WOW!!!

Barry Obama has really ANGERED the Professional Left. And, to think that just two short years ago, in November 2008, Barry and the lefty liberals walked up to the altar and pledged at the voting booth that they would love, honor, and cherish each other for all of eternity. But, ever since the Porkulus bill tax cuts and the public option fight, the lefty liberals have suspected Barry has been cheating on them. Now, with this tax and unemployment benefits extension deal they "know" he's been sleeping with the Republican's!!!!

My most Hillaryous hope is that this causes a repeat of the 1980 election when Ted Kennedy descended from the far left side of planet Liberal to run a primary challenge against an incumbent Dem president. About 30 seconds of thought produced the following list of possible 2012 candidates:

1. Monsieur Jean Kerry
2. Al Bore
3. Hillary Clinton
4. Rev. Al
5. Dennis Kucinich
6. Bernie Sanders (doesn't he look like a Muppet when he's angry???)
7. Anthony Weiner
8. Alan Grayson
9. Keith Olbermann
10. "Mr. Ed" Schultz

Please God, once again show us your wicked sense of humor, like you did in 2006 with "I voted for the $87 billion, before I voted against it." And in 2008, with Rev. Wright and those people clinging to their religion and guns. Let one of the top three run for the nomination seriously and add two more Stooges from the other seven who are really looking for the VP slot.

Please, Please, Please.

In reaction to this deal, soon to be House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi commands:

"Assemble the Democrat Circular Firing Squad!!!

Ready…..

Aim……

FIRE!!!!"

The Middle Ground:

Fortunately football season is in full swing and there is a lot of basketball on ESPN. Thus, I have redirected my focus away from the sport of politics to more college and pro sports. However, I still scan the headlines to see what the pundits are saying. And from what I can tell most are very angry.

I read that Joe Scarborough didn't like the tax deal because the conservatives were not interested in cutting the deficit. Well, where has Joe been? The Republicans are far more interested in giving tax breaks to the wealthy than managing the debt. They don't have a clue about debt management, but they know a lot about gifting money to the wealthy.

Then I read that some Republicans were unhappy with the tax cut deal because there were too few tax cuts and TOO MUCH HELP FOR THE JOBLESS. The conservative Club for Growth was unhappy because the tax cuts were not permanent. Sometimes it sure is hard to please people.

Then I'm told that Keith Olbermann had some special comments stating that Obama was goddamned weak on the tax deal. From Olbermann's perspective, the President betrayed his base. I guess no one has told Keith that his base is not the far left, but middle-class Americans. Compromise involves giving and taking. From what I can tell, President Obama kept his campaign pledge not to raise taxes for the middle class. The winners were neither the right wing nor the left wing; but in this case, but middle-class Americans.

Ron Indiana

Then I'm told that Keith Olbermann had some special comments stating that Obama was goddamned weak on the tax deal. From Olbermann's perspective, the President betrayed his base.

He dis

Good Morning America

THAT’S NOT ENOUGH CERTAINTY

Hostage takers (Republicans) complain there is not enough certainty because the Bush tax cuts and the estate tax repeal should be permanent Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), a leading House Republican, the conservative Club for Growth, the Heritage Foundation, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), Arkansas GOP Rep.-elect Steve Womack, said this after relentlessly pushing for an extension of the Bush tax cuts on everyone. What a canard. Did I not recently say the Republican/Tea Party focus on- job creation would be abandoned as it be the uncertainty they so feared?

What about that massive increase in the deficit caused by extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest two percent of Americans?

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/07/gop-hostage-takers/

========================================================

All Americans who vote for Republicans should hand over their Social Security to Hedge Fund managers. And of course keep them from having any health insurance when they are out of work or cannot afford it. It goes without saying they will be opted out of Medicaid.

It wont' be so bad for them at all. We will have the new GOP House pass a bill to send each and every American who voted for Republicans a FREE (postage free) American flag lapel pin, a FREE Bible and a FREE dashboard Jesus they can shove up their ass.

The Presidents lashed out at "purists'' in his own party who have castigated him for capitulating to GOP demands. Humm, more like quislings. Traitors complain for their version of every negative situation.

Smile in your face then back stab that's what back stabbers do.

Ron;

It never stops. Those that have want more because they feel it is their God given right to own everything and call the shots. One side is mad because they feel they did not get enough. The other side in in the opposite camp complaining that they did not get enough. Go figure.

As it stands now the republicans got a huge tax break on their income taxes and estate taxes. Once again the tax cuts favor the richest 2% who stand to also to get the majority of the benefits. The economic divide will grow to a new record. The deficit that the republicans said they wanted to lower just in fact got bigger thanks to them. Hypocrites all. I saw complaining that the tax cuts for the middle class was not paid for but did not mention that neither are the cuts for the rich either. Same old same old. They are complaining that the unemployment extension is a bad idea even though virtually every economist says that in a recession/depression this is a economic stimulus that adds 1.65 dollars for every dollar invested. The tax cuts for the rich add about $0.32 for every dollar.

One issue I have is with the 2% reduction in the Social Security Payroll Tax. It is going to be hard to repeal this next year and we will then be on the republican road to destroy Social Security as well unless they maybe increase the cap of 106,800 to 150K, 175K or something to make up the difference??

Also these Tac Cuts are going to be one of the major if not the major campaign issues come 2012. I suspect we are on a path where this is just going to go on and on and the Middle Class is footing the bill again.

What an angry little man Obama has become. Just what was the point of that press conference of his yesterday? Obama screamed at the Democrats, he called Republicans "hostage takers", and he topped it off with a heaping helping of self-pity about how no one appreciates his "greatness". Obviously the neighborhood organizer is not cut out for the job. And this was his second conference on the subject in two days, so it appears the "Great Communicator" couldn't get his point across the first time down in North Carolina and had to have a "do-over" to try and make his point again (and he managed to fail yet again). Obama rolled out the standard boiler-plate of the Democratic talking points where he says he'll "Fight the Republicans", "Fight for the American people", "Fight anyone that gets in his way", and the biggest laugher "I'm itching for a fight". And the Liberals/Media called George HW Bush a wimp, Obama has GHWB beat in the wimp department 100 times over.

Obama sure didn't put up much of a fight against the Republicans, whose incoming House Speaker Boehner only a couple of months ago conceded the point of taxes on the rich going up - on Sept 10th Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner said that, if approving a bill to extend breaks for middle class income Americans were "the only option," he would support it. Boehner doesn't appear to be too good at his job of being a "hostage taker", but he apparently installed a fear like no other into Obama.

Elections have consequences. For Obama, it appears he's lost his mind.

Actually elections don't have consequences. Republicans totally ignored the 2008 results and took the position that they must defeat anything this president does..period

BTW...the reps will overreach by butting into peoples personal lives and though they are against government interference in their lives they don't mind telling the rest of us who we can marry and what kind of sex lives we can lead...

Political theater from the Left and Right are required in this situation. The most Liberal in the political theater are of course upset at yet another handout to the rich. They should be, and I'm not happy about it either. That doesn't mean this wasn't the best deal to be had. Conservatives are naturally upset that they had to compromise their war on the middle class. It's what they do. They got a piece of what they wanted and they're always looking far enough down the road that they realize it. That doesn't mean the Tea Party and rest of the Rabid Right doesn't need to be pacified.

Our President stood before the American people and told us in no uncertain terms that he made the best deal he could. He is loathe to accept yet more give aways to those who need it least and he said so. Two years from now he'll get to say it again after Republican tax cutting continues to explode the Federal Debt.

Meanwhile, to all Democrats who have a problem with the result, how about getting of your lazy keisters and helping out next time? One of the basics of basketball is that it's a team sport--you won't be successful that often if you insist on going 1 on 5. Barack Obama had no choice and had to settle for making his foul shots. The rest of you should quit standing around and go to the ball as well.

tbn: this president is doing the best that he can

Well, it appears that's just not good enough.

We all can't be victims tbn. Someones got to be productive to pay for all this nonsense Obama wants.

Louis J.

Good points. President Obama is thinking of America first, not his political ambitions like some of the politicians (both Dem 7 Rep) are doing. We are in a very bad time thanks in part to the mismanagement of the previous administration, which they still deny the two unfunded wars (one based on lies and the other total mismanaged), two unfunded tax cuts that gave the top 2% over 50% of the benefits and the unfunded prescription drug plan couple that with the lowering of regulations and you have a huge problem, that we are still paying for to boot. Everybody yaps about the deficit, and it is way to high for my liking, but the republicans had a big hand in its escalation. They campaigned on lower the deficit but want to pass bills that add record amounts to the very deficit they said they wanted to lower. Go figure.

Cutting spending is important but not the total answere, there also has to be increased revenues as well, not less. UIntil both sides of this equation are addressed things are going to get worse.

John B:

Excellent post. Spot On! Looks like we are singing from the same songbook on this issue. BTW, Bobby Knight used to say B-ball is a team sport...back in the days when Indiana was winning ball games.

Barack Obama had no choice and had to settle for making his foul shots

Obama had no choice? Are you kidding us? He's 1/3 of the legislative process. He can veto any bill that comes across his desk. He has the bully-pulpit to get his message across. He can shape any argument for any issue. And you say he "had no choice and had to settle" because the Republicans, the extremely in the minority Republicans, said "boo" to him?

You must not have much confidence in Obama if you think he had no choice in this matter.

Right on as usual Beverly. Always love your posts.

And again, as usual, both Parties are whining and sniffling because they didn't get EVERYTHING. Gees, I thought both sides wanted compromise, but i guess not. Both Parties are crybabies.

Republicans have enough power to stall tax cuts for average Americans for months, and enough to cause unemployment benefits to expire for over 1 million people in need, putting the entire economy in jeopardy as a result.

