Uh oh!

L@@ks like someone's begging for a atta boy & pat on the back! ;0))

Lame-duck Speaker Nancy Pelosi is now suggesting that, after House Democrats rejected the compromise on the Bush tax cuts negotiated with Republicans by President Obama, she might not support the President's initiative unless changes are made to the proposed legislation. The White House response is that this is a "take it or leave it" deal.

In effect, Madame Speaker is now engaged in undermining her own President. She continues to refuse to accept the consequences of the horrific midterm defeat...Pelosi is in total denial. Meanwhile, President Obama must deal with a new, unpleasant reality.

Pelosi should have shared responsibility for the outcome of last month's referendum on the Democratic Party...and relinquished any future leadership role.

Instead, she's chosen to allow President Obama to deal with the outcome of the midterms on his own.

Republicans have long known how despicable Pelosi is...now President Obama must learn this the hard way.

That's what happens when you say 'take it or leave it'

Some people leave it

Maybe Speaker Pelosi doesn't like Surrendering to Hostage takers

Is there ANY DOUBT that Republicans will force Obama to CONTINUE Extending Tax cuts in order to get Unemployment Insurance extended ? They've already Rolled Obama once .....

MSierra, SF-

Maybe Madame Speaker likes one-term Democratic Presidents.

Sure looks like it.

I actually prefer to hear from members of safe districts. I get the impression that they can be more candid because they're not looking over their shoulders at the next election. It's not true in all cases -- Grayson was going to say some despicable sh*t regardless of his electoral position. But it does feel like a politician is speaking to me instead of telling me what I want to hear.

Not so BigBear, not so.

Obama did negotiate with the GOP. That’s how the wealthy tax cuts got there in the first place. The original tax package passed by the House Dems was killed by the Senate Reps. What we are looking at now is the second attempt with the wealthy tax cuts the Reps are so fixated on. Now it looks like the House Dem are going to disrupt that package and it will start all over again.

IT IS NOT TAX CUTS.......It is a vote to extend the CURRENT RATE.

Let's see, a deal was made that everyone benefits (income), and everyone pays (deficit). By definition it was Bi-Partisan. Isn't that what we just spend the last 2 years wanting?

Certainly seems like the dems in the house are only for it if it is exactly what they want, and nothing more.

Not to mention that they just slammed Pres Obama to the floor. He can't be out in front of the camera everyday speaking how great this deal is to have his own party back stab him...

Patricia, yes I know President Obama negotiated with the Republican Party. That's what the Democrats are angry at. So now they're pulling this.

It reminds me a little bit of the health care reform legislation which Lawrence O'Donnell spoke about. There were those in the House who said they would not vote for a bill that had no public option. But they in fact did vote for a bill with no public option.

How does anyone expect President Obama or any President, Democrat or Republican, to get anything without negotiating with the other party? It happens all the time.

IT IS NOT TAX CUTS.......It is a vote to extend the CURRENT RATE.

By default, anything that is created as a temporary measure with an expiration deadline assumes that whatever was permanently in place - or whatever it will default to once the temporary measure's deadline expires - is the 'correct' rate.

Hence by not making the tax cuts permanent in 2001 and 2003, the assumption of the congress at the time was that the tax rates of 2000 and 2002 were 'correct.' If you don't like it, don't holler at us, go back in time and holler at whoever the Speaker of the House and Senate Majority leader were at the times of those votes.

That is why it is correct to call these tax cuts. We simply haven't been at the normal tax rates for seven or nine years respectively. If these rates become permanent and they attempt to then raise them back to the 2000 or 2002 rates, at that point you could correctly label them tax hikes.

You’re right; it’s not new tax cuts. This is to just extend the current rate. All which helped get us where we are today. This tax package includes the wealthy cuts that already exist; of course the Dems are not going to like that. The Reps are the same way; they won’t pass anything that doesn’t have the wealthy tax cuts in it. We could go back and forth all day long saying that the Dems should take what they can get or the Reps should stop being so greedy. But then we start getting into “good enough” politics and I’m sick of playing that game. “Just let the bill pass, it’s good enough.” When the hell did we start thinking that was acceptable?

Pat - Boston... Thank you for the voice of sanity... It's badly needed EVERYWHERE...

I wonder if President Obama would have handled this differently if he still had Ted Kennedy's vote and Liebermann was still a D. I wonder if he knew, judging by last weekend's vote, that he just didn't have the votes to let the tax cuts expire and had to reach out to the GOP to get this passed. Especially when the Democrats chickened out of the vote before the midterms. Seems he's keeping quiet about what he knew where the votes were and weren't in the Senate all along.

