flpoljunkie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 06:23 AM
Original message |
Will R's hold hostage middle class tax cuts to preserve tax cuts for the top 2%? |
|
Make them choose, Dems. Make them choose. And, before the mid-term elections in November.
|
Champion Jack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 06:34 AM
Response to Original message |
1. sure they will, but, the bigger question is |
|
why will the dems let them get away with it?
|
hobbit709
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 06:51 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
liberal N proud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 06:47 AM
Response to Original message |
2. They are the party of NO! |
|
Blocking any and all legislation put forth by Democrats is their agenda.
|
stray cat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 06:48 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Let them all lapse by doing nothing |
vi5
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 06:54 AM
Response to Original message |
5. They are the party of no, and Dems are the party of... |
|
.."Please? Pretty please? Well how about if we do this for you? How about if we take this out for you? Would it make you happier and like us more if we changed it entirely? Would it be o.k. if we kept the name though for our fundraising letters"
I'm not entirely sure which one is worse.
|
dkf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 07:30 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Mon Aug-09-10 07:32 AM by dkf
In the end Dems are the ones who will face the consequences because we are in charge. If George Bush could get his crap done with less than 60 votes why can't Obama get whatever he wants?
And the argument that the tax rates dud just fine when Clinton was in charge is actually an argument against keeping the middle class tax cuts.
|
zipplewrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
The reality is, if you are a democrat, which is better, letting them all expire, or keeping them all? You let them all expire and the revenue stream improves ALOT. You keep them all and the train wreck continues. Polictically, it would hurt to have all those middle class folks suddenly see higher taxes, especially during a recession and not to mention you just gave some of them a tax cut. But if you can't get that passed, the next two options present you with a pickle of a choice. And for some reason, the GOP won't take hit for preventing the middle class tax break just so the uber rich can get one too.
|
tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were reconcilliation bills |
|
That require only 50+1 votes in the Senate, Dick Cheney broke the tie for passage on the 2003 bill IIRC.
But since Democrats failed to pass a budget resolution this year, the budget reconcilliation process will not be available to them. They have no vehicle to move a reconcilliation bill, so the extensions will have to be subject to filibuster. This fall will see a very high stakes game of chicken on these tax rates.
|
Jakes Progress
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 09:25 AM
Response to Original message |
8. Yep. With some Democratic help. |
flpoljunkie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
11. These 'centrist' Dems must be forced to choose, as well--and not caved in to. |
|
Bayh, Conrad, Ben Nelson--among others.
|
ellenfl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-09-10 10:11 AM
Response to Original message |
10. in a word, yes . . . and probably get away with it. eom |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 03rd 2024, 07:17 PM
Response to Original message |