President Obama negotiated with the hostage takers in the best interest of average Americans. He's made it clear in the process that Conservative politicians are beholden only to their wealthy, elite benefactors. That's good enough for now.

Typo error correction:

Ron Indiana

Then I'm told that Keith Olbermann had some special comments stating that Obama was goddamned weak on the tax deal. From Olbermann's perspective, the President betrayed his base.

He did.

But, Lawrence O'Donnell and Chris Matthew's have been the only sane voices in this controversy. As much as I love Ed, Keith, and Rachel IMO, they are dead wrong and putting more coals in the fire for the frenzied left and right.

Lawrence O'Donnell was spot on last night. If anyone missed it, they should go to the Last word's website and watch the "Progressives on Obama" video . There you will the clueless, purist especially Jane Harman, whom btw, I usually despise. She sat there pontificating; until Lawrence O'Donnell made her look like a dumb bunny. She didn't know much about the estate tax either. Another one, an author who is getting money by writing a book about President Obama used a bias slant and called the President Hoover; plus he didn't even know what the bottom tax bracket was. This author could even cite the historical differences between Democratic and Republican Presidents

I was glad to see Lawrence clean the purist clocks. Well, at least 3 of them. Ezra did seem to know what he was talking about.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/40560368#40560484

What many angry Democrats fail to realize is that this country is governed by a two-party system. Democrats are not the only ones in Washington D.C. and come January there will be significantly fewer of them. They will have to deal with Republicans on some issues or face a stalemate for the next two years in which no business is done.

As I see it, the purist are just as farcically whacked as Wikileaks Assange is a purist.

He had to compromise to help the unemployment issue.

Why the borderline paranoid disconnect for every time thy can have their way?

So John B., Obama agrees with the Republicans, but he doesn't agree with the Republicans? The man has turned into Sybil John.

Yours, and the Far Left Liberals, wild twisted pretzel "logic" explanations and excuse making for Obama's actions is getting absurd.

John B.

Agreed. Based on the current timing and environment President Obama did the best he could with what he had. I have problems with some of the proposals but the alternative would have been devastating to the economy and not really an option.

People will always complain, typically they are the ones that are sitting on they arses and being part of the problem instead of helping out.

President Obama promised tax cuts for 98% of the people and he did that. In fact everybody got a tax cut (keeping present program in play) on the first $250,000 of Taxable Income. Everybody got a 2% payroll tax reduction (only goes up to 106,800 of employee income). But NO, some want more than their fair share, not because the necessarily deserve it, but because they feel they are entitled to it.

In order to get these tax breaks for the Middle Class he basically had to make a deal with the devil. He also is not happy with this deal, but he put America first and did the best he could. Can he get a little more, I do not know. He would run the risk of then having this go on forever and probably end up back at the same point or probably getting even less.

The republican agenda is still gridlock, make President Obama a one term President and opposse anything and everthing that will move this country forward. I see NO change there at all.

Bev-

Jane Hamsher is the founder of the progressive website, Firedoglake.com.

Noting that if President Obama had not met the Republithugs in the middle, there is talk that they would have extended UI anyway. It was surmised that the Republithugs would have felt pressure from their constituents in districts where unemployment is high, the Republithugs would have passed UI even if the president did not extend the cuts for the rich.

That's a bunch of baloney. The voters that comprise the Republithug base would have voted for those Congress members regardless of how they treat said voters. If that were otherwise then Mitch McConMan would have been replaced and Rand Paul would still be in Bowling Green. Republithugs will vote for whomever they are told to vote for. They are party devoted and will die for the greedy simply because they lack dependent thought.

JS1 seems to be confused that the majority of Liberal posters here are unwilling to sacrifice the needs of average Americans for ideological purity.

Maybe because the latter is more a Conservative priority.

Mixed Bag

Bev-

Jane Hamsher is the founder of the progressive website, Firedoglake.com.

I know that. Jane Hamsher complains and complains; thus, she is singing the same chorus as the nutty right wingers... "Obama is not doing enough". She and Arianna Huffington are two of by fellow sistas whom I consider borderline bi-polars. Their craftiness caused a lot of Democrats to stay home during the midterms. You know some times one can be so extreme they just "black out".

She and Arina Huffington are two of by fellow sistas whom I consider borderline bi-polars.

You got THAT right GF! I never read Firedog Lake and am down to only peeking at HuffPo once or twice a week!

As you know... no one leans further LEFT than I do but those two do Democrats NO favors! :0)

Louis J, Beverly, Ron, US Navy, John B, tea bag not, Rick WS NC--excellent points. President Obama got more out of this tax compromise than did the GOP/TP, Obama has not lost his base contrary to the media storyline portrayal and the left's pontificating; democrats are doing their version of a victory dance which often includes huffing and puffing about what they don't like.

As Lawrence O'Donnell pointed out last night--it isn't about the 2% rich but rather about the lowest tax bracket for low income earners which is currently 10%. If the fight continues, those low income earners will see a 50% tax hike come January which would be devastating to those families in this slowly recovery economy. President Obama is absolutely right, this is about protecting middle and low income earners from the hostage takers (GOP/TP), this must become the focus of the discussion--protecting the other 98% of Americans during recovery.

As for Joe in Albany and Joanna Smith, I have concluded they suffer a disease causing lack of rational thinking, commonly known as SIASD syndrome.

Have a good morning!

Louis

The president could just as easily bullied the Republithugs into submission. He could have even made them get on their knees and beg.

the president has the situation under control and that he can handle himself.

The President couldn't do anything. He lost control of the whole issue. He could have addressed this and had what he and the far left wanted long ago. Instead, we had yesterday.

Yesterday was a pathetic display of what a President should not be.

Obama acted as a petulant punk who has forced to do something against his will. The President referring to the opposition as hostage takers, after the earlier Dem comment of the Repubs being terrorists. Then the ill-tempered childish tantrum against the far left, all the while sanctimoniously sulking for not be appreciated for protecting the middle class which he has never listened to.

What a class act. What a great display of Presidential leadership.

But that was just yesterday. The big story is that Obama has been railing against Bush tax cuts for 3 years - they were the "failed economic policies" that "almost caused the the second Great Depression."

Yet Obama, through his own in competence is forced to accept and extend them those very same policies.

Which in the end is good thing, but it sure does illustrate how out of his depth he is.

President Obama is absolutely right, this is about protecting middle and low income earners from the hostage takers (GOP/TP),

Isn't it amazing how the lemmings on the Left adopt their masters vocabulary? "Hostage takers"? The Republicans? Hardly. Independent thought is certainly not the strong suit for the Lefty Lemmings.

Republican John Boehner, incoming Speaker, said 2 months ago that he's like the Bush tax rates to be extended for all, but understood he would have to compromise to exclude the upper 2% if "that was the best deal he could get". Does that sound like a "hostage taker" to you Liberals? If so, you scare rather easily.

I wonder if Obama plays poker? He'd be broke if he did.

I wonder if Obama plays poker? He'd be broke if he did.

He does - we are.

Actually chances of coming out ahead in a game of Hold'em against the big boys are better than gambling on liberal social engineering experiments working.

Sounds like some Republicons have Community Organizer envy. I'm just sayin...

Envy - Nah.

Pity for those fall for it - Yea, pretty much.

I would quit crying, the Democrats have had an entire year to decide upon this, but did not take it serious. Instead of dealing with the tax cuts when they could throw their weight around, they fell in love with the "summer of recovery".

Maybe they would have gotten what they wanted had they not put it off until the last minute. Now they shed crocodile tears. Get over it.

Instead of complaining, we should be calling on our representatives to reform the tax code so everyone should pay their fair share of income taxes. That is where we are losing money, because 47% don't pay, 2% hide their money, and the rest of us are broke. Fix the unfixable.

It's amazing how our federal government got by with spending no more than they took in for years! Let's face it we cannot sustain spending more money than we take in. I tried it in my private life for a while and almost went bankrupt. Most folks on this site spew about how one party is the enemy (take your pick). Bottom line, quit worrying about hosing the rich; they will always have money and plenty of politicians from both parties in their pockets. Bring industry back to America and quit sending all of our money to China! The way the government spends our tax dollars is shameful. They waste most of it on crap!

bob: Actually chances of coming out ahead in a game of Hold'em against the big boys are better than gambling on liberal social engineering experiments working.

Could you see Obama in negotiations to buy a new car? If his negotiations with the GOP are any indication, he'd get in the sales office and say "I'll only give you $3000 over MSRP. That's my final offer, take it or leave it, and please don't hold me hostage."

Then afterward he'd whine that he didn't have any choice and had to cut the deal.

"As for Joe in Albany and Joanna Smith, I have concluded they suffer a disease causing lack of rational thinking, commonly known as SIASD syndrome."

Jody, nice to see you are a graduate of The Forrest Gump School of Rational Thinking. You must be proud!!!

“Now, if that's the standard by which we are measuring success or core principles, then let's face it, we will never get anything done. People will have the satisfaction of having a purist position and no victories for the American people.”

This is the essential statement in the story. The President paid attention to one of the "messages" from the election - focus on the economy and jobs, and quit staking out purely political positions for the sake of "purity." Get the job done.

It's a message both parties ignore at their peril over the next two years. The President is exercising leadership in a more direct involvement with the legislative process than he had over the past two years. He needs to continue his involvement, especially in a 112th Congress that promises even more ferocious fights over purity on the Right - and, probably, gridlock.

People who here have dismissed the President as a lightweight, or inexperienced, let their prejudices blind them. This President is actually a relatively popular man, and with steps such as this compromise is building his strength around the country. We should all see a brilliant strategy as well as a practical form of executive leadership in the offing. And with that will come the public influence to either lead Congress out of a morass, or expose ideological diehards to defeat in the next election.