Just a thought. But yes. The Democrats did compromise. But so didn't the Republicans.

Allowing people to keep there money is not what caused us to get where we are today. MY money and other peoples Money is not YOURS. We understand that if the Govt promises you more Cheese and you dont get it that you think thats a Cut. . but hey your still getting the Same amount of that Govt Cheese as you did before.

IntheMiddle, TX

"IT IS NOT TAX CUTS.......It is a vote to extend the CURRENT RATE."

F I N A L L Y !! Someone who gets it!

Bush had 3 choices- INCREASE taxes, LEAVE the CURRENT RATE in place, or CUT tax rates

He picked # 3. It was TEMPORARY. Which means, when it expired, it reverted to......choice #2, CURRENT RATES.

Thanks again, ITM, for this post! Both sides have been playing word games with this thing all over the place. Hell, even Hannity keeps calling it the "largest tax increase in American history" for crying out loud.

Patriciacat, you think tax cuts got us to where we are today?

Really?

What, pray tell, did tax cuts have to do with the collapse of the housing market? Or of Fannie and Freddie? Because that is what got us where we are today.

Google the federal deficit In 2006 and 2007. In 2006, it was around $270 billion, in 2007, it was $160 billion. Why? Extremely high tax revenue.

Today's deficit is as a result of diminished tax revenue due to high unemployment and also because of Obama's spending spree. True, Bush initiated TARP,(which I opposed), but those monies have been repaid by the banks. It was Obama who opened the piggy bank for GM and Chrysler, instituted new and more entitlement programs, and an almost trillion dollar stimulus program which stimulated NOTHING but the deficit. Even Obama admits, too late, that there is no such thing as a shovel ready job- at the same time calling to spend another $50billion on, oh yes, shovel ready jobs. Either he is crazy, or he thinks we are nuts.

Pat in MA

I wonder if the republicans get this deal if they will keep any other deals they may have agreed with during the horse trading session. They may have pulled the wool over Obama's eyes.

Lyn, thank you but I'm not particularly proud of the way I handled myself these past few weeks. I guess I just pay too much attention to what other people think in my party. But at some point I had to draw my own line in the sand. President Obama is a smart, thoughtful President. I can say the same about some in the Republican Party as well. But my line is I want him to get re-elected. I want a Democrat in the White House, because I'm a Democrat. Republicans feel the same.

And no one is going to make me change my mind. If D's want to primary him, then I have nothing to say to them. Nothing. President Obama comes before all the BS. At least with me. Doesn't mean I won't fight for whatever needs fighting for. I do it all the time.

And I hope President Obama reaches out to the left at some point. They could be a valuable asset to him.

I'll never forget what Adam Green (the activist) said last week - He said he woke up every morning wondering what he could do to get Barack Obama elected in 2008.

That's a man President Obama should at the very least, listen to.

Obama is INCOMPETENT

He could have passed this when he had 60 Votes in the Senate He could have passed Tax Legislation BEFORE the Election WHERE was the LEADERSHIP from Obama?? WHAT WAS HE DOING ???

The OBAMA White House has MORE CLOWNS than Barnum and Bailey

Tjhis Tax cut is NOT about Economic policy, it's about Obama's Re-election THAT'S why he held a press conference A Press conference to denounce Democrats

ANYBODY BUT OBAMA 2012

Oh, for god’s sake. I don’t think the tax cuts created our economic problems and national deficit. I said it “helped get us where we are today”. It’s a big, giant soup pot of bad choices here people, and continuing to make those same bad choices is not going to change anything.

Pat, Boston, MA-

Your sincerity is undeniable, Pat...and your comments reflecting disappointment about the failure of many in the Democratic Party to support President Obama's acknowledgment of the realities involved in his proposal to extend all of the Bush tax cuts is dead-on.

But...Adam Green opposes the President on this compromise. He told Larry O'Donnell just that.

If President Obama listens to, and follows the advise of folks like Adam Green...he will be a one-term President.

He'll be an ideological purist like Green...but, he will no longer be President of the United States.

You just want the Govt to Give you more. thats why your so mad. If people get to keep more of their Money That means less for you..

Less for me? What? How do I get it if it is taken from the wealthy? I'm not on unemployment. I'm not on welfare. Explain this for me, becauce I'm a little slow today. (what's new, right?)

typical demoncrap

Captain-

As a conservative, believe me when I say that I hope that all Democrats adopt your world view.

Continue to march...

This is very short sighted. Beverly, it is the people's Waterloo. The result of this will be the end of life as we know it in America.

Personally, I think the President has done some good things unlike any other President since FDR.

Have to love you Bev.

