DBO - the tape from the Senate vote last Saturday should come in quite handy in 2012!

Anyone want some popcorn? lol

that's right drive by, let the house vote down the compromise this year and let it go into next. I mean really what do many of the house democrats have to lose, absolutely nothing, since many ain't coming back in 2011. What a perfect way to show that those who voted them out in November made the right choice.

I do give obama credit for his efforts at bipartisanship as that was one of his campaign points.

This is President Obama's deal, drive-by...

That's what most will remember.

Democrats will reap no benefit from opposing their own President on this.

drive by-postponing would cause a huge dive in the equities markets, wiping out additional 401k/IRA savings. only people that dont plan for their own retirement (have no self respect or any idea of self responcibility) would want that.

You DO know that if they don't vote on it this year, it automatically expires, don't you? If they put it off they will have to start over and come up with a whole new bill that gives tax cuts to the rich, and they will have enough votes to push it through. Then they can accuse the Dems of raising taxes on everyone by not voting on the extension, and the Repubs can take credit for cutting taxes when they pass their new tax cut bill. Either way, it's a loss for the Dems.

Pat,

Knowing that the dems could have taken care of this in the summer, but didn't. Why do you think it is crap?

Everyone knew that the tax cuts were going to happen. I will also agree, that I knew that unemployment was going to get extended, but I did not think that they would add another year, which means, that those who take advantage of it, and there are some, can sit at home for 3 full years now. And we don't have a single cut in the package. I think that compromise is the way government is suppose to work. I mean even your John Adams had to compromise with the Declaration of Independence to get it through the Continental Congress.

Of course I am not from Massachusetts, I only visit historical areas and leave quickly:0 And I think that the President did a good job with compromising, for a change.

And maybe you can tell me why Nancy is wanting to get a hold of someone's estate so bad after they die.

Pat,

You have it absolutely right. They punted before the mid-terms. Like they really believed that their hands would be strengthened and the Grand Obstructionist Party would break ranks with McConnell & Bonehead and they would miraculously find 60+ votes in the Senate? Unfortunately for all of us (rich excluded), me thinks they doth protest too much.

actually, it was the lib congress under bush that kept him from making the tax rates permenant (they are not tax cuts) had that been the case, more certainty would have enabled capitalism to likely have had us further out of the recession than we are now (in spite of the redistributionist laws passed by the last 3 year lib legislature)

btw, the libs ran all of congress for the last 3 years, and could have worked on this long before the 11th hour. they are like children, waiting until the day before to complete a work assignment.

but dont dispair, a few soldiers, elected by patriots will soon enter the house. in two years we will vote in additional soldiers, and restore the Republic.

Everyone knew the tax cuts were going to happen

I agree with you on this. I hate it, but I knew it wa coming. But some Dems are giving us the phony outrage over this legislation. I had two "arguments" this morning with two very liberal courtroom attorneys, of which I am not. And you know what? They ended up agreeing with me. I say argument in quotes because I'm not known as the most aggressive person in the world. I'm pretty quiet and reserved (except here of course). These two attorneys are v. aggressive. But they listened to me and what I thought happened. Not what everyone is saying. And I told them what's going on with DADT and the compromises that need to be made. Did they think that was okay?

Yes, of course they said. You have to compromise.

Yet when it comes to the President, he isn't allowed to compromise for some reason.

If you came here and visited John Adams' home, you would have been 3 minutes from my house. If you came here and visited Faneuil Hall, you would have been 3 minutes from my office. Next time you're here, I'll buy you a beer. And give you a tour. I love telling stories about the founding of our country (much to the chagrin of people driving in cars with me LOL) as I point out every historical everything. And it all began right outside my office window with the Tea Party in the Harbah.

Pat, I typically disagree with you on every issue on here, and am shocked at your last paragraph above.

Mitch, very good, I am glad someone else on this understands that The United States of America, is a Republic, not a Democracy.

thanks Texas. unfortunately, the revisionist redistributionists must always be reminded, not only a Republic, but also, a group of States United.

Keep Texas free, keep Texas strong. it is a beacon for Patriots round the country.

Pat,

I am a little tired of the Congressional Democrats blaming the President. They should have taken this up earlier, but nooooooo. And during the midterms, they were too busy running scared. Well here we are. Although the extension to the rich is a hard pill to swallow, this is more about the middle class and helping the unemployed. The President should do this, the President should that, blah, blah, blah. What about the congressional Democrats. Where is their responsibility? They did mind riding his coattails, but the minute the going gets rough, they run like like little girls. And the far-left liberals are calling for the President's head. Stop whining. He is systemically trying to work his way through. Knowing he did not have the votes why fight a losing battle. The only people who would get hurt is the middle class and where would all those fighting liberals be then. Blowing hot air while others suffered.

I am a proud Democrat. I'd also like to think I'm fairly pragmatic as well. Under the circumstances, this was the right thing to do.

As always, the President is the only adult in the room.

Let's hear it for the 43% of the voters in Barney Frank's liberal Democratic 4th Massachusetts Congressional District who had the sense to vote for his opponent.

Big Bear - You (and Michelle Bachmann) misunderstand the unemployment extension. It does not extend unemployment past 99 weeks for anyone, it preserves the 99 week limit. Here is the response to Michelle Bachmann's similar mistaken statement from the Huffington Post.

" It would preserve the 99 weeks by reauthorizing Emergency Unemployment Compensation and Extended Benefits programs, which together provide up to 73 weeks of benefits beyond the standard 26 funded by states."