Republican John Boehner, incoming Speaker, said 2 months ago that he's like the Bush tax rates to be extended for all, but understood he would have to compromise to exclude the upper 2% if "that was the best deal he could get". Does that sound like a "hostage taker" to you Liberals? If so, you scare rather easily.

What politicians say and what they do are often times two different things.

This is all moot. Jim the Deminted will block the vote, he feels the GOP did not need to give the unemployed any more benefits. All for the RICH and the other Americans be dam-ed.

Man Louis, glad you are not partisan, hate to see your rant on that

US Navy - Confused: What politicians say and what they do are often times two different things.

For Obama that is true. All during his campaign in 2007 he said the taxes on the rich should go up. No ifs, no ands about it. I guess something changed for him with that idea though.

But for Boehner, he basically sold the 2%-ers down the river. He said if that's the best deal he could get, on maintinaing tax rates for just the 98%-ers, that he'd take it. Doesn't sound too hardball to me. How about you?

Somehow Obama perceived that as a threat, as a "hostage taking" situation. Kind of looks like Obama over-reacted, now don't you think?

Louis J:

Glad to see you are still "drinking the Obama kool-aide". I guess it is tough to admit that the man you so strongly support has continued to loose face with, no only the left, but with world leaders, in general. Obama still hasn't concentrated on the one big item he should have-----JOBS!!! As he indicated in his speech yesterday-----"I am doing what I said I would do if elected". Obviously he's more worried about satisfying his own ego than addressing the real problem(s) facing this nation. His statements yesterday about supporting the middle class were almost hilarious. I will give Obama credit-----he can give a good speech, even though much of it is retoric.

LouisJ - shut up and grow up

JoAnnaSmith,

Good one.

BTW- Great comments as usual.

John A,

This President is actually a relatively popular man,

He was very popular and is relative to the dislike of his performance and policies. But it seems to be trending south, huh?

and with steps such as this compromise is building his strength around the country. We should all see a brilliant strategy as well as a practical form of executive leadership in the offing. And with that will come the public influence to either lead Congress out of a morass, or expose ideological diehards to defeat in the next election.

His practical executive leadership? His petulant display yesterday was anything but. He had the perfect opportunity to do exactly what you just said - he blew it. It's just not in him, doesn't have it. He is not even a Clinton.

He is an ideological diehard that is caught in his own ideological trap (His ideology doesn't work!)

A number of points. The GOP has basically taken control of the House and some political balance has been restored. Obama and the more liberal members of congress can no longer inflict their will without regard for, at least about half of the populations views (right or wrong) and everyone is still unhappy. The new balance will force compromise which is generally how it should be. You can see that the Obama haters are not motivated by politics or ideals, but hate.

Second, why is there such an outcry about tax cuts for higher earners? These are the people that pay higher taxes by amount and percentage. People have to lose the mentality that wealthy people pay nothing and the whole tax burden is on the middle class. If you're in the "middle class" then worry about the tax burden in your income bracket not what someone else is. Think of it this way, If you went to see a movie and you were charged based on your income rather than a set fee for everyone, you would probably be annoyed, unless of course you were the guy getting in for free.

I hope that the parties continue to deal and compromise and that either side does not continue with utra-partisan politics. For this Nation to prosper, we have to understand that there needs to be some sort of unity baed on the good of all. Politics will always be a tug of war, but in the end, its the balance that makes us strong. As we have all seen time and again, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I read the left and right post from everyone and have respect for your thoughts.... That being said, I don't think any of you grasp the feeling on the streets right now. The American public (Middle Americans) is starting to understand that the 30 year budget party is over, and the check has come. Neither the president with his compromise, nor the Republicans are willing to talk about the financial reality of deficit spending, and neither understand the groundswell that is going to turn into a very hostile situation by this summer.

We are broke as a country! We have $14 Trillion in federal debt, and if you add unfunded programs and state debt that figure climbs to somewhere around $60 Trillion. Nobody is talking about the serious 40% cut in federal spending that has to take place. Nobody is talking about the fact that the Bush era tax cuts have to go towards deficit reduction. Between credit card debt from the hollidays, more home foreclosures, higher unemployment numbers because of seasonal workers, the other shoe is going to drop in late January, early February. All this and the damned pubs are already discussing raising the debt ceiling!

Now Obama, rather than telling Americans the truth about the budget, proposes a compromise that both parties know we cannot afford. Taxes cuts to the wealthy don't create jobs, tax cuts to the middle class will not stimulate the economy as they will go to reduce personal debt, and anything left will go into savings, not be spent on products. The one program that does give stimulus to manufacturing is extending UI as that money goes right back into the economy. But UI is hated by the Republicans, and Democrats get slammed at the polls and in the press by it so they would rather keep it out of the headlines.

The future is here.... now! All of you have good commentary, but quit ignoring the 14 trillion pound gorilla in the room!

Louis Keep posting you are doing the Republicans more good than anyone I know.Your last statementis tipical Dimocrat bull@!$%# your entire blogg is aimed at tearing the country apart,& dividing ,you say united we stand,divided we fall.Do you have no SHAME ?????

He was very popular and is relative to the dislike of his performance and policies. But it seems to be trending south, huh?

Uh, nope. Not only is his popularity in the upper 40s, just about where it's been for the last YEAR, but he's STILL more popular than Reagan or Clinton at this stage of their presidencies. Don't believe it? Link to Gallup below.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

I really struggle with all of the negative thoughts and ideas here that lean one direction. I used to think that this was a good progressive sounding board with new ideas, but lately it has become more of a Blue against Red theme. Exactly what we have in Washington today.

Since everyone's desire is to move towards economic and social prosperity, how exactly are we going to do that if we can't be open to other ideas and have a more civil discourse?

The time has come for Obama to realize and accept that his job is not to represent the Democrats or the Republicans or the Independents it is to represent the people of The United States of America. Since it is IMPOSSIBLE to please everyone at the same time, he needs to concentrate on taking care of the and listening to, the MAJORITY of Americans. There will always be a minority out there who, no matter what a POTUS does or says, will find fault with it.

I hope that Obama has learned that to be successful as our POTUS he must find middle ground. There are good things that both parties want to accomplish for this country and this BS of political party in house fighting and not passing something simply because a Republican or a Democrat thought of it, must stop! Otherwise, we as a country, are doomed to tear ourselves apart much like many empires before us have done.

Edd, I don't mean to make anyone upset. Stress leads to health issues and you sound very stressed. And to that we can all thank God that HCR was passed because apparently many people are stressing these days. UI is extended to help the unemployed from the Bush Era Unemployment whereby the precursor to this was the Republithug run Congress of Drunken Spending and Unregulated Markets from 2003-2006. Edd, I despise the Hater Spray, but I must spray you.

John,

He is less popular than BUSH!

About the "Reagan & Clinton" liberal pacifier, Reagan had a clue what he was doing and turned it around. Obama doesn't and won't. Clinton had a clue and gave up the liberal agenda. Obama doesn't and won't.

9.8% unemployment and Obama doesn't even talk about it going down. Wait untill they turn on him. Afghanistan and Obama kicks the can to 2014. On and on. Health care? What happens as more and more comes out (All the companies having to apply for waivers to keep from laying off employees, or dropping their existing coverage?) Wait until the media and more Dems turn on him.

Obama is going to end up next to Carter - not Reagan, or Clinton.

But feel free to dream and tell yourself whatever you want.

Edd,

Good job! You got another example of stupidity out of him.

Here is theproblems I see. Unemployment is not really an issue that can be addressed though political maneuvering because it is a market issue. Governments, particularly Presidents can do little to affect these factors without taking control of the markets, much like China does, so no Presint Dem or Repub can be very succesful in creating jobs. Tax cuts in my opinion are not vehicle that create jobs. Jobs are the result of increased demand and competition. However, excessive tax burdens hurt profits and therefore inhibit investment. Tax burdens can cause companies to move operations offshore. The only way for governments to create jobs is to expand government and hence government spend, or though public works project and research.You can also create jobs by expanding the military.

Bob: Obama is going to end up next to Carter - not Reagan, or Clinton.

I strongly disagree!!

I think Carter has him beat.

I'm happy that the President is finally speaking his mind....and he's right, you don't get anywhere near 100% of what you want with legislation. If the Dems decide he shouldn't be elected next term, they should offer up someone as an alternative. Guess what? Nobody wants the job? Only the lame-brain Repubs want the job. Clinton said she didn't want it, I doubt Biden would take the job. This is the best we got, so we should go along with it.

It wont' be so bad for them at all. We will have the new GOP House pass a bill to send each and every American who voted for Republicans a FREE (postage free) American flag lapel pin, a FREE Bible and a FREE dashboard Jesus they can shove up their ass.

I think you are confused. Government sponsored freebies (and unwelcome suppositories) are the trademark of the left, not the right.

Wow, the liberal venom is really flowing today, huh?

My thoughts exactly Steve. There are many factors that have to be dealt with to find jobs. R and D along with progressive innovation will create a workforce that would surely create more jobs than you could shake a stick at. They are opening new technological plants all across the country. Especially plants that deal with new car concepts, new energy technologies, alternative energy production. Along with R and D for oil and energy production, farmers will have new alternatives to lost crops of tobacco as they raise crops that help society instead of kill them.

I completely agree with your statement.

Wow, the righties decided to kill what had been a very vigorous and interesting debate.

Jody, Iowa

Louis J, Beverly, Ron, US Navy, John B, tea bag not, Rick WS NC--excellent points. President Obama got more out of this tax compromise than did the GOP/TP, Obama has not lost his base contrary to the media storyline portrayal and the left's pontificating; democrats are doing their version of a victory dance which often includes huffing and puffing about what they don't like.

