CNN: House Democrats defy Obama on tax cut bill

[Hubbs]

So now Obama's a "cut tax and spend more conservative"?

Obama's not the one who was fighting to prevent taxes on the wealthy from going up.

[Predicto]

IFrom a presidential stand point, does anyone else think this works very much in Obama's longer term favor? Here he is visibly to the right of much of the Dem party. Heck he even has some Republicans saying this was a good deal with him. Is it harder to pigeon hole him as a socialist liberal today than last week? I think so. In some ways I almost see this as the beginning of a reelection campaign, and I think (s)he who captures the center gets a 4 year stay in the White House.

I'm absolutely sure that this plays into the strategy.

And most Democrats realize that if Obama gets popular, they are likely to get reelected too.

[DjTj]

Clinton and Republicans compromise = higher income taxes, lower capital gains, welfare reform, closing military bases, balanced budget, invention of the internet, blowjobs for everyone

Obama and Republicans compromise = lower income taxes, lower payroll taxes, longer unemployment benefits, bailouts, stimulus, largest deficits in history, body cavity searches for everyone

[Predicto]

Clinton and Republicans compromise = higher income taxes, lower capital gains, welfare reform, closing military bases, balanced budget, invention of the internet, blowjobs for everyone

Obama and Republicans compromise = lower income taxes, lower payroll taxes, longer unemployment benefits, bailouts, stimulus, largest deficits in history, body cavity searches for everyone

Post of the Year.

[Larry]

I'm absolutely sure that this plays into the strategy.

And most Democrats realize that if Obama gets popular, they are likely to get reelected too.

Actually, I would think that the outcome that would most make Obama look heroic, would be if Congress passes this package, and then Obama announces a change of heart, and vetoes it.

It would have a lot of political consequences. Lots of people's taxes would go up, and Obama would be the guy they associate with it. (I suppose he could try to point out that the reason the taxes went up was because the Republican Party wrote the law that way. But face it, the Democrat's spin machine has been spinning it's wheels in the mud for decades.)

I think that he could come off as the President of "I know it's going to be hard, but it's necessary for the Good of The Country. But it's certainly not guaranteed. (I think that his attempt to look Presidential would be helped by the fact that the economy is going to get better, because it already is getting better. If things are better, next election, then I could see a lot of people crediting Obama's Strong Leadership.)

It would really shred his relationship with Congress. I mean, he told them that he'd sign it, if they passed it, and now he yanked the football away from Charlie Brown? Congress would assume that Obama had used them for a political publicity stunt, by promising them something, then reneging. OTOH, let's face it: The odds of Obama and this next Congress having a relationship of bipartisanship and compromise are already zero, anyway. What are they going to do? Filibuster every single proposal he makes?

[Tulane Skins Fan]

So now Obama's a "cut tax and spend more conservative"?

No, the republicans are.

I would never call Obama the "c" word.

[Fred Jones]

I don't know why your people are presenting points, the whole system is broken.

All the new Republicans that won because they said they would bring change are all signing K street lobbyists despite campaign promises.

When Obama took office on a sea of change, he changed nothing and kept business as usual.

The fight over a tax cut put forth by the previous president simply put the country in debt and currently bad fiscal status and many want to continue said debt issue.

And voting in that old House leader/nightmare to continue to run in the new house was just plain stupid. I have trouble saying her name.

And, to think the former Gov of Alaska is still considering running for a job she knows nothing about is just plain funny.

I am now tired from pointing out just a couple of issues, but I could continue the rest of the afternoon.

The solution, pain across the board. That is my solution. It fixes everything, but no one would ever be able to do it.

[SnyderShrugged]

Well, it appears that the Democrats are the party of fiscal responsibility after all. The Republicans and Tea Party vote for increased spending and tax cuts once again and the Dems try to block it. Strangely, all the supposed fiscal conservatives on this board minus one seem to be lambasting the Dems for this and perfectly happy with the Republicans and Tea Party/Obama compromise.

It's dishonest to claim r or d as fiscally responsible in this. Both are actively seeking to ncrease our debt

[twa]

The fight over a tax cut put forth by the previous president simply put the country in debt and currently bad fiscal status and many want to continue said debt issue.

