Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
78 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
BREAKING: White House: Obama will veto any bill extending tax cuts for those making more than $250K. (Original Post) JaneyVee Nov 2012 OP
Yyyyyyeeeessss! Barack_America Nov 2012 #1
HuffPo Headline: "LINE IN THE SAND" ellisonz Nov 2012 #2
Technically, everyone will get a tax cut Xipe Totec Nov 2012 #3
technically 54% of the tax cut hfojvt Nov 2012 #12
Get ready for the repig tears bongbong Nov 2012 #4
FUCK YEAH! redqueen Nov 2012 #5
ALL RIGHT ! CaliforniaPeggy Nov 2012 #6
RIGHT ON! POTUS is the MAN! ffr Nov 2012 #55
Boner, you said you wanted leadership -- well suck on this! nt SDjack Nov 2012 #7
~ Goehner 2014! ~ xtraxritical Nov 2012 #47
hold strong. and a fuck ya. nt seabeyond Nov 2012 #8
is this an interpretation of the remarks he gave? Enrique Nov 2012 #9
Don't know, but he has said this before. Saw a video clip on TV the other day, where gkhouston Nov 2012 #15
This has been his position since 2008. Sequestration hits January. The big stick now in his hand. freshwest Nov 2012 #63
Now we're talkin'! eom ChisolmTrailDem Nov 2012 #10
I don't know why people think this is so great hfojvt Nov 2012 #11
The OP implies the bush tax cuts will expire, except for those making $250k and under. redqueen Nov 2012 #13
same one I have used hundreds of times now (probably) hfojvt Nov 2012 #21
The OP implies the cuts for anyone above $250k are over...this compromise is obsolete, perhaps? redqueen Nov 2012 #23
I never did think it was a good compromise hfojvt Nov 2012 #42
What does "Obama is pushing" mean? nm rhett o rick Nov 2012 #17
My understanding: LoisB Nov 2012 #31
My point is hfojvt Nov 2012 #40
Considering that the top 20% PAY about 95% of taxes ChillZilla Nov 2012 #46
That statistic means absolutely nothing. kentuck Nov 2012 #51
oh, thank you so much for the Republican talking point. hfojvt Nov 2012 #54
The Washington Post and Salon theKed Nov 2012 #14
One thread says it's conditional, but this one says it's over. I'm a bit confused. Gregorian Nov 2012 #16
NOT breaking. Repeat of oft repeated position upon which we all just voted. IllinoisBirdWatcher Nov 2012 #18
Perfect. JNelson6563 Nov 2012 #19
The problem isn't that he SAYS the word compromise. n/t Dawgs Nov 2012 #27
Do you see yourself in this picture? JNelson6563 Nov 2012 #48
YAAAAAAAAYYY!!! sibelian Nov 2012 #20
Please hold the line, guys. Tommy_Carcetti Nov 2012 #22
Stand your ground Mr. President! SoapBox Nov 2012 #24
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Nov 2012 #25
Good, but we really need to RAISE taxes dramatically on the 6 Waltons who own 40% of America's wealt grahamhgreen Nov 2012 #26
wut u say. n/t Dawgs Nov 2012 #28
^ This Myrina Nov 2012 #29
Sometimes, when I'm with nothing but republicans toby jo Nov 2012 #32
An excellent argument! grahamhgreen Nov 2012 #35
Hope you don't mind cate94 Nov 2012 #52
If Senator Reid throws it in the trash can? kentuck Nov 2012 #30
Good. The GOP is fucked on this one. They can't override said veto. HopeHoops Nov 2012 #33
Why can't they? Leopolds Ghost Nov 2012 #62
CBO says Bush tax cuts expiring has very little negative effect on the economy. joshcryer Nov 2012 #64
How do you convince people who get all their "liberal" news from NPR? Leopolds Ghost Nov 2012 #68
I was one of the people who was OK with it for the unemployment extension. joshcryer Nov 2012 #75
Compromise is great when people know how to haggle and find a sticking point Leopolds Ghost Nov 2012 #78
The Dems in the Senate will stand firmly on an Obama veto of any sort. They've got the power. HopeHoops Nov 2012 #72
Yes, yes, yes. FiveGoodMen Nov 2012 #34
Obama Will Get Tax Increase erpowers Nov 2012 #36
Don't stand your ground, Mr President. kentuck Nov 2012 #37
STICK TO IT, OBAMA Skittles Nov 2012 #38
Boehner Digs In on Opposition to Tax Hikes for Wealthy...FUCK THIS GUY!! spanone Nov 2012 #39
It is a bullshit statement, people BlueStreak Nov 2012 #41
After listening to his speech I feel you may be right. Puzzledtraveller Nov 2012 #44
Here we go again :-( Inuca Nov 2012 #45
It didn't take him long to start the hustle BlueStreak Nov 2012 #50
Agree with this!! LovingA2andMI Nov 2012 #58
Like another DUer said after the 08 election politicasista Nov 2012 #59
It's a step. Until we can close the loopholes. joshcryer Nov 2012 #65
Question, please help me here. Puzzledtraveller Nov 2012 #43
This is the backbone I want to see. sarcasmo Nov 2012 #49
He's always had it-- it's just that with being President, there was a bit of a learning curve ailsagirl Nov 2012 #57
This is a scam on the American people. Obama is dealing with the Devil. limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #53
The RICH must be so ANGRY at KKKarl Rove!!!!!!!! ailsagirl Nov 2012 #56
Reccing that headline! dchill Nov 2012 #60
Welcome to the mandate Politicub Nov 2012 #61
Yesssss!!!! tavalon Nov 2012 #66
Haven't we heard this line before? Bohunk68 Nov 2012 #67
Now you can STAND FIRM Barack! jimlup Nov 2012 #69
I don't believe it. nt Romulox Nov 2012 #70
We gave the President a mandate and looks like he knows that madokie Nov 2012 #71
Just words right now... only words... ocloc12 Nov 2012 #73
Didn't he say this last time too? Angleae Nov 2012 #74
EXCELLENT!!!! get the red out Nov 2012 #76
Something everyone seems to overlook everyones tax is going doc03 Nov 2012 #77