First off, a qualifier because I'm going to get flamed for this post: I am not a republican, tea=partier or any other type of far right winger. Nor am I loyal to the Democratic Party, yes, I am a registered Democrat and recently I frequently (but not always) vote Dem. However:

What exactly did the President (and those of in the middle class) get out of this deal? Sure we got to keep our tax cuts. Great. Wonderful. Everyone hates taxes, me included. But honestly, I'd think I'd rather pay my share rather than force my kids to pay share (plus interest) later. Enough is enough already. If he couldn't get the middle tax cuts, with the tax cuts for the top 2%, well that would have sucked but we HAVE to stop kicking the can down the road and forcing some other generation to deal with it. The madness must stop, well should have stopped.

So beside the unemployment extension, what did he get? Anyone?

Next thing. Mr. President, if I'm ever a "hostage" again, please DO NOT negotiates with the hostage takers. You do not appear to be very good at it. Speaking of "hostages" let’s look at this. We were being held hostage so you HAD to negotiate. Really? So now we negotiate with terrorists and other hostage takers? While I'm sure this was just a poor choice of words, it did not make this an easier to swallow, in fact it made it worse as you appear, well honestly, weak. and weak is not something anyone wants their president to be.

Last thing Mr. President. Please get back out there in front of the media and announce now that you NOT seek re-election. If you were half the guy I saw running for president I wouldn't say this, but you appear weak. I know you've done a lot in the first two years, and thank you. But you are not the guy I saw on the campaign trail. You lack the fire and drive that guy had, you make Jimmy carter look like a strong leader. Give up, go home and raise your children. Do not run again. America needs a president that appears strong, even if he's completely incapable like Bush Jr.

I'm sorry but I fail to see how getting 13 months of unemployment benefits in exchange for a huge tax break for the rich is a victory. How is saddling everyone including future generations with a back breaking debt a victory? How is giving the Republicans every tax break they wanted plus the estate tax crap a victory? If you can explain, in an understandable and factual way (with proof of your facts) how this a victory please post it. Or do we now define “victory” as: a crushing defeat but with a positive spin?

FLYNAVY, excellent post. Thank you, I tried several times today to come up with something like what you posted, but honestly I'm pretty annoyed and angry about all this and that is reflected in everything I tried to write today. Frankly this whole thing sucks, another example of what's wrong with America.

Everyone meeting the 14 trillion gorilla, we'll be feeding it and paying for it for years thanks to Obama and McConnell. Or should that be McBama? Ob'Connell? Or just Grinch. that fits.

House democrats just need to shut up. Apparently they just want to bicker non-stop while the country sinks in the abyss. Thank God Obama has taken the adult roll in this whole thing and did what he had to do for the American people. The dems are mad because he took over negoations, but what would the negotiations brought if just they had been in charge. I'll tell you, complete gridlock. Nothing would have gotten done and the American people would have paid for it. All these politicians are completely out of touch with reality in this country.

Prayers and Godspeed for Elizabeth Edwards, her children and close friends today from the Hill Folk. Sometimes the Man Upstairs sees the need for another fine true voice for his Heavenly Chorus so he reaches out and calls another Angel home. Memories of a life well lived is a blessing for all to carry forward.

Nicely said IR, You're exactly right.

Great job, IR, on both comments.

Independent Redneck Va.

You know I've watched Mr. Boehner and his other Bobbsey Twin Mr. McConnell consistently reject many pieces of legislation that would benefit America and a lot of folks that most all of us would want to help.

O-M-G, Independent Redneck Va. I haven't heard Bobbsey Twin since I was a little girl. Got a good laugh out it. My mother used those words whenever me and one of my sisters or brothers were doing wrong.

The 911 responders in New York for example. Folks that thru no fault of their own have lost their employment and are on the verge of losing all they have worked for all their lives is another. And with these proposals have been a way to pay for these actions with a Surplus that could be applied to the Deficit. We need to close these Tax loop holes for folks that are Off shoring our industry. We need to protect the folks here that are working their butts off to improve their bottom line with the interest of their American employees and American communities in mind and in their heart. We need to close the Tax Loopholes for Hedge Funds that are taking their American profits out of our country scot-free.

You are so right. Some people just can't see it though. Also look at how they did the 9-11 firefighters law suit.

I.R> I'm late to the party, but nevertheless, I must add my compliments to you for a great post.

On the second post, beautiful said, Elizabeth will be a voice well heard in Heaven.

Amen Frank. She was a woman of class right to the end.

I couldn't have said it better myself Grimey!

Elizabeth was one of a kind and will be missed by many!

Her legacy will continue through her beautiful children!

We should be grateful to Elizabeth Edwards that she worked for HCR even as her own health was failing. I can give her no greater praise than to say that I hope my daughters become like her. She was a unique personality, and we will miss her.

Morning Frank;

She was a class lady and an inspiration to many. She is in a better place now and being rewarded as she so well deserved. No more pain, just happy thoughts.

Well said, Frank. Elizabeth Edwards never stopped fighting for health care for everyone so they, too, could fight the battle she was in a position to fight.

Pat: Great to see your comments this morning.

I know you are a fan of Keith, and I confess I did not watch him: Only read what other's said.

But there are times when the left: like Huffington, Ed Schultz, Keith do more harm than good. I wonder how long it will take people to realize that our President is committed to doing the right thing, not the politically clever thing.

Pat,

I agree. This tax cut issue should have been addressed long before the November Election cycle. Should be interesting to see what happens over the next few days.

And you believe that the Tea Party movement is a problem for the Republicans?

Sooner or later, the midterm catastrophe was going to cause problems for Democrats.

I didn't see progressives deciding to rip President Obama to shreds coming though...

Good luck stuffing this genie back into the bottle.

Hi Ron: I'm as progressive as anyone. I think. But I saw this coming for a while with Keith. So I'm not terribly surprised. Congress should have dealt with this issue before the midterms, something President Obama wanted. And the way they voted this past Saturday was disgraceful. He has a brutal brutal Congress - both sides.

I guess growing up in a very large poor family has left me a little too easy to accept disappointments. I have had a million of them. I can't stand with Keith on this one. But he has been an inspiration to me for many years. He makes me want to be smarter, more aware of our country and its history. Not many people have that kind of effect on people. He has "it".

So it goes.

Pat,

I was very disappointed in Keith & Rachel last night (not to mention Ed Shultz going ballistic earlier)!

Couldn't agree with you more though about Lawrence O - who would of thought a self-proclaimed socialist (lol) would be the ONLY one of the group to make sense!

Don't even get me started about the old goat Buchanon DEFENDING that moron who wants to only allow land owners the right to vote! MSNBC should be ashamed of their resident BIGOT!

PS: Tell Tom Brady to bundle up Sunday... the forecast is for a massive snowstorm over the weekend! Perfect for the Monsters of the Midway! ;0)

Feisty, I didn't bother watching Rachel. I kind of knew what was coming. Listening to Keith was enough.

Football. Football. Football.

What WILL happen on Sunday? It's going to be a good game. We're all looking forward to it. Chicago is having an awesome season. It's good to see a different team. So this should be fun. I have no idea of what to expect.

Snowstorm huh? Well, you needn't worry about us. We're more than used to it up here. Lol.

Pat,

I do agree that this issue should have been addressed long before the elections. BUT THEY DIDN'T ! Which is why America voted out so many of the elected officials. Because they abdicated their responsability to get America's house in order in a timely fashion instead of creating more giveaways. They waited to long and gave away the leverage they had. The republicans have the leverage on this issue and seem to have used it wisely on this issue.

Quite frankly, if this bill doesn't get passed quickly it will be reflected in the loss of more jobs for Senators and Congressman come next election cycle. Van Holland is a fool if he truly speaks out any further about the president in this fashion. Elected officials who only speak to the choir better have a big choir or they will be out of a job soon.

I am continually amazed at the number of people who are so extreme in their insistance that their party/elected official has the only way of doing things. Both parties and pretty much every elected official has made huge errors which have hurt the American people over the last 20 years, all in the name of Partisianship. Sadly it is only getting worse.

Right on Pat. The Democrats have no one to blame, but themselves, for not acting before the November elections. Now we all suffer.

Let's have some honesty from the "teabaggers" this morning, if they are capable of such a thing. You and each of you own this disaster. You disrupted Town Halls with your demands for deficit and spending reductions, and now your Corporate owned Republican Party just exploded both. If I don't see you at Republican Town Hall meetings, having your collective tantrum, you will prove that you are exactly what we said you were. Too ignorant to know that you are being tools for the rich to the detriment of the middle class and poor. I can't imagine how ANY of you sit in church on Sundays with this on your soul. But hear this and try to get this through your thick skulls: The reason that nations collapse is when there is not a vigorous growing middle class. The working poor must see a way into the middle class, the middle class must see a way up too. You have destroyed ANY obligation of the ego driven wealthy to create any sort of jobs, since you are willing to hand them the keys to the country without any sacrifice on their part. The resulting mess will be YOURS, and I hope at long last you are honest enough to own it. And while I am on the subject, impeach John Roberts.

OMG, the FR lefty liberals seem to be turning on their beloved Keith and Rachel today because they have turned on Barry!!!!

Will Rogers nailed it when he said "I do not belong to an organized political party, I'm a Democrat."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good morning Pat, Boston, MA

Lawrence O’Donnell had another compelling program last night with 4 progressives. And you know what? Now the libs hate Lawrence. Why you ask? Well, because he asked them for specifics. And they couldn’t come up with any. And libs don’t like that. They can call President Obama every nasty unimaginable name in the book – but when it comes to detailed answers in the real world, they can’t do it.

I still like Adam Green. I think his heart is in the right place. How can you not like someone who goes after Scott Brown? Lol.

Don't forget Mark Kirk and Blanche Lincoln.