The solution, pain across the board. That is my solution. It fixes everything, but no one would ever be able to do it.

So our deficit should match the costs of that tax cut?....Load of horse****

The pain is coming

[Tulane Skins Fan]

It's dishonest to claim r or d as fiscally responsible in this. Both are actively seeking to ncrease our debt

Well, in general you're right. In this INSTANCE, the dems are actually trying to be more fiscally responsible. It might be at the detriment to the economy, but that's what they are trying to do.

[Fred Jones]

So our deficit should match the costs of that tax cut?....Load of horse****

The pain is coming

I don't understand what you are saying. I said "The solution, pain across the board. That is my solution."

My solution is pain for everyone. Everyone means everyone. I said nothing for or against Bush tax cuts. In fact, seems to me pain might be to repeal them and make everyone pay more taxes. Pain means the Government spending less money. Pain means the rich paying more in taxes. Pain means pull out of countries we are spending large chunks of money trying to fix to save money. Pain means everyone suffers to bring fiscal responsibility back. Like, an equal opportunity suffering.

And, I don't understand what pain you are referring too when you say it is coming. Some say that God's wrath is coming to bring order to the world. That would cause a lot of pain.

[SnyderShrugged]

Well, in general you're right. In this INSTANCE, the dems are actually trying to be more fiscally responsible. It might be at the detriment to the economy, but that's what they are trying to do.

I hate to say it, but even in this instance (and by instance I refer to the entire "compromise" and not just the tax extension proposal) the Dems are just as guilty because neiter has made any significant moves to lower spending, in fact Obama's "deal" was to add 14 more months of unemployment at a HUGE cost.

Its just majorly irresponsible all around. so depressing.

[PeterMP]

I hate to say it, but even in this instance (and by instance I refer to the entire "compromise" and not just the tax extension proposal) the Dems are just as guilty because neiter has made any significant moves to lower spending, in fact Obama's "deal" was to add 14 more months of unemployment at a HUGE cost.

Its just majorly irresponsible all around. so depressing.

This thread isn't about Obama, but what the house DEMS are doing, and they aren't going with Obama's deal.

[SnyderShrugged]

This thread isn't about Obama, but what the house DEMS are doing, and they aren't going with Obama's deal.

I'll concede that point.

Though I still dont feel that they are anything remotely close to fiscally responsible overall,

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I'll concede that point.

Though I still dont feel that they are anything remotely close to fiscally responsible overall,

As said, I was saying that the house dems were the ones acting fiscally responsibly, not Obama. At least those dems trying to block the bill.

question for you though, does fiscally responsible mean "cutting spending" or does it mean "balancing the budget"?

[TMK9973]

BTW - SS - So you understand the bill that was written does NOT extended Unemployment for 13 months.

What it does, is extend the emergency extension for 13 months. Confusing -- I know.

But what I'm saying is unemployment is normally for 26 weeks (depends on state, I know, but I'm using as a example). Because of federal extension of unemployment - It was bumped up to say 59 weeks (again- various by state). That was set to expire, meaning that it would go back to 26 weeks. The extension would keep the 59 weeks in place for another 13 months. But if you are on your 55th week right now, with or without this extension, your benefits ends 4 weeks from today.

That seems to be getting lost.

[Goaldeje]

I hate to say it, but even in this instance (and by instance I refer to the entire "compromise" and not just the tax extension proposal) the Dems are just as guilty because neiter has made any significant moves to lower spending, in fact Obama's "deal" was to add 14 more months of unemployment at a HUGE cost.

Its just majorly irresponsible all around. so depressing.

Let it go man. I have always voted Republican, but they bear most of the responsibility for this. Almost all, in fact.

It's funny listening to died in the wool Republicans as they try to convince me that Trickle Down can still work, and that now isn't the time to increase taxes on the rich. Socialism!

Sheesh. I wonder if I can sell my vote on eBay.

[AzSkinsFan63]

This is a dog and pony show..democrats will eventually pass the bill as is and have planned on it all along. But they are not going to be happy about it I tell ya!...

[Teller]

I'm glad that at least the president understands that "compromise" doesn't mean "our way, or STFU." There's a reason many of these idiots will be jobless soon.

[visionary]

No, the republicans are.