Xipe Totec

(44,558 posts)
3. Technically, everyone will get a tax cut
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:31 PM
Nov 2012

For all earnings under $250,000

So they can stop whining.

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
12. technically 54% of the tax cut
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:41 PM
Nov 2012

is going to the RICHEST 20%

So, they ought to be pretty happy.

I still bet they will get more.

 

bongbong

(5,436 posts)
4. Get ready for the repig tears
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:31 PM
Nov 2012

"I make $20K a year and I'm MAD AS HELL! Some day I'll be rich because I'm so smart! It's all those evil libs who have been keeping me down! And all those lazy n----- who want free stuff! WAAAAAHHHHHHHH!"

Enrique

(27,461 posts)
9. is this an interpretation of the remarks he gave?
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:36 PM
Nov 2012

or did someone specifically say veto? (I'm not asking you, OP, I see how brief the AP article is, I'm just asking)

gkhouston

(21,642 posts)
15. Don't know, but he has said this before. Saw a video clip on TV the other day, where
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:46 PM
Nov 2012

someone specifically asked him if he'd veto a bill that maintained the Bush tax cuts for over 250K and he said yes. No hesitation, no weasel words, simply "yes".

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
63. This has been his position since 2008. Sequestration hits January. The big stick now in his hand.
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 01:34 AM
Nov 2012
And they gave it to him by playing with people's lives and the national debt. Obama said:

This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.


http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/03/26/10871996-when-presidents-meet-a-hot-mic

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
11. I don't know why people think this is so great
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:39 PM
Nov 2012

Obama is pushing to extend about 73% of the Bush tax cuts.

Under his proposal, the top 1% get $40 billion in tax cuts
the top 4% get another $40 billion in tax cuts
the next richest 15% get $83 billion in tax cuts

For a total of $163 billion to the top 20%

The tax cuts for the bottom 60% - about half that amount.