Because of this, the liberals want to primary President Obama. I guess it is only they who have core principles. It’s what they sell. But it’s not how they behave

I agree with you Pat.

But, what many angry Democrats fail to realize is that this country is governed by a two-party system. Democrats are not the only ones in Washington D.C. and come January there will be significantly fewer of them. They will have to deal with Republicans on some issues or face a stalemate for the next two years in which no business is done -- just more grandstanding and name calling

They will be responsible for the collapse of the kinds of social and cultural infrastructures that helped so many Americans survive since Reagan if they keep this up.

Pat, terrific post. President Obama asked democrats to get the tax deal done BEFORE the election; he was out there nearly every day campaigning to repeal the high end tax cuts and extend only the middle class brackets and momentum was on the side of "D" but they did not do that. They could easily have called in the cots and declared they would not adjourn to campaign UNTIL this was done--the GOP does not like to stay over and would have allowed the votes by not filibustering. It worked last Christmas and it worked everytime it was threatened.

Impeach John Roberts!!!

I would think that we need to have a better plan than that.

Newday:

You must have a miserable life. All you do is whine everyday.

If we listen to you; the world is ending tomorrow. This society is not going to collapse, at least not in our lifetimes. The U.S. may become a third world country in about 2-300 yrs.

Impeach Roberts....lol...now that is funny.

You must have a miserable life. All you do is whine everyday.

Now that's some funny sh!t coming from ITM... I don't care who ya are!

Dude... do you ever read what you write? lmfao! NDD asked a question and you have to chime in to prove you don't have an answer or a CLUE...

You're running on anger & fumes!

Thank God for Lawrence O’Donnell.

With the exception of Chris Matthews who was more restrained than usual, O’Donnell was the only person on cable news last night that provided some clarity on the ‘TAX” brouhaha without frothing at the mouth.

When Lawrence broke it down in laymen’s language it seems pretty obvious that the President got what he wanted and more… and the Republicans are somewhat mollified that their rich friends will continue to be rich for at least 2 more years. The President could have provided some political theatre and ruined some lives along the way but not a damn thing would have been accomplished by that except that the ideologue purists would be happy today. It doesn’t take much for them to “get to happy” but the unemployed would be in a world of hurt.

Did fiscal responsibility go out the window? You betcha! But that happened nine years ago with the first Bush tax cut that the comatose Dems and Repubs voted for without it being funded. Can’t blame that BS on Obama. That same crowd also voted for tax cut # 2 in 2005 and two unfunded wars and a Medicare Part D prescription Drug Program.

Apologists for the Republican party and GWB keep harping that Obama has to stop blaming Bush for the financial mess and take responsibility for it since he is now President. The President can stop blaming Bush, but I will not! So there.

OK. Let’s blame it on Mickey Mouse or Sponge Bob, or Lady Gaga.

Somebody effed up and it was not Barack Obama because he was still a State Senator in Illinois when the spending frenzy began.

The liberal pundits have been just waiting for this day. They can now grab their share of the fame by inciting hate and dissension just like the Faux news crew did with the Dems. Olberman can now really become the Beck of the left

Obama asked the House to get to the tax issue before the mid-terms, but they were so scared of their election chances, they balked. The Senate had 5 Democrats vote against the bill that eventually came from the House.

Obama showed that he is above politics and Party. He could have easily made the politically relevant move to use rhetoric the left would love. But is that what working Americans want? Is that what the unemployed want? I think not. Obama did what he had to do.

And he is correct in saying that the whole Constitution was founded on a compromise. Jefferson, who wanted slavery abolished, compromised with the South to keep the abolishment out of the Constitution, figuring sometime in the future it would be handled. The Framers actually wanted at least one of the Branches to be the Party in opposiiton to the President. The whole concept of the Constitution was that compromise gets no one everything, but does give a piece of the pie to all.

Read some US HIstory. There were many compromises throughout our history. And everyone - right and left - should just shut up. Lawrence O'Donnell understands because he had to work in a
White House that did compromise. He wiped the floor with some of those uber-progressives who have been trashing Obama since day one. Jane Hamsher is a fraud, Adam Green likes to hear himself speak. Ezra Klein, at least knows something of which he speaks.

We have to get over this I'm right and you're wrong attitude. We have to get above Red State v. Blue State; conservative v. liberal;Democrat v. Republican. If we can't be adults, then we are in for a lot of hurt.

So far the only adult in the room seems to be the President.

The president was negotiating from a weak position, because he was the only adult in the process. The Republicans and, sadly a few liberals, are willing to throw the country under the bus to make their political point. If Obama had not cut the best deal he could get under the circumstances, we would have a deadlock. That would mean come January, taxes would go up for everyone, not just for the upper brackets. [As O'Donnell pointed out, the lowest brackets would get a 50% increase in their rate.] The unemployed would still have no safety net and the new House Majority would be in charge of writing the new tax laws. Thank God someone is thinking of the country and not just their "principles".

I Must Be Dreaming

Here is my response .....HILLARY 2012 ...write her in....... joins us !!!!

Hey, why don't lay-off the right wing rhetoric.

I respect and like Hillary; but, you Dreaming, are way out the box.

Hillary is a centrist. What makes you think she would stand up to the republicans? She backed off healthcare. Barack didn't.

We got deregulations from the Clintons. Barack gave US financial reform.

Like James Carville said;

Via Tribune reporter Mike Memoli on Twitter comes a colorful line from Democratic strategist James Carville:

"If Hillary gave up one of her balls and gave it to Obama, he'd have two."

Well, at least one anyway.

Hello, dangerfield-

I'm a bit surprised at your piling on...

Or are you just poking Bev in the eye?

Hey, MB

Piling on? There are 4 posts...and I love the quote...:)

Let me clarify, dangerfield...

The "piling on" I refer to is the current assault on President Obama by many progressives.

I can't believe that any loyal Democrat seriously believes that any good can come from these intensely personal attacks on the Democratic President...particularly given the unpleasant options available to him in the current political and economic environment. Although I'm a conservative, I enjoy game-planning the opposition...and, honestly, I just don't see the upside here.

That said...I can understand your fondness for the quote.

It's classic, irreverent Carville.

A quote from James Carville?? That dude has his head sooo far up the Clinton's a$$, it's not even funny. He's just bitter still over the democratic nomination. Dude probably thought he had a cabinet seat locked up. Freaking mutant.

CU Farley

Anybody see KeithO's whiny, yappy, self-important, dramatic rant last night? It was hilarious. He's all POd because someone in the administration said that the angry lefties and socialists "just don't understand the bill." LOL It's great. That's what all you people have been saying about the rest of America for the last 2 years. "Americans are stupid and don't understand what's good for them." Well now the admin is using that line on you socialists. I love it.

I think Glenn Beck whines and cries too much and does not read history, religious, economy books.

Glenn is a whinny, whinny, simpleton who has special episodes filled with lies and delusions.

Heck, he is a nut who thinks he is a "Jedi Master" and his live is like "The Matrix".

Pu-lezee, how can you take a whinny, dolty ,shrieking Glenn Beck serious?

This Dr Jeckle and Mr Hyde thinks he can rewrite the Constitution on his blackboard.

Don't forget the fools gold he peddles. Oh, and that frozen food stock up and his U pillow is another rip off.

Most of the talking heads on the left and the right are extreme. The only ones I respect are Brooks and Shields. At least they can agree to disagree and not act like kids fighting on the playground.

The liberals are always fighting with one hand tied behind their backs.

The biggest problem is there are no grown ups running the show. We have elected people who are still acting the way they did in High school.

Ru-roh--

Here comes the master idiot c u farley. Wait for it...

empty useless tripe...

Hey Tyler, didn't you suspend this idiot for a month just yesterday? http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/12/07/5605225-first-thoughts-youve-gotta-know-when-to-holdem?last=1291828623&threadId=1150057&sp=0&pc=25#c20008265

Why is he able to post? And why wasn't it a permanent suspension? His very name is a personal attack and he never has anything to say except insults.

Obama seems most intent on conveying the message that nothing is his fault.

These people are in complete denial, and appear willing to destroy their own President in order to sustain their fantasy world.

I'll start to worry when the "far-left" starts backing candidates that are as loony toons as the tea baggers' favorites in 2010: Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell, and similar whack jobs who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory for the GOP in races they would have won with an even halfway sane candidate.

The Republicans are participating in this compromise with President Obama only because of the historic loss of Democratic House seats on November 2nd.

In 2012, Democrats will be defending 23 Senate seats...Republicans only 10. Those are daunting numbers for the Democratic Party.

Despite fielding a number of bad Senate candidates in 2010, Republicans held ALL of their open seats of retiring Senators while defeating 2 Democratic incumbents and taking ALL of the open Democratic seats...for an net gain of 6 seats.

Republicans will learn from their mistakes in the 2010 midterms.

Based on what I've seen from Democrats, they've learned nothing whatsoever from THEIR midterm beatdown.

But, don't take my word for it...

Just ask President Obama.

Well, Houston, last week F R was touting Kerry - he of the tax evasion tactics on the new yacht- and I am pretty sure Kucinich will give it a shot. Someone mentioned Grayson- who seems to think someone other than himself is to blame for his re election flop.

So, there are three delusional misfits who might challenge the One.

Who is, by the way, done. He is the lamest of lame ducks.

I sure hope that the left keep on keeping on. He won't last till March under the barrage.

Wait a minute: Isn't the always wrong no jo the one that said that Pelosi would resign? Hmmmm?

Wait a minute: Isn't the always wrong no jo the one that said that Pelosi would resign? Hmmmm?

That was so yesterday NDD... darling NJNB like the rest of the right wing lemmings can't remember what they had for breakfast! ;0)

It's perfectly reasonable to expect that any House Speaker who presided over the loss of 63 seats and will be ushering an astonishing 53 incumbent members of her own caucus out of town in January would have, and SHOULD have resigned.

