Compromise After Compromise Is Just Defeat After Defeat

[The Rabbi]

What I don't understand though, is why the Democrats - and, why Obama isn't leading the Democrats into making a political point of this: the republicans care more about the 2% wealthiest getting lower taxes then they do about the unemployed.

A) Because it's a lie. (Not that Democrats are bothered by that much)
B) Because they ran on exactly that and got their asses handed to them last November.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

This Dem-led Congress blew it once again. They shouldn't have waited till the last minute on this. This could have been resolved a long time ago. Just one more staggering blunder by this Worst Congress in History.

 

[Coyote]

But wasn't it John Boehner who said that extending the tax cuts for the richest Americans was necessary, as those richest Americans are the ones who create jobs?

Those tax cuts have been in place for some time now.....haven't seen much job creation from the wealthiest 2%....

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment was well below 6% for most of the Bush years, post tax cuts.
Just because there aren't many jobs for over-age strippers doesn't mean there wasn't tremendous job creation.

Post tax cuts....frankly...unemployment looked much better BEFORE the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003....

 

[LibocalypseNow]

I thought the People wanted Bipartisanship? Isn't that what we always hear? Well,here's your Bipartisanship. Enjoy.

 

[Intense]

I'm disappointed but not shocked that Obama compromised and I hope the Dems kill "Obama's" compromise because I don't see any place where he actually won anything. I'm especially stung by his hypocrisy, how can he cave in to give tax cuts to the rich which he thinks is benefiting everyone and simultaneously call for a freeze on the salaries of all federal employees, most of whom are middle class working people, the ones he claiming to help? Why not freeze the salaries of all the politicians instead for their failure to properly represent the people that elected them and for dragging this country into deeper trouble because of their bickering?


This is exactly why i put no trust in any politician and keep my trust and faith only in God, every politician is a devil to me because in order to extended and have their political careers they have to do deals with Satan daily and that means someone is always going to get short changed. God has never defeated evil through compromise and doing deals with Satan.

First, you need to understand. He did not give tax cuts to the rich based on the fact that they are rich. There are many people and economists that believe in supply side economics...and when Mr. Obama saw that after 2 years, pumping mponey into the economy did little to no help, he deemed it best to see if supply side economics will help so he opted to give the business owners a break and allow them to enjoy the tax cuts as well. I suggest you get off the "tax cuts for the rich" thing. The politicians used it to try to stir up the people....but they knew that intelligent self thinking people saw it as employing a strategy along the lines of supply side economics.

As for freezing government employee wages. What is wrong with that? We are in a recession....or the recovery of one. Most in the public sector did not see an increase in salary...most business owners saw a decrease in income....so why should those WE PAY not suffer a mild setback as well?

Freezing my wages, yes I am a government employee, was dumb, its not as if we're all living good while people in the private sector have it worse than us, they actually make more than we do on average, if they want to freeze some wages freeze the wages of those high ranking government employees sitting in jobs where they get paid loads of money where they're not needed or freeze the wages and benefits of those millionaire politicians. Since most government employees are upper to lower middle class why freeze our wages?

So what are we paying you not to do????? Government Employee's need a pay cut, not a freeze. Why over Tax us Bass????

 

[The Rabbi]

Those tax cuts have been in place for some time now.....haven't seen much job creation from the wealthiest 2%....

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment was well below 6% for most of the Bush years, post tax cuts.
Just because there aren't many jobs for over-age strippers doesn't mean there wasn't tremendous job creation.

Post tax cuts....frankly...unemployment looked much better BEFORE the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003....

Need to learn how to read a graph?
Unemployment declined post '03 from over 6% to about 4.5%.

 

[Coyote]

Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Unemployment was well below 6% for most of the Bush years, post tax cuts.
Just because there aren't many jobs for over-age strippers doesn't mean there wasn't tremendous job creation.

Post tax cuts....frankly...unemployment looked much better BEFORE the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003....

Need to learn how to read a graph?
Unemployment declined post '03 from over 6% to about 4.5%.

You didn't finish reading did you?

It went up - way up post 01....down and then up again post 03, and skyrocketed up - still under the same tax cuts.

 

[The Rabbi]

Post tax cuts....frankly...unemployment looked much better BEFORE the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 and the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003....

Need to learn how to read a graph?
Unemployment declined post '03 from over 6% to about 4.5%.

You didn't finish reading did you?

It went up - way up post 01....down and then up again post 03, and skyrocketed up - still under the same tax cuts.

Yes, clearly argumentation is not your strong suit.
If the tax cuts passed in '03 then UE would not start declining until AFTER they passed, right? Which is just what happened, about mid-year.

 

[rightwinger]

The Republicans gave nothing they wouldn't have given anyway. They just held back approval to have a chip

It was just giving in to a Republican tantrum

And the new Congress hasn't even been seated yet

 

[The Rabbi]

The Republicans gave nothing they wouldn't have given anyway. They just held back approval to have a chip

It was just giving in to a Republican tantrum

And the new Congress hasn't even been seated yet

So since the Dems have no need whatsoever to compromise with the GOP until January why did they do it?