But yeah, I guess, thank God Obama is taking a strong stand in favor of his plan to cut taxes for rich people.

redqueen

(115,186 posts)
13. The OP implies the bush tax cuts will expire, except for those making $250k and under.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:45 PM
Nov 2012

Your analysis is interesting and all, but how about a link.

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
21. same one I have used hundreds of times now (probably)
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:01 PM
Nov 2012

not up to date, but probably better than it would be now. Since the rich keep getting richer, the "Original Obama plan" probably favors the rich more now than it did in 2011, or 2008. http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxcompromise2010.pdf

As I said, in 2008, I was secretly hoping that the Democratic Congress would ask for more.

It sorta burns me up, that this is our BEST case scenario. That even if we "win" what we will win is a tax cut that largely favors the rich.

Somebody, (besides ME, that is) needs to be SCREAMING and demanding a lower limit. Demand $50,000 and settle for $120,000. That would still suck, but it would be twice as good as $250,000.

redqueen

(115,186 posts)
23. The OP implies the cuts for anyone above $250k are over...this compromise is obsolete, perhaps?
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:04 PM
Nov 2012

I'm on my phone so a pdf isn't so helpful but thanks.

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
42. I never did think it was a good compromise
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:14 PM
Nov 2012

and that was before I got the numbers from CTJ. Seeing the numbers kinda makes me furious about it.

I kinda thought it was acceptable, a necessary evil to prevent McCain from winning, but I also always hoped that a Democratic Congress would push that limit lower.

Given Obama's track record, I guess we will be lucky if the end result is $250,000. But I am still a lone voice pleading with people to ask for more. To not be happy with what is in actuality a very, very bad compromise.

Which will probably help fuel that talking point. If Obama stands firm, they will say he doesn't compromise. Well, Pelosi or Reid or Sanders or Baldwin or the Progressive Caucus or the CBC should be on the other side (with me, since I appear to be leading the charge) pointing out our disgust with $250,000. That $250,000 is already a compromise that we HATE. Hate it as much as Republicans do, but for different reasons.

Because the RWNM is gearing up to pound Obama for daring to stand firm instead of "reaching out to the other side". Well goddamit, giving them 73% is already MORE than half. Far more than half. That's how far he is already reaching out.

LoisB

(13,025 posts)
31. My understanding:
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:22 PM
Nov 2012

The tax cuts are on income up to $250k. So whether you make $10k or $1m, you get a cut on everything up to that amount. $250,001 - you pay higher on the $1.00; $1,000,000, you pay higher on $750,000.00.

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
40. My point is
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:03 PM
Nov 2012

that people making over $250,000 are still getting huge benefits from this plan.

80% of this country makes less than $88,000 a year. So the people getting the benefits of those tax cuts from $88,000 to $250,000 are people in the top 20% including the top 1% which still gets to keep $40 billion a year in tax cuts.

Consider this. The Bush tax cuts expire automatically - all of them, for all incomes.

Now pass that bill that Obama wants to pass - the 73% of the Bush tax cuts bill. That bill is heavily favorable to the rich. The top 5% get $80 billion in tax cuts, and the bottom 20% get $14 billion.

How the fuck is THAT acceptable to even a conservadem, much less to a progressive? Republicans are all over the media, demanding that the $250,000 limit be raised - to infinity and beyond. Well progressives should be somewhere, at least on DU, insisting that the $250,000 limit be lowered. Instead we are given a shit sandwich and we cheer like it is really chocolate ice cream. It's NOT.

So where are the progressive voices calling for the $250,000 to be lowered? Rachel? LarryO? Colbert? Stewart?

Oh wait, all those people make way more than $250,000 a year. They are NOT on my side in this battle. Senator Baldwin? Lame duck Kucinich? McFly? Anybody? DU?

 

ChillZilla

(56 posts)
46. Considering that the top 20% PAY about 95% of taxes
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:44 PM
Nov 2012

they are going to get a larger percentage of any tax break by default. What's your solution? That people making less than 250k pay NO taxes at all and make the top 20% pay 100% of the tax burden?