Nancy Pelosi has the lowest job approval numbers and highest negatives of any national elected official, her caucus suffered the worst political defeat in 70 years, and yet...she somehow remains the leader of the House Democrats.

Go figure...

I'll concede Grayson was out of line with his "Taliban" commercial, but nojonobo's comparison of him to the likes of Christine O'Donnell and Sharron Angle is absolutely idiotic. Angle threatened violence if she didn't win her election and O'Donnell claimed scientists were growing mice with fully functioning human brains. The comparisons to Kerry and Kucinich are equally idiotic.

For my money, Nancy Pelosi in a leadersip position in the House minority, along with the same cast of idiots from the majority leadership, will be the gift that keeps on giving!!!

I'm reminded of two things:

The line from The Who's hit song Won't Get Fooled Again: "Meet the new boss / Same as the old boss", and

Albert Einstein's famous statement that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Nancy: Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You.,

To a lot of people the truth is what they want to believe. Some people go to the talking heads to hear what they should believe. One can tell by the comments where the thought originated. "the one" If you depend on B, R and H for you daily talking points, then you are not thinking freely.

Dear Mixed Bag,

Your post is 100% accurate, except that you did not point out how similar the extreme left is to the extreme right. Both are willing to make their case, regardless of the actual consequences to the country. The difference is that the left has leadership (not pundits) that acts responsibly in the national interest; the right has both pundits and leaders who would destroy the country if it gave them political gains.

So, CAL USA-

You can excuse the pundits on the left (Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and many, many others) who are busily engaged in eviscerating their own President?

Fine.

But...do you honestly believe that the Democrats in leadership positions...like Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), are acting "responsibly" when they saw off President Obama 's legs by refusing to support his Bush tax cuts compromise?

The Democratic Party "leadership" is at least as responsible for President Obama's current dilemma as he is...yet you would cut him adrift.

Is President Obama, alone, is responsible for the loss of 63 Democratic seats in the House, and 6 Democratic seats in the Senate?

Please...

No wonder that President Obama is, increasingly, unlikely to serve more than one term.

What is wrong with you people...?

If we want to look for a Democrat to blame......it would be Senator Harry Reid. He has allowed the FAKE filibuster to be used 500 times by the minority in the Senate, in Obama's first two years in office.

They very well could have blocked any extension to benefits for the unemployed forever. To play the card they did, I would think that they had established that it was not a seriously dangerous political move. Maybe there are more Dems out of work tahn repubs..

Indie Woman in Denver:

The Republicans have sold their soul to the devil.

How else do you explain a Party who has continually and consistently made it a priority to give tax cuts to the rich for more than 30 years! It was voodoo economics when GHB called Reagan out when running against him for the Presidency in 1980 and it is voodoo economics now.

Even the idiots who sold Reagan on this nonsense have backed away. That would be David Stockman and Alan Greenspan. Both have taken shots at the Republicans lately about their intractable stance on tax cuts being stimulative.

The Repulicans gave up any semblance of integrity while begging for tax cuts for rich people and making a "deal" with President so that Unemployment Insurance and tax credits for the poor and middle class could continue.

That is priceless. Integrity cannot be bought.

Besides, shouldn't the GOP hate this deal? It blows a $900 BILLION hole in the deficit! Where are the tea party protesters for this one?

It SHOULD, but when have they been honest about their agenda in the past?

It SHOULD, but when have they been honest about their [the Republicans] agenda in the past?

The extremely in the minority Republicans cut the best deal they could with Socialist Democratic regime. That's good enough for now.

Keep trying to paint the party that stopped 420 bills that passed the House in their tracks once they got to the Senate as powerless. I guess that must be the best alternative to try to weasel out of responsibility for attempting to sell 98% of Americans down the river.

We know where the loyalties of Conservative lawmakers are--they demonstrated it clearly in this round.

Say one thing while you are on the campaign trail to get votes, then when elected do whatever the he!! you want, thinking that no one is going to hold you accountable. Well, people are starting to take notice and 2012 is coming. I want to see the republicans defend their opposition to the middle class, defend how they were for deficit reduction only to create a new deficit record, etc etc etc.

Why should anyone have to pay estate taxes? Why should my children have to pay extra money to the government because of the work that I did to make their life better? I thought our children were suppose to have a better life than us, that is why we work so hard? And yet you all keep blaming the rich.

Do you all realize that the number of millionaires in this country increased by 16% last year, still not as high as in 2007, but an increase. 7.8 million people in this country are considered millionaires by wealth. It is sad that you all blame them for everything.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/09/number-of-us-millionaires_n_491942.html

Your children are supposed to have better opportunities.

If you believe in merit, and meritocracy, then there is no reason for healthy and able offspring to inherit anything beyond space to live and the means to support that space.

If your wealth is created in an environment of deficit spending, the excess wealth that exists upon your death should go back to change that environment.

The Death Tax should be dedicated to national debt reduction until both are gone.

Paul,

I have not created an environment of deficit spending, those in Washington have. What I can't take with me goes to my children, and it is WRONG for the government to take any of it. When does the taxing stop, when everyone pays all of their money to the government, only to have it redistributed to them, so they can pay taxes on it again.

Our country was founded on principles that allowed the free to choose. I believe that we should pay for some things, roads, military, protection. But as a taxpayer, not one of the 47% that get a free income tax paying ride, I am tired of giving to a government that cannot balance a budget like myself.

I am not wealthy and never will be. If you do the math the top 2% of this nation pays more in tax's than the lower 98% of the country so why are they not paying there fair share. If they are to have theres raised then the rest of us should too. Ok liberals lets hear it now I must be off my rocker. The trueth is the trueth weather we like it or not. I am on a fixed income so I would probably feel it more than most but fair is fair.

Paul:

It is very easy to say that because you probably have not achieved any substantial wealth.

Most people that do not have any wealth think that way.

If you have benefitted from deficit spending, and you have. Then what you have "earned" you may keep. The excess should be dedicated to removing the debt which created the economic bubble you prospered within. It's called personal responsibility.

Paul, you go first

Why are so many people so consumed with tax cuts for wealthier people? It's not like they are not going to pay taxes at al. this group still contributes a lareg majority of the tax revenue collected in this country.

Paul,

I don't think I have prospered because of deficit spending. I have prospered because I got my education, I have worked hard everyday, saved my money, and purchased the things that I own. Not with government handouts, not because I inherited it. Because I get and hold down jobs. I leave a job when I feel it it time to move on. I haven't been out of work for nearly 25 years now. But then again I am willing to move to keep working. Unlike many that can't leave their surroundings and start over.

And until the government quits spending and starts balancing a budget, then they don't deserve more money from the people, because isn't the first line of the Constitution "We the People". It is time to start running the government somewhat like a business. But until then, you please give your extra money to reducing the debt, they have a special account set up for that.

It's not about what you think.

It is what it is.

Anyone who prospered during the age of deficit spending, did so because that economic environment was created. Now that the bill is coming due, everyone wants to avoid their responsibility.

I don't and will never blame the rich for the mess our country is in. We are we are because our government cannot seem to live and operate within their means! I am not even close to your definition of "wealthy" and I don't have a problem paying my fairshare. For those of you who think the rich should pay for everything.....get over yourselves and start taking responsibilty for your own financial situation!!!!

Way to go Bigbear for working hard for 25 yrs to get where your at- that's called responsible!

For those of you saying that the rich pay more in taxes so they should get a break too, pay close attention: the rich pay LESS of a percentage of their actual income in taxes than anyone that is paying over 15% pays. Yes, in absolute dollar amounts, they pay more but as a percentage of actual income, they pay LESS.

SIASD!!! Over, and over, and over and over . . .

I pay my taxes, therefore I am responsible. That still does not give the government the right to take more than they already do.

When you liberals decide to quit spending and start cutting back on government programs, then we can talk about fair taxation, but as long as this government--both sides of the aisle--continue to spend and borrow, they don't deserve anymore tax payer money, especially from those who have lived, paid taxes, and left something for their family.

Again, anytime you want to Paul, you can donate to the debt relief organization out there.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/gift/gift.htm

I see that our liberal friends, who want to take from those who have and give to others, only donated a mere $3 million last year, with pledges of $21K for 2011. I would think that Warren Buffet/George Soros & Hollywood would be able to cut the debt in 1/2 by now. I guess they just want the hard working people, who actually don't hide their money to do it.

What little you and I pay in taxes covers little more than the INTEREST on the the debt, The DEBT which creates the economy in which you labor.

There's no getting around this. We accepted the services and expansion of the pie based on deficit spending. Time to pay the piper.

Except no one is willing to step up and admit the piper must be paid.

So Matthew, Perhaps we should base everything on percentages, If you go buy food we should charge you based on how much you make, or gasoline. Going to buy a car, well you earn $40,000 a year, you pay $20,000. That guy over there, he only earns $20 k per year. Same car costs him $10,000. It has to work both ways, you have to get paid by percentage. Oops the company had no profit this month, sorry no pay.

Paying a lower percentage is not paying less. Taxes may be collected in percentages, but its measured in dollars.

You're on the right track, but not thinking it through very seriously.

If you are unable to work yes I agree you need to be helped. If yolu are able to work and wont take a job because it beneith you then no you deserve no help at all. Most of the people on public aid deserve to be taken off of it as they are just to lazy to work or they have more kids so they can get more money. That should stop as it puts a strain on the system. The people here illeaglly should get nothing as they are not our people but people that are here illeagaly'

American Taliban? Really, how f'n crazy are you?

Okay, Is this equally crazy as what Angle and O'Donnel were saying? It seems that way to me.

How can you say the Republicans are equal to the Taliban with a straight face, you're either completely delusional or lying to yourself.

