites set on Social Security. They want to under fund it so it goes broke, and will then try to move it to the gangsters on Wall Street so they can steal it. Join the Revolt here:

djbarona 12 years 15 weeks ago

It's time to REVOLT fellow progressives IF NOT NOW WHEN ??!!! My anger is not geared just at Obama but I submit to you that it is the Rahm Emanuels of the party who think they can take the base for granted. Saying "don't worry about the base they have no where to go" . Time after time, compromising the principles, breaking promises ! We must REVOLT by NOT VOTING FOR OBAMA and allowing them to savor the sweet fruit of their defeat . We must show them that the Base is the heart and soul of the party. It will be difficult but it is a sacrifice we must endure to flush out the cancer that plagues the Democratic Party. Clearly Obama cares much less for the Dems because single handed he has absolutely destroyed the party. He has done it by breaking this promise and by doing exactly what said he was NOT going to do. Well Mr. President we are progressives and we have a longer memory than most americans good luck in 2012 !! The republicans know this and that is why they shy away from going up against the crazies like Rush , Shawn and Bill. REVOLT FILIBUSTER DO WHAT EVER YOU MUST SEN B. SANDERS AND SHOW THEM THAT WE ARE A FORCE A STRONG FORCE THAT WILL NOT BE SILENCED.

djbarona 12 years 15 weeks ago

Thank you Thom for your program I listen almost everyday and I support your sponsors. I have phoned them and even written them letters to tell them how much I enjoy your program. I think I have lost ALL HOPE ! thank you for keeping some in your glass half full.

Woodrow Wilson's picture
Woodrow Wilson 12 years 15 weeks ago

Mr. Hartman I usually agree with you, I don't like all these tax cuts but Randi Rhodes is right this is a good TEMPORARY fix please listen to her.

Clavias's picture
Clavias 12 years 15 weeks ago

The Rule of the Intellectual Acquisitors!!! (Larry Summers for example making an appearance yesterday) This dishonest social class marks the last stage of the Acquisitor Rule -igniting the flame of social revolution in the people.

We cannot "compromise" with corruption and destruction of the middle and working class people! We demand Economic Democracy NOT Crimes Against Humanity style tax cuts to the wealthy and overclass!!!

The ball is in your court Congress - make us proud this holiday season and Reject this, this - compromising, of the American people!

leighmf's picture
leighmf 12 years 15 weeks ago

Revolt! It's time for good people to stand up, if there are any. My DC sources say DC culture has become a literal hotbed of orgies and immorality. They are Babylon, whores of the earth. Off with their heads.

gerald's picture
gerald 12 years 15 weeks ago

@leighmf, thank you for the great comment! That is one reason why I have called our nation, The United States of Mortal Sin. We have lunatics running our asylums in Washingon, D.C.

Tim66's picture
Tim66 12 years 15 weeks ago

Food for Thought

The Strategy / Plan

Chess v Checkers?

Verdict: Chess; but one dimensional.

Proof: Tuesday’s press conference when OB flat out says “There will be no double dip recession” & “economy will be better in 2 years”. OB has obviously sided with those on his economic team who believe we are in a cyclical recession and not the advisors who say our problem is systemic.

Notes: I, like many others, are in the systemic camp and rate the probability of double dip recession, or worse, as high. OB acts as if this could never happen, and his plan/strategy completely ignores the possibility.

Negotiation Skills

Poor Execution or Arrogance?

Verdict: Arrogance - that Plan/Strategy is spot on.

Proof: None, but just can’t believe an agreement was negotiated before discussions with party and if necessary floating point of GOP holding hostages to public.

Notes: Comments in Tuesdays press conference like the “Republican’s won’t budge” & “their dug in” were just too amateurish. Isn’t there an art to calling somebody out? What downside would there have been to floating the two positions out into the public domain if needed and using the President’s bully pulpit power as leverage?

ajackson652 12 years 15 weeks ago

Extesionion of unemployment benifits, what is the story? I have heard that it doesn't include the 99'ers, who have not been able to get a job for two years. Is that correct? It makes a difference in the argument. What about the people out of jobs now? Has anybody considered that there are, and will be no jobs for the unemployed until we bring industry back to America. Also I keep hearing conflicting reports on the 'tax cut for the middle class'. How much is it for what pay group? And, what is the Republican Terriost Organization going to demand when it is time to raise the debt ceiling? when the unemployment runs out? what other demands is the RTO going to place on our social secuity.