Trueman - Integrated the Army

Eisenhower - National Highway System

Kennedy - Inauguration Speach

Johnson - Civil Rights and much more

Nixon - Opened up China

Reagan - (I'm sure there's something)

Bush 1 - Iraq War (the good one)

Clinton - Prosperity

Notice anyone conspicously absent from this list, other than Ford and Carter? Anybody more, say, recent??

Alan,

Reagan ended the cold war and the USSR

35 to 40 years of effort ended the cold war and the USSR on GHW Bush's watch. REAGAN just CONNED you.

Alan, NJ

Personally, I think the President has done some good things unlike any other President since FDR.

Have to love you Bev.

I mean to say more things since FDR. I remember watching the Rachel Maddow Show show a while back. She was able to enumerate the President's accomplishments. So forgive me for not using the correct word.

Here is a snippet.

June 28, 2010

'THE LAST TIME ANY PRESIDENT DID THIS MUCH IN OFFICE, BOOZE WAS ILLEGAL'..

"But presidential legacies are complex. Not even the Reagan administration's legacy is pure as the conservative-driven snow. But Taegan Goddard at CQ Politics was right today about nothing this big happening since FDR. The list of legislative accomplishments of this president in half a term even before energy reform which he's probably going to get to is, to quote the vice president, 'a big freaking deal.' Love this administration or hate it, this president is getting a lot done. The last time any president did this much in office, booze was illegal. If you believe in policy, if you believe in government that addresses problems, cheers to that."

Peter Beinart noted today that for all the challenges making life difficult for the president right now, "he keeps racking up the wins." Indeed, Beinart makes the compelling case that Obama has recorded more significant milestones in 18 months than the last two Democratic administrations achieved in 12 years.

"Even before today's historic Wall Street reform agreement, President Obama, of course, did what politicians have been trying to do for more than 60 years. He passed health reform, which, for the first time, establishes government responsibility for the health care of American citizens. Consider also the stimulus bill. It didn't just throw a lasso around our entire economy and yank and yank it back from the brink, it also pumped about $100 billion into the crumbling embarrassment of our national infrastructure and transportation system. It was the largest investment in infrastructure since Ike. For solving our country's energy problems, something Obama has compared to man walking on the moon, it contained about $60 billion in spending and tax incentives for renewable and clean energy, also a historic investment. It also included an unheralded but giant investment in science and tech, amping up the budgets at NASA, the National Science Foundation, and an experimental energy research agency that was created under President George W. Bush, but never funded until now.

"President Obama also expanded state kids' health insurance to cover another four million kids. He signed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act amending the 1964 civil rights act for equal pay for equal work. He signed a nuclear arms deal with Russia that would reduce both countries' arsenals by a third. He created a new global nonproliferation initiative to keep nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists. He set forth an international way forward on that radical left-wing proposition of Ronald Reagan, a world without nuclear weapon

The clip is worth watching in its entirety, but Rachel's recitation of some of Obama's greatest hits revealed a pretty impressive list.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_06/024482.php

On the other hand, some will say ... In the USA, when it comes to violating the separation of powers and seizing executive power, no president has done more since FDR than Obama. ...

I do recognize others. In such a short time Obama has done more depending how one sees it.

Posts like this sum up the Liberal position in America. People keeping what they earned, people able to spend the money they earned on what they feel is important, people that are pulling the economic wagon, and not just taking a free ride in it, well, they are the enemy, they are ones that are "stealing" from the ones riding in the economic wagon. Somewhere along the way, the Liberal mindset strayed far, far away from making any kind of sense.

And the $250 payment to Social Security recipients, just what is that? The rules of SS Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) clearly state that the payments will be adjusted according to the amount of inflation in the previous year. There has been no inflation, so no adjustments are necessary. But for Liberals, that's just not good enough, they again believe people on social security are some how victims, and that they must provide for those victims. Forget the rules that were agreed too, forget that the federal government spending is totally out of control, those things don't matter. At least not to the Liberals.

Liberals need to understand, the federal government has a spending problem, not a taxing problem. They spend too much.

RGiles, everyone realized that $250 payoff was to try to swing the senior vote during the last election. I, for one am proud that our reps are finally working together.

The benefit for the few, you say??? I believe that renewed tax cut covered about everyone in the US didnt it?

"Liberals need to understand, the federal government has a spending problem, not a taxing problem. They spend too much."

Y' might have something, there, JoAnna. Tell us:

Not including military spending, In what other three areas YOU would cut all the spending that would shed, say, 1/2 of the debt we now have?

DBO - I would include the military in any spending reductions.

See the Debt Commission report for other items that I would support, including the increase in taxes on such things as gas.