 

[Intense]

So they can claim that Republican's are responsible for their errors.

 

[loosecannon]

The Republicans gave nothing they wouldn't have given anyway. They just held back approval to have a chip

It was just giving in to a Republican tantrum

And the new Congress hasn't even been seated yet

So since the Dems have no need whatsoever to compromise with the GOP until January why did they do it?

You haven't heard of senator Phil E Buster?

 

[The Rabbi]

The Republicans gave nothing they wouldn't have given anyway. They just held back approval to have a chip

It was just giving in to a Republican tantrum

And the new Congress hasn't even been seated yet

So since the Dems have no need whatsoever to compromise with the GOP until January why did they do it?

You haven't heard of senator Phil E Buster?

No, filibuster only stops existing legislation from passing. All the Dems had to do was sit on their hands and higher rates would be law automatically come January.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

First, you need to understand. He did not give tax cuts to the rich based on the fact that they are rich. There are many people and economists that believe in supply side economics...and when Mr. Obama saw that after 2 years, pumping mponey into the economy did little to no help, he deemed it best to see if supply side economics will help so he opted to give the business owners a break and allow them to enjoy the tax cuts as well. I suggest you get off the "tax cuts for the rich" thing. The politicians used it to try to stir up the people....but they knew that intelligent self thinking people saw it as employing a strategy along the lines of supply side economics.

As for freezing government employee wages. What is wrong with that? We are in a recession....or the recovery of one. Most in the public sector did not see an increase in salary...most business owners saw a decrease in income....so why should those WE PAY not suffer a mild setback as well?

Freezing my wages, yes I am a government employee, was dumb, its not as if we're all living good while people in the private sector have it worse than us, they actually make more than we do on average, if they want to freeze some wages freeze the wages of those high ranking government employees sitting in jobs where they get paid loads of money where they're not needed or freeze the wages and benefits of those millionaire politicians. Since most government employees are upper to lower middle class why freeze our wages?

So what are we paying you not to do????? Government Employee's need a pay cut, not a freeze. Why over Tax us Bass????

No we don't need a pay cut and though I'm not going to reveal what my job is it does require me to have a security clearance and it does involved computers and electronics, we don't need pay cuts because we're not the overpaid ones, I work side by side with a government contractor who's job is to assist me and he makes 9000 dollars more than I do, so no, government employees are not overpaid people in need of a pay cut, you've been getting the wrong info buddy so stop spewing that Republican BS.

 

[Synthaholic]

First, you need to understand. He did not give tax cuts to the rich based on the fact that they are rich. There are many people and economists that believe in supply side economics...and when Mr. Obama saw that after 2 years, pumping mponey into the economy did little to no help, he deemed it best to see if supply side economics will help so he opted to give the business owners a break and allow them to enjoy the tax cuts as well. I suggest you get off the "tax cuts for the rich" thing. The politicians used it to try to stir up the people....but they knew that intelligent self thinking people saw it as employing a strategy along the lines of supply side economics.

As for freezing government employee wages. What is wrong with that? We are in a recession....or the recovery of one. Most in the public sector did not see an increase in salary...most business owners saw a decrease in income....so why should those WE PAY not suffer a mild setback as well?

But wasn't it John Boehner who said that extending the tax cuts for the richest Americans was necessary, as those richest Americans are the ones who create jobs?

I cant speak for Boehner but if I had to guess, he was responding to the fact that the other side of the aisle continually referred to them as "richest Americans"....
But those Americans are not targeted by the GOP to get the cuts based on their wealth...they were targeted to get those cuts as well based on the theory of supply side economics....

And I, for one, do not think Boehner is worthy of Speaker....but that is another thread for another day.

Is there a better term for the people with the highest 2% of wealth?

 

[Synthaholic]

I thought the People wanted Bipartisanship? Isn't that what we always hear? Well,here's your Bipartisanship. Enjoy.

Too bad the Regressive Party didn't want it.

 

[Sallow]

Looks as if Demint might be the poison pill that will rescue the spineless Democrats from their compromising ways..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Hmm, with no extension, the tax cuts lapse and unemployment spikes above 10%.

Yeah that'll be good for Obama Pelosi and Reid to explain again in 2012.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

But wasn't it John Boehner who said that extending the tax cuts for the richest Americans was necessary, as those richest Americans are the ones who create jobs?

I cant speak for Boehner but if I had to guess, he was responding to the fact that the other side of the aisle continually referred to them as "richest Americans"....
But those Americans are not targeted by the GOP to get the cuts based on their wealth...they were targeted to get those cuts as well based on the theory of supply side economics....

And I, for one, do not think Boehner is worthy of Speaker....but that is another thread for another day.

Is there a better term for the people with the highest 2% of wealth?

These same Republicans who call for a pay cut for federal employees who aren't rich also want a tax cut for the top 2%, incredible BS coming from the right, thats just more proof they favor the rich above all others.

 

[Sallow]

Can't believe that I am rooting for James Demint to filibuster.

Strange times indeed.