Maxrot's picture
Maxrot 12 years 15 weeks ago

I'd say the House Dem's have realized that sometimes doing the right thing supersedes what their PResident wants. Good for them.


CHIPSHIRLEY.COM 12 years 15 weeks ago

I can't find anyone who earns under 30k or is facing the end of their unemployment benefits who wants this bill killed.

Can you find anyone who is facing their unemployment benefits ending now, who wants to kill the bill and wait indefinitely for something better?

And how many low wage earners (below 30k) can you find who don't want their payroll and income tax cuts now and not later?

And yet at the same time I do want the prez to run on raising taxes on the rich in 2012, which I've been fighting for daily for ten years.

Chip Shirley

southmpls 12 years 15 weeks ago

I can't understand why this proposal doesn't decouple W's cuts from Obama's cuts -- which, by the way, were all scheduled to expire without any intervention on anyone's part. I hope you all read Bill Black's and David Cay Johnston's takes on this ridiculous issue. Why Obama doesn't trot out the morals card is simply beyond me. It's all politics with his team. The way to deal with the Righties is to become like them. Call their bluff. Deal with bullies by confronting bullies. Not with conciliatory caves without a fight. Let the Righties tell their constituents in the South that well, no, we really are going to let your unemployment benefits expire. And sorry, we know we didn't create any jobs with W's tax cuts but that's what we're all about. I'm damn sorry, but tax cuts don't spur job growth. Demand does. So let's have job growth, job growth, job growth now and then let's figure out how to tamp down the deficit. I do understand the politics of having this discussion again in 2 years, but Obama's already HAD 2 years to have this discussion with the Righties. The law says "expire." What's so damn hard about that? The wingnuts will twist any economic growth, job growth, deficit reduction, etc. that occurs on Obama's watch into their version of reality no matter what happens anyway. So why not have the fight now rather than in 2012? I'm not understanding the cave-ins at all.

stonesphere's picture
stonesphere 12 years 15 weeks ago

The name of the game seems to be to hand the executive over from one side to the other , pull the trigger , hope for the best and run the economy on thin air and time the whole affair so that the final catastrophe rests on the oppositions shoulders. Russian Roulette.

rogerdocmillsii's picture
rogerdocmillsii 12 years 15 weeks ago

Somebody, the so-called "democrats", needs to stand up to the pro-corporate maniac--------------------Mr. Obama. Hurray to the progressives, and thank God the "bulldogs" are on the right side for a change [even if it is by accident].

God help us all because we don't seem to have more than about two dozen "people's representatives" in the House. When is the last time anyone other than Dennis or Bernie really taken a stand for the "people of the United States" instead of the Multi-National Corporations. The corporations seem to own our "law-breakers" ahh, I mean our law-makers and thereby they own our government and therefore our country--which seem to be the "Corporate States of America".

Roger Mills

Gulfport, MS

rogerdocmillsii's picture
rogerdocmillsii 12 years 15 weeks ago

Mr. Obama is no Jack Kennedy. Mr Obama has no concept of how to play Mr. Kennedy's favorite sport--oneupmanship. Mr. Obama should be standing up for the working Joe's and Josephine's of this country and calling the Republican's bluff. He's never even tried to call their bluff. He always caves in to their demands; so where, exactly is he different from the Republicans?

Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From Cracking the Code:
"Thom Hartmann ought to be bronzed. His new book sets off from the same high plane as the last and offers explicit tools and how-to advice that will allow you to see, hear, and feel propaganda when it's directed at you and use the same techniques to refute it. His book would make a deaf-mute a better communicator. I want him on my reading table every day, and if you try one of his books, so will you."
Peter Coyote, actor and author of Sleeping Where I Fall
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Right through the worst of the Bush years and into the present, Thom Hartmann has been one of the very few voices constantly willing to tell the truth. Rank him up there with Jon Stewart, Bill Moyers, and Paul Krugman for having the sheer persistent courage of his convictions."
Bill McKibben, author of Eaarth
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Beneath the success and rise of American enterprise is an untold history that is antithetical to every value Americans hold dear. This is a seminal work, a godsend really, a clear message to every citizen about the need to reform our country, laws, and companies."
Paul Hawken, coauthor of Natural Capitalism and author of The Ecology of Commerce