The Taliban is a terrorist supporting regime that prevented basic human rights to the citizens they govern. To equate any American political party with that is just plain stupid.

How about you quit your ranting and actually discuss the issues at hand rationally and lucidly.

Didn't Bush have a meeting at the Crawford, Texas ranch with his buds the TALIBAN leaders prior to 9/11? Why , yes, yes he did.

Lets see the Left/Obama have called Republicans the "American Taliban", "hostage takers", "enemies", "people that cling to their guns and bibles", that they should "sit in the backseat", "astro-turfers" (Pelosi), "evil-doers" (Reid), the list goes on.

So Libs, I'm sure this makes you all feel real good, but how do you think this all plays with the Independent voters?

JAS1

Stick and Stones.

Tyler, remember this? http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/12/07/5605225-first-thoughts-youve-gotta-know-when-to-holdem?last=1291828623&threadId=1150057&sp=0&pc=25#c20008265

I'm angry. I'm angry that the Republicans are willing to hold 98% of Americans hostage for their wealthy, elite sponsors. I didn't think they'd stoop that low. I was wrong.

The Republicans have to hope and pray that the jobless rate goes down because they are convinced that the lower tax rate will take care of that. If the jobless rate goes down and more people are employed, people will be happy with the current President. If the unemployment rate stays down, the Republicans will not be able to get a permanent tax rate at the current level.

I thought Stephen Colbert put it well (I'm paraphrasing to the best of my recollection):

"I can't wait for my taxes to stay the same as they've been for 10 years, so I can start to create jobs!"

All the Republicans want the jobless rate to decline kate. We're kind of surprised that the Demcorats are so ambivalent about it though.

No, JoAnnaSmith1, it does not appear that Republicans do want the jobless rate to go down....just yet. The current tax rates, which, we have been assured, will cause employers to "create jobs," have been in place for almost 10 years and jobs have been lost during that time. Employers decided that they could create more wealth by investing than by creating jobs. Once the economy collapsed, and they lost money, they decided they shouldn't risk anything more....not on people, not on investing. Whenever one hears Republicans talk, they rarely mention the word "people" -- it's always abstract things, jobs...money....deficit.... I do not belong to a political party, so I pay attention to politicians, and right now there are very, very few Republicans who seem to care about people at all.

kate - The current tax rates, which, we have been assured, will cause employers to "create jobs," have been in place for almost 10 years and jobs have been lost during that time.

Would that be the same tax rate Obama agreed to continue? If Obama didn't believe it would improve the economy, why'd he do it?

Plus he added on a 32% reduction in the Social Security (6.2% to 4.2%) payroll tax for individuals, and no one was even asking for that.

Barack Obama - the Supply Sider.

And kate, do you think the economy started in the year 2000? Because there is a lot of evidence through the history of this country that shows lower tax rates do spur economic growth, and jobs. Do you deny that history?

Clotho,

I am kind of under the impression, that although the income taxes stay the same, one will get more back because they get a 2% break on ss taxes, and 20% break on estate taxes.

John B:

You're just mad because things didn't go the way you wanted them to. You may as well kiss you're arse and get glad because this country is not frikken ultra liberal.

Stop whining like a little b*** and carry on with life.

A POLITICIAN IS A POLITICIAN....I have said this forever but some of you do not learn.

ITM calling someone else a b!tch, now that's funny.

JAS1,

Would that be the same tax rate Obama agreed to continue? If Obama didn't believe it would improve the economy, why'd he do it?

It's so typical, you hold someone hostage and when they pay the ransom, you blame them saying they agreed to being held hostage, since they paid the ransom.

He did it because the GOP decided that they would block everything he proposed, including the Stark treaty and the American people would suffer, because the GOP is only concerned about the rich American people.. Haven't you been listening? In every instance, the GOP says take care of the rich or we will make every other American suffer.

Because there is a lot of evidence through the history of this country that shows lower tax rates do spur economic growth, and jobs.

Not true, one example..the Clinton years. Please take off the blinders.

Congratulations, you're happy that Republicans have been plainly shown as willing to sell 98% of Americans down the river to gain favor with the new aristocracy.

Way to go Conservatives, now EVERYONE can see your priorities.

Way to go Conservatives, now EVERYONE can see your priorities.

Like I mentioned yesterday John... I'm enjoying the right wing cockiness...

Can you say OVER REACH? lol

It will be interesting to see how many Democrats, particularly in the House, will vote for President Obama's initiative.

Republicans are just glad to finally have some input...most will support the President on this.

P.S. Nancy says the lower estate tax proposal is "a bridge too far." Actually, any tax over zero is a bridge too far. This is clearly an egregious confiscatory tax.

Aside from the estate tax's immediate benefit of helping to reduce the national debt that Reagan and Bush ran up, it has an important social benefit as well. It works against the establishment of a permanent aristocracy consisting of parisitic playboys and girls living off their ancestors' accumulated wealth. Even WITH the supposedly "confiscatory" tax, a lot of useless people still seem to have enough money inherited from Daddy left over to spend their lives going from party to party to rehab center and then back to partying.

Warren Buffet or some other super-rich person who favors the inheritance tax once said: "I want to leave my children enough money so that they can do well, but not so much that they so that they can get away with doing nothing." Looking out for the interests of do-nothing parasites seems to be the major concern of the contemporary Republican Party. Quite a change from the days of Theodore Roosevelt, who was one of the early proponents of the estate tax.

P.P.S. Obama's support of tax policies that lean heavily towards the supply side is a tacit admission that his massive Keynsian fiscal "stimulus" was a failure. Better late than never.

Isn't it amazing that the Obama stimulus bill, the $878 billion dollar bill, the bill that was to create "millions of jobs", just doesn't come up anymore during these press conferences by Obama. How many times did Obama/Biden say "shovel-ready" jobs? How many times did Obama come out from his Oval Office bunker to tell us "We've turned the corner on the economy"? How many times did Biden tell us we'd be "Creating 500,000 a jobs a month"? How'd that "Recovery Summer" of 2010 go for you all?

You'd think the media would keep bringing it up, ask Obama if he now believes that stimulus failed, because it did fail.

You never hear about the "stimulus" bill anymore. It's like it never happened. And in reality, it didn't. Well, except for the fact someone is going to have to pay for it.

JoAnnaSmith1

You'd think the media would keep bringing it up, ask Obama if he now believes that stimulus failed, because it did fail.

Joanna, economist alot smarter than you have said time and time again that the stimulis did work, to save jobs, the money given to states and local communties helped save teachers, cops, firemen, and other municipal workers that would have been layed off due to lack of funds at the state level.

So I ask you Joanna, should i trust what your saying with your highschool GED education or economist with MBAs, Well lets see, GED-v-MBAs.

Jeff - Joanna, economist alot smarter than you have said time and time again that the stimulis did work, to save jobs

Then explain the 10% unemployment rate.

And Jeff, I didn't claim the Stimulus bill would create (not save) millions of jobs. I didn't claim 500,000 jobs would be created each month. I didn't claim that the 2010 summer would be the "Summer of Recovery". I didn't claim over and over that "The economy has turned the corner". I didn't claim "Pass the Stimulus bill so unemployment will not go over 8%". But Obama and his economic team made all those claims Jeff. And none of them are true. So please explain how that isn't a failure.

JoAnnaSmith1

Same can be said about the tax cuts, Bush claimed that they would sustain economic growth for years to come, he said be giving these tax cuts we would avoid a recession, So please you explain how the cuts were not a failure.
Joanna GED Please explain that.

JoAnnaSmith1:

And Jeff, I didn't claim the Stimulus bill would create (not save) millions of jobs.

But you have claimed repeatedly that the stimulus failed, contrary to the opinions of even conservative economists. So, who should we believe: the experts or some loudmouth bloviating on the Internet?

Hey Jeff, take your GED insults and stick them where the sun don't shine. No policy addressing marginal income tax rates could have prevented the economic meltdown -- duh, have you heard about the housing bubble? The right has (correctly) argued that lower marginal rates are supportive of economic growth. But no one that I know of ever claimed that lower rates would "avoid" recessions. By all means, show us the Bush quote you allude to that makes that claim. Otherwise, STFU.

_____

Bush I: "Read my lips, no new taxes."

Obama: "I'm as opposed to the high-end tax cuts today as I've been for years."

LMAO.... and dare I point out, we all know what happened to Bush I when he broke that promise.

Bill, Fairfax VA

Thank you bill, i think that GED comment got to you, Maybe because this was the way you finished HS. Sorry to hear that.

that comment was meant for a person that believes, she KNOWS EVERYTHING, she KNOWS MORE thaneconomist that have said time and time again that the stimulus did work, not as they thought it would but it did. STFU i bet you got that all on your own.
GOOD FOR YOU!!!!

Typical liberal behavior. You point out a failure with Obama, they want to switch the subject and talk about Bush. Top it off with some personal attacks from them, and it's another typical day on the blogs.

It just never changes.

JoAnnaSmith1

Typical liberal behavior. You point out a failure with Obama, they want to switch the subject and talk about Bush. Top it off with some personal attacks from them, and it's another typical day on the blogs.

It just never changes.

I'm a consertive Liberal thank you!!!!

GED Joanna!!!!!

Obama's fiscal stimulus clearly FAILED to stimulate the economy.

Pointing that out is not bloviating on the internet, it's stating a FACT. Or have folks not heard that unemployment is hovering near 10%, and that the last data point showed it was going UP not down. Or have folks not heard that Bernanke is rolling the dice on QE2 because unemployment remains so high and economic growth continues to be so slow?

These facts force supporters of the Obama stimulus to take the position of claiming things would have been even worse without the stimulus. That's a really convenient position because it's impossible to prove or disprove it, which is why the left likes it so much. More to the point, if that's the best case the left can make that's no case at all, because things are pretty bad now and don't seem to be getting much better.