Heartlight3, you are correct about the unemployment extension. Those that have already reached the 99 weeks, will not get an further benefits. The extension is for those whose benefits fall between 26 weeks and 99 weeks.

I am gonna bet you that when all is said and done, those at 99 weeks will get more unemployment time. They are not going to allow people who have been off 2 years without a job, not keep getting their checks.

I thought was one of the reasons they were extending it, so those whose time was up last week, could still claim unemployment. Because if their 99 weeks is up, then why the complaints about not getting unemployment anymore. JMO

many believe the earliest progressive President was Teddy Rosevelt. back then it meant realizing that a minority voice/needs should never be put to a national vote. but also back then, people were being basically enslaved by monopolies, and worked under sweatshop/life threatening conditions.

libs should really use a different word besides progressives. libs are redistributionists. it is not the same thing. one is a label assigned to a republican President, the other is typically assigned to theives, rapists, and murderers.

Redistribution is what has been happening for the past 30 years.

Exactly and very well put. Easier to blame the President than to take responsibility themselves.

I rather like how this is playing out. Boehner is on tape saying that he would vote for the tax cuts even if the bill did not contain cuts for the $250,000 and over crowd. The House forces the vote and Boehner votes no. Before he is Speaker of the House, he is on tape and on paper as a filthy liar.

The republicans refuse to do anything during this lame duck if they don't get their way on the tax cuts for those over $250,000. They hold the poor, middle class and unemployed hostage. The President compromises, gets a good deal, and the Republicans celebrate...oh...woops. The Republicans are celebrating adding $900 billion to the defecit! Just a couple of weeks ago they were crying about the unemployment extension being put on the defecit! Uh-oh. Theoretically, the "tea" party should be crapping their drawers...but are they? What are the tea-party candidates going to do when they are sworn in? Denouce their Speaker as a liar and a hypocrite? He betrayed them as well!! If they do not denounce him, then they have to display how powerless they actually are - and everything they ran on this year was the bull that most of us thought it was.

So...the Speaker-elect is a proven and documented liar and the republicans are, once again, spending like frat-boys - not caring how it's paid for, as long as they get their way. The tea party has to stand against the republican leadership or risk being completely emasculated....and all of this before they even get control of the House!!!

I think the President did just fine and the democrats have more political capital than they ever could have dreamed!!

shocked and disgusted - welcome to the world of politics, where every statement may have spin and every statement made is subject to change. One can posture on any subject but then change in the name of compromise or "for the common good". Politicians of all persuasions have done this for centuries

unfortunately, we would probably elect him here in delaware.

btw, has anyone seen the map of blue and red congressional districts. The most vociferous opponents are from safe urban seats. There are not too many dem reps who do notcome from either the east coast or left coast.

keeping 70/pay bi-weekly, or keeping 140 a month, instead of giving it to the Fed to waste...sounds good to me.

Yah, but unfortunately, that isn't what is going to happen. That $70/bi-weekly figure assumes that someone earning $30,000/year is paying no payroll taxes at all. My point was that with the current plan, the amount of increase in take-home pay the $30,000 earner is going to get will be so minimal that there will be no real incentive to change spending behavior.

The figure for the $30,000 earner is likely to be in the range of $7.69/bi-weekly, which, while nice, I suppose, is certainly not the game changer that many seem to hope it will be.

Hence the stimulative effect of this, assuming that there is supposed to be some sort of stimulative effect, will be similarly minimal since you aren't really affecting the people whose behavior really needs to be affected in this economy.

Look at at it this way, if you have 20 people who are trying to build a house, you don't give the most nails to the 2 people who already have nail guns and don't give any at all to the 10 who have broken down old hammers and a smattering to remaining ones who have better hammers in various states of repair and expect that house to go up any faster.

If you really want to change how fast the house goes up, you make sure all 20 people the right hammers and nails to do the job, even if they have to do it by hand and don't have nail guns.

i understood your point, and appreciate your artfull explanation. unfortunately, i am a simple guy. basically: we cant let these pigs get any more money, as they will only find new ways to spend it.

Look at at it this way, if you have 20 people who are trying to build a house, you don't give the most nails to the 2 people who already have nail guns and don't give any at all to the 10 who have broken down old hammers and a smattering to remaining ones who have better hammers in various states of repair and expect that house to go up any faster.

Sure you give more nails to the ones with the nail guns than the ones with the broken hammers. The guys with the nail guns will put more useful nails in while the ones with broken hammers will waste good nails by bending them all out of shape. If you take away the nail guns from the ones that have them and give all 20 people better hammers, the job takes longer and you may run out of money for nails because you spent too much buying better hammers for everyone.

Make work pay credit phases out depending on income level.

Welcome to the new 'Party of NO' :)

Hear, hear, lance...

Will the Democratic Party really reject the President?

Were it any other party, any other time...I'd say no.

But, these are Democrats...

All bets are off.

I was hired by a corporate manager - so I guess I was hired by someone who doesn't own a business. The people who will benenfit most will be the Wall Street Execs looking to bonus $144 Billion for driving the economy into the ditch. Where are all the jobs they create with their wealth?

I'm ging to guess a thousand dolars to my family represents a hell of a lot more than $10,000 does to a millionaire's family. I could be wrong of cours.

Or not. I'll put in an extra $1,000 if everyone making over a million puts in $10,000. Who'd be with me.

OR- I could save my thousand, and buy typing lessons.....It's probably cost that much.

Ummm Mitch, because the Libs are about redistributing YOUR wealth, not theirs ...

he didnt have to comprimise, the libs run the presidency and both houses of congress till the patriot soldiers are seated in January.