I would never call Obama the "c" word.

So what does that make him? lol

[sacase]

I like the fact that the president actually told congress what he wanted to do in his comprimise with republicans. I like the fact that he attempted to compromise with the republicans.

I did not like the idea that he put forth for in his compromise. So I am actually glad that it has failed in the house. If they can start to comprimise with each other, then it could be a good beginning.

The President is the leader of the country. He needs to give congress his vision and how he wants it enacted. I am saying this as someone who almost completly disagree's with almost everything Obama is about.

[AsburySkinsFan]

seriously, this is a good thing. The bill amounted to nothing more than another stimulus under a different name to trick the idiot masses.

I agree, and I hope they kill it as it happens to be the most irresponsible thing that's been done in DC in the last year. 850 billion dollars over two years....:doh:...fiscal responsibility my arse.

[SnyderShrugged]

As said, I was saying that the house dems were the ones acting fiscally responsibly, not Obama. At least those dems trying to block the bill.

question for you though, does fiscally responsible mean "cutting spending" or does it mean "balancing the budget"?

Spending cuts to the highest degree in order to accomplish a balanced budget with the smallest hit on the populace via taxation, is my definition of fiscal responsibility.

---------- Post added December-10th-2010 at 07:39 AM ----------

BTW - SS - So you understand the bill that was written does NOT extended Unemployment for 13 months.

What it does, is extend the emergency extension for 13 months. Confusing -- I know.

But what I'm saying is unemployment is normally for 26 weeks (depends on state, I know, but I'm using as a example). Because of federal extension of unemployment - It was bumped up to say 59 weeks (again- various by state). That was set to expire, meaning that it would go back to 26 weeks. The extension would keep the 59 weeks in place for another 13 months. But if you are on your 55th week right now, with or without this extension, your benefits ends 4 weeks from today.

That seems to be getting lost.

regardless of the sematics, it significantly increases spending and the debt

---------- Post added December-10th-2010 at 07:41 AM ----------

Let it go man. I have always voted Republican, but they bear most of the responsibility for this. Almost all, in fact.

It's funny listening to died in the wool Republicans as they try to convince me that Trickle Down can still work, and that now isn't the time to increase taxes on the rich. Socialism!

Sheesh. I wonder if I can sell my vote on eBay.

LMAO! It appears you are calling me a "dies in the wool Republican" which couldnt be further from the truth.

In fact, you may want to read say, all of my posts from 2004 until now to get my opinion.

Other than that error you made, you also made zero point with any cogent tract.

---------- Post added December-10th-2010 at 07:42 AM ----------

I agree, and I hope they kill it as it happens to be the most irresponsible thing that's been done in DC in the last year. 850 billion dollars over two years....:doh:...fiscal responsibility my arse.

I really like it when we come together on the same page. Its warm and fuzzy!

[AsburySkinsFan]

I really like it when we come together on the same page. Its warm and fuzzy!

But then I could be wrong...

It just chaps my cheeks to hear the GOP scream about fiscal responsibility and addressing the debt, and then they pull this craziness.

[TMK9973]

Spending cuts to the highest degree in order to accomplish a balanced budget with the smallest hit on the populace via taxation, is my definition of fiscal responsibility.

---------- Post added December-10th-2010 at 07:39 AM ----------

regardless of the sematics, it significantly increases spending and the debt

---------- Post added December-10th-2010 at 07:41 AM ----------

LMAO! It appears you are calling me a "dies in the wool Republican" which couldnt be further from the truth.

In fact, you may want to read say, all of my posts from 2004 until now to get my opinion.

Other than that error you made, you also made zero point with any cogent tract.

---------- Post added December-10th-2010 at 07:42 AM ----------

I really like it when we come together on the same page. Its warm and fuzzy!

Well -It's more then just sementics. People seem to think this means everyone on unemployment will have unemployement for ALL of next year - and thats not the case.

But also - While you are not a die hard republican - you have ALWAYS been anti Democrat. Not saying your views are wrong on this (It's a BAD bill that is not good and costs to much) but in THIS case - you can give credit where credit is due. Dems are acting more responsbile then the Republicans. Dems are saying "We don't care how much funding for our pet projects you are throwing in, this costs to much".