"The top 5% get $80 billion in tax cuts, and the bottom 20% get $14 billion." Uh, yeah. What's 100% of zero? Zero.

kentuck

(115,406 posts)
51. That statistic means absolutely nothing.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:02 PM
Nov 2012

If you lower tax rates, this same group could pay 98% of the taxes and the revenues received could still be billions less. Just like when Romney said he could cut rates by 20% and the wealthy would still be paying 60% of total taxes. Never mind that there might be a huge revenue shortfall and huge deficit...

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
54. oh, thank you so much for the Republican talking point.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:10 PM
Nov 2012

First of all, it is Federal Income Taxes, not just taxes that the top 20% pay so much of.

In the second place, the bottom 50% still managed to pay $32.3 billion in Federal Income Taxes in 2007 (and that is AFTER the $14 billion in tax cuts). Since their/our total income was $1.08 trillion we also paid $82.6 billion in FICA taxes, and our employers paid another $82.6 billion in FICA taxes in our name.

There are tons of tax plans that would benefit the bottom 50% as much or more than the top 20%. What if the standard deduction was increased by $4,000? That would help taxpayers at the bottom and do very little for those at the top, because most of those people itemize their deductions.

Consider the making work pay credit, again described by Citizens for Tax Justice. http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxcompromise2010.pdf
12.8% of that went to the bottom 20% and a mere 1.4% went to the top 5%.

So the statement that "the top 20% is going to get a larger percentage of any tax break by default" is a LIE promoted by a lot of super-rich people like Limbaugh and Hannity more than happy to rake in their lion's share at the expense of the rest of us.

As for my solution, actually we might perhaps be on the same side. Obama-types and many DUers think that the revenue shortfall can be closed by simply increasing taxes on people making more than $250,000 or even the top 1% or the top .1%. Whereas I think that the rich people making between $70,000 and $250,000 can pay a little bit extra in taxes even if that group does include a bunch of latte-sipping liberals who deny loudly how rich they are. And the sad truth is that many in that privileged group don't give any more of a crap about the bottom 50% than Boehner does, and they pretty much own the Democratic party.

theKed

(1,235 posts)
14. The Washington Post and Salon
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:46 PM
Nov 2012

both have blurbs about it, but it's just the same one sentence, sourced from AP.

Gregorian

(23,867 posts)
16. One thread says it's conditional, but this one says it's over. I'm a bit confused.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:49 PM
Nov 2012

I guess the AP has it from the source. This is good, if iso.

IllinoisBirdWatcher

(2,316 posts)
18. NOT breaking. Repeat of oft repeated position upon which we all just voted.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:59 PM
Nov 2012

Perhaps this is Breaking News to repugnants who have watched nothing but faux noise.

However, anyone who has watched or read any real news for the past six months knows this.

Maybe repugs are just surprised to find an adult who can keep the same position that long.

JNelson6563

(28,151 posts)
19. Perfect.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:00 PM
Nov 2012

I see a few DUers back to their old tricks, hinting that the President will do evil things because he said the word "compromise".

How sad the election is over and we have to tolerate these right wing tactics at DU again.

Julie

 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
26. Good, but we really need to RAISE taxes dramatically on the 6 Waltons who own 40% of America's wealt
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:08 PM
Nov 2012

wealth, and others like them.

Not just prevent tax cuts....


Bring back the tax rates of the greatest generation and we eliminate the debt and deficit.

 

toby jo

(1,269 posts)
32. Sometimes, when I'm with nothing but republicans
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:25 PM
Nov 2012

I'll tell them I'm an Eisenhower Republican. That stops them cold. Then I tell them that the highest rates under Ike were 90%. That he was paying off the war debt. That he oversaw the greatest expansion of the middle class in our history. (Hey, in this regard, we're all like Ike)

It works like a charm. It really gets them to visualize all the right wing turns that party has made for 40 years.

They never get around to the fact that I wasn't born then, nor do I get into the fact that I wouldn't have voted for him because of his social policies, of which I know nothing, just assume they were most likely too slow for my blood which runs progressive.

They say even Reagan woudn't fit into today's right-wing nut party.