You see Jeff, this where you and your party are so disconnected from reality. 10% of the people are unemployed. We can assume that number is much higher because many have just stopped looking. Many, many more people are under-employed, and probably most are afraid their job won't be there come next year, well, unless they work for the government.

All those people couldn't care less about what some conservative/liberal/pointy_headed_academic says about the economy. And those are the people that voted last month, and now we all see what their opinion is on the entire situation.

So continue to quote scripture from all of these "learned" economists. See where that gets'ya.

All those people couldn't care less about what some conservative/liberal/pointy_headed_academic says about the economy.

No, they care about solutions that work, and 30 years of trickle down economics are proven to not work.

So Jeff, where's the Bush quote you lied about? Put up, or shut up -- or should I say, STFU.

John B: No, they care about solutions that work.

And that's the point of the thread John. What Obama did in the last 2 years did in fact not work. If it did, why did Obama change tack 180 degrees from being a Keynesian to becoming a Supply Sider in the last 2 days?

To kind of quote Reagan, Obama is not exactly "Staying the course".

Bill, Fairfax VA

So Jeff, where's the Bush quote you lied about? Put up, or shut up -- or should I say, STFU.

Bill all kidding aside, every president that gives tax cuts from reagan all have said that tax cuts spur growth. that is the general thinking with tax cuts, Bush may or may not have said that tax cuts would sustain economic growth for years to come, but we all know, this is the general thinking, why else would he do that?

I'm a construction estimator, and no business has been hurt like construction, the stimulis gave construction a life line that the Private sector could not do, with the stimulis roads were rebuilt, and for a 18 month period of time construction spending went up instead of down. you keep saying the stimulis failed but in my business it saved thousands of construction jobs that would have been lost in early 2009.

Bohner and McConnell and Joanna have preached extending tax cuts to spur growth. i have said the president faces a tough sell, you can't let the cuts expire while we have 10% unemployment, the deal liberal are screaming about was a good deal, a even better deal with out madan speaker involved. Bill i han convinced that she has been the problem.

Bill the Liar from FAIRFAX: So where is the "FOUR engine plane you saw fly into the Pentagon" on 9/11?

You swore that you saw something that was impossible to see, since Flt.77 had only two engines.

Why do you keep coming back here and tell people to STFU, when you should hang your head in shame, for botching your part in the cover-up of 9/11?

JS1 can't decide whether Republicans forced a giant loss upon the President or he decided Conservatives must be right after all. Unable to resolve that conflict she's decided to go with--BOTH!

Ignoring the entire time, of course, that what he's really done is negotiate on behalf of people Conservatives don't care about.

Bush may or may not have said that tax cuts would sustain economic growth for years to come, but we all know, this is the general thinking, why else would he do that?

Fine, so you have no direct quote on this issue because there is none. The right argues that lower marginal rates are supportive of economic growth. That's not the same as saying growth continues ad infinitum. The business cycle moves up and down, that's just the way things are. The best a policymaker can do is to create conditions that are conducive to economic growth. But no policies can guarantee perpetual growth and no one on the right that I'm aware of has ever taken that position.

I couldn't agree more.

The "Party Of No" says "yes" to President Obama, while Democrats say...

Hmmm...

How will Democrats vote on this compromise legislation?

Nash,

Compromise is what makes government work. It is what formed our nation. Therefore, I think that the government did a good job to help everyone. I still wish we would cut some areas to pay for it. But that will come, or we kick the bums out again.

Nashville_fan

Also, I am a little weary of the "resurrect LBJ" and "twist arms" fantasy scenarios to get around the inconvenient truth that there are not enough votes in our corporate owned Congress to pass the Progressive Agenda we all hold so dear.

Thank you, as usual you make me even prouder whenever you post.

LBJ gave us the dixecrats, the present day blue dogs.

Obama's situation is much less volatile than that faced by LBJ and his Democratic Senate of 1964, in their push to enact civil rights reform. There was no mandate for him to accomplish what he did. Most of the South and a good many northern whites were just fine with the status quo.

========================================

Another liberal talking point that sickens me is the... "I want President Obama to be FDR".

In 1934, early in the Roosevelt Presidency, strikes broke out all over the country, including a general strike in Minneapolis, a general strike in San Francisco, hundreds of thousands on strike in the textile mills of the South. Unemployed councils formed all over the country. Desperate people were taking action on their own, defying the police to put back the furniture of evicted tenants, and creating self-help organizations with hundreds of thousands of members.

Without a national crisis—economic destitution and rebellion—it is not likely the Roosevelt Administration would have instituted the bold reforms that it did.

So Progressives are disappointed that - contrary to the hype - Obama is no FDR.

But FDR himself wasn't who we think of as FDR until he was forced by protests, strikes and other forms of civil disobedience.

http://www.progressive.org/mag_zinn0308

==============================================================

As vociferous as these voices are in their opposition to marginalize the President, They really need to get their history and facts straight.

Another subject that was very popular for novelists was the condition of labor. They ranged from subjects on social protest, to strikes.

Business-oriented observers explained the recession and recovery in very different terms from the Keynesians. They argued that the New Deal had been very hostile to business expansion in 1935-37, had encouraged massive strikes which had a negative impact on major industries such as automobiles, and had threatened massive anti-trust legal attacks on big corporations. All those threats diminished sharply after 1938

Conservative critics attacked New Deal policies as "Spend-and-Spend; Tax-and-Tax; Elect-and-Elect"

Roosevelt rejected the advice of Morgenthau to cut spending and decided big business were trying to ruin the New Deal by causing another depression that voters would react against by voting Republican.^[56] It was a "capital strike" said Roosevelt, and he ordered the Federal Bureau of Investigation to look for a criminal conspiracy (they found none).^[56] Roosevelt moved left and unleashed a rhetorical campaign against monopoly power, which was cast as the cause of the new crisis.

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal}

I hope you have time to peak at this.

President Obama doesn't need to be FDR or anyone else. He is doing a find job to hold this union together.

As the President said the Founding Fathers did not provide for him to walk the Front Door until we evolved. I don't think many people caught the sublimity of what the President meant. I noticed it last night on Lawrence O'Donnell show. That clueless author gave me the impression he as well as many on the left probably won't admit they feel uncomfortable taking directions from the man in the Oval office. Yes, they voted for him. But until we learn to stop making assumptions that the dominant culture is better at making decisions than others in the subculture, we won't evolve; in my opinion. That's what progressiveness means to me. I'm not into symbolism. I what answers, progress, and what's best for this country's future.

I apologize for the long windess; I have a lot to say

Love your comment Bev . . . the length was just right! :o)

P.S. Thanks for the kind words.

Nashville_fan

Love your comment Bev . . . the length was just right! :o)

P.S. Thanks for the kind words.

Always, Nash

hugs

Beverly

I didn't take the press conference as whining but as an explanation as to why the compromise was done. He was receiving all kids of flak from the left and felt he needed to address it.

Tony,

It is interesting that folks have the right to call President Obama a weak-kneed chicken sh!t, but if he says they are "sanctimonious" that is a bridge too far.

Really?

Nash-

I've long thought that there was way too much mean-spirited, hateful, and vitriolic language coming from the left...but I never dreamed that so much of it would ever be aimed at President Obama.

Have progressives become completely unhinged?

Hey Mixed Bag:

I don't think progressives have become unhinged . . . I think that many are just plain tired from battle . . . and some are paid to stir up controversy.

It's all good though, because reality does not change because we refuse to acknowledge it, ya know? :)

For what it's worth, Nash (shout-out to the Buffalo Springfield)-

I'm with you and President Obama on this one.

The richest are paying a much smaller percentage of their income than the middle class, after their various deductions and tax loopholes. Nice try blaming the poor for the problems of the country, but it's time for the rich to show show patriotism and be willing to pay their fair share. Especially since the rich can pay a higher percentage and still afford both food AND clothing for their children.

Republicans like to show that the top 2% are paying more in taxes than they used to, while failing to point out that the same top 2% are making a lot more money, while the rest of us are living hand-to-mouth. The money has been flowing upward and collecting at the top for 30 years, and it has to stop. It's the American Dream, which is neither socialism nor class warfare.

Amazing how this little 3% Obama tax cut for the top 1% of the rich has caused so much controversy.

But whats a fair share to you?

My wife and I own a business. We hocked our home and retirement to start and maintain our company. We employ 15 people at an average salary of 50K per years plus health/dental/401K etc.

We earn more than 250K a year now and don't see why we should voluntarily give more of it up to pay for someone elses life...we pay corporate taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes, persoanl taxes, community taxes, property taxes and personal taxes...thats enough for me...BTW, how many good paying jobs HAVE YOU ever created in your life?

Congratulations on providing good paying jobs and benefits for 15 people.

Rick, I noticed that your business is incorporated; therefore, you can deduct employee benefits, such as health insurance, disability, and up to $50,000 in life insurance. The deduction covers owners who are also employees of the company. Since you obviously work in your organization, although you must pay individual income tax on your salary, it is a deductible business expense to the company. The company; therefore, can deduct your salary and your business does not pay taxes on your salary.

Yes, you pay a lot of taxes, but because you are in business, you are entitled to tax credits and other incentives, thatin some cases result in receiving a refund from the government. Rick, I still think that your personal tax rate should have reverted by to the pre 2002 rates.

I wish you continued success in your business. I hope it grows and employ even more people.

That is the problem with including business net with the truly wealthy who spend 250k or more on personal lifestyle. If you are earning 250k after putting 30-40% of your net back into the business to expand purchases of stock next year, give raises, and hire more people to handle the increased business if needed, my hat's off to ta. Good job!!!!!!