But good for O, hope he keeps on for 4 years with at least this much focus.

cate94

(3,102 posts)
52. Hope you don't mind
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:03 PM
Nov 2012

but I stole a large chunk of this to respond to a facebook posting.
The person was bitching that $250,000 wasn't really wealthy. I think the whole 90 percent under Ike might get her to quit whining...

kentuck

(115,406 posts)
30. If Senator Reid throws it in the trash can?
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:19 PM
Nov 2012

It doesn't make it to the President's desk to be signed. There is nothing here to debate.

Leopolds Ghost

(12,875 posts)
62. Why can't they?
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 09:56 PM
Nov 2012

I'm just sayin'... many of the professed liberals I meet in real life buy into the media line that the fiscal cliff will happen if the bush tax cuts expire, that the "massive tax increase" entailed is what constitutes the fiscal cliff and that the across the board spending increases are somehow inextricably linked to that.

Leopolds Ghost

(12,875 posts)
68. How do you convince people who get all their "liberal" news from NPR?
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:33 AM
Nov 2012

I.e. most remaining liberals and lefties (those who are not extremely plugged into Internet activist blogs)

If you listen to NPR or corpmedia the drumbeat is "nothing makes sense unless you're willing to do half measures. The problem is caused by people who want ALL the Bush tax cuts to expire. these people are known as extremists because they're not able to understand that doing a controversial policy halfway is always preferable. always meet the fascists in the middle"

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
75. I was one of the people who was OK with it for the unemployment extension.
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:25 PM
Nov 2012

And I have since admitted it was a shitty deal. Would I still have supported it? Yeah, probably, no doubt. Unemployment benefits were necessary at that time. The SNAP build out was highly important, still needed to this day.

However, the economy is not in the state that it was back then, so as a "halfway measure" it simply isn't necessary, it would be an epic fail. One reason I voted for Obama was he assured us he would let the Bush tax cuts expire. It is the most important reason, for me, really.

If he fucks this up I will be really pissed.

Anyway, to answer your question, I do think that there are legitimate reasons to do the compromise and the halfway measures. I don't think that such reasons exist now, and I can't be sure how to convince people of this, except by pointing out the facts (such as the CBO report, etc). The Republicans do not want it reported that the Bush tax cuts do not grow the economy at all and that letting them expire has little effect on the future growth of the economy (and furthermore that we pay billions in interest alone).

Leopolds Ghost

(12,875 posts)
78. Compromise is great when people know how to haggle and find a sticking point
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:19 PM
Nov 2012

If there's no sticking point and a constantly moving target (constantly rightward-moving) then it's a problem...

 

HopeHoops

(47,675 posts)
72. The Dems in the Senate will stand firmly on an Obama veto of any sort. They've got the power.
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:47 AM
Nov 2012

erpowers

(9,445 posts)
36. Obama Will Get Tax Increase
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:52 PM
Nov 2012

I think President Obama will get the tax increase on the wealthy. Since this is a strong statement the House Republicans may give in on the tax increase.

kentuck

(115,406 posts)
37. Don't stand your ground, Mr President.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:59 PM
Nov 2012

Do what rational Democrats prefer - fold like a cheap suit.

It's not like people expected anything from a second term. Save us all the hassle and surrender everything to Boehner and the Repubs. We know nothing can get done without compromise. Show them all how to compromise, Mr President.

spanone

(141,602 posts)
39. Boehner Digs In on Opposition to Tax Hikes for Wealthy...FUCK THIS GUY!!
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:02 PM
Nov 2012

elections have consequences

 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
41. It is a bullshit statement, people
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:11 PM
Nov 2012

The top marginal tax rate make no difference whatsoever because none of the millionaires pay that. What they do is:

1) Shelter most of their income entirely from taxes, through offshore havens and/or complex corporate structures

2) Show some of their income as dividends, which is currently a special 15% rate for billionaires, but was the ordinary income rate before the bush cuts

3) Use loopholes such as carried interest to launder other income as capital gains, again getting the special billionaire's rate of 15%, which was 20% before Bush's cuts.

Obama is poised to sell us out again. Show me some action on the real billionaire scam and then we can talk. If you just go by the public statements, Boehner is actually closer to dealing with the real problem than Obama is.

Puzzledtraveller

(5,937 posts)
44. After listening to his speech I feel you may be right.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:20 PM
Nov 2012

As my question in this thread, it's left me scratching my head. $250k'ers or millionaires and billionaries, which is it?

 

BlueStreak

(8,377 posts)
50. It didn't take him long to start the hustle
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:00 PM
Nov 2012

I'll keep an open mind, but it is not heading in a good direction at this point.

LovingA2andMI

(7,006 posts)
58. Agree with this!!
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:55 PM
Nov 2012

My God. It seems that for some, President Obama is suppose to bend over to all of their demands. No way...$250K, make the lime $100K of $50K or worst $25K. WTH ever! Look President Obama is the leader of ALL Americans, whether they want him to be or not. With such, the 250K limit makes all kind of since.

Take two individuals married making $125K each. Now that is a lot of money to most individuals but with increased income, comes increased bills. Now still, this couple probably has a year or two rainy day fund BUT if one of both lost their jobs...they would be in just as much crapola that the married couple making $100K (i.e. $50K each) because of the lifestyle they were accustomed too.

So why not negotiate but be FIRM like President Obama is doing, the limit is NOT going above $250K. Makes perfect sense to me. Going to far to alienate folks that are at best upper middle class because of their income will have the Democrats falling apart like the Republicans are right now.

politicasista

(14,128 posts)
59. Like another DUer said after the 08 election
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:45 PM
Nov 2012

Win the election and let the circular firing squad resume. (Paraphrasing)

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
65. It's a step. Until we can close the loopholes.
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 01:37 AM
Nov 2012

And the Republicans won't let us close the loopholes in the 113th congress.

Puzzledtraveller

(5,937 posts)
43. Question, please help me here.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:17 PM
Nov 2012

Help me out here, for some reason I hadnt thought this or just took it for granted. When we talk about the 1%, and the 2% as I listened to the presidents speech today he referenced the 98%, so we say 98% and 2%, yet, 1% are millionaires and billionaries, surely people making 250k arent even in the 1%, or the 2%, am I right? I know it's a quarter of a million, yet even many here have said that a small family owned business can easily fit in that bracket yet live nowhere near like a quater millionaire. I guess I am asking, who is he referring to when he says we need to raise taxes on the higest earners, 250k'ers, or millionaires and billionaires. Honest question.

ailsagirl

(24,287 posts)
57. He's always had it-- it's just that with being President, there was a bit of a learning curve
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:34 PM
Nov 2012


limpyhobbler

(8,244 posts)
53. This is a scam on the American people. Obama is dealing with the Devil.
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:05 PM
Nov 2012

Do people realize they are open to cutting social security, medicare or medicaid in exchange for Boehner agreeing to let these tax cuts expire.

What a scam.

All that has to happen for the tax cuts to expire is to do nothing.

Once we cut the safety net programs the cuts will stay with us for generations. But the tax cuts for millionaires can be reinstated at any time.

It's a big scam and it's really sad to see liberals being led down this path by a President they apparently trust for some reason.

ailsagirl

(24,287 posts)
56. The RICH must be so ANGRY at KKKarl Rove!!!!!!!!
Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:31 PM
Nov 2012

BWA-HA-HA-HAH!!!!!

Now this I can comfortably gloat over!!




madokie

(51,076 posts)
71. We gave the President a mandate and looks like he knows that
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:25 AM
Nov 2012

As I heard him say this election proves without a doubt that the majority of Americans like what he is trying to do.
Once we get past the racist, bigoted assholes our country will be much stronger with much better race relations due to the fact we have an all loving person at the helm.

doc03

(39,085 posts)
77. Something everyone seems to overlook everyones tax is going
Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:04 PM
Nov 2012

up January 1, the SS tax cut also expires. I don't care either I think it was BAD idea in the first place.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»BREAKING: White House: Ob...