A very tough decision for Barack Obama...

[kentuck]

He says is for extending the Bush taxcuts for the middle-class. But he thinks, as does his Treasury Secretary, that the taxcuts for the wealthy should be allowed to expire. How strongly does he believe this?

The Republicans are going to push him against the wall on this issue. Either he signs the bill to extend the taxcuts for everyone or he will be portrayed as "raising taxes on the middle-class" and all America. Let him try and run on that in 2012.

The President is not totally unarmed in this argument. He still has his veto. But will he use it?

So far, he has not shown his hand. He has been very, very cautious thus far. Some in his Party are very nervous. They have no idea what to do. They are looking for some leadership from somewhere. Anywhere. And he saga continues...

[Yupster]

1. Let them all expire

When Bush passed them in the first place the middle class got so little they didn't even notice them.

[HughMoran]

4. That's the stupid part - I never noticed the tax cuts they're talking about

Tax Cut = Fraud

It should be a bumper sticker on every liberals car in America.

[hugo_from_TN]

36. I sure as heck notice the $1000 child tax credit.

[HughMoran]

41. The child tax credit was enacted as part of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997.

Not part of the Tax Cut for the Rich that Republican Bush implemented.

[TBF]

39. I noticed that we got a refund last year -

which frankly surprised me at our income level.

[HughMoran]

42. Taxes = withholding - taxes owed

There are lots of reasons why you may have received a refund - some may be related to withholding variations, some could have been related to tax law changes. Tax law changes rarely amount to more than a few hundred dollars for low-middle income families. I'm happy that someone "at your income level" may have received a cut. Surprising to hear this after reading some of your socialist writings bashing Obama.

[TBF]

44. Yes, maybe it's the withholding -

that actually could've been the difference (we paid in the past 5 yrs prior).

I don't know about "bashing", but definitely I'd like to see a system other than capitalism. On a personal level we have a decent income right now, as long as we stay employed, but no wealth (don't even own a home actually). Many out there (particularly republicans) seem to equate income with wealth, and often think they are wealthier than they are. I have much more in common with someone who is homeless than someone who is a millionaire. Most of us do, whether we admit it or not.

[chimpymustgo]

2. It should not be a tough decision. I swear, if he caves on this, it's OVER.

This should be our winning play. Sickening.

[kentuck]

3. It's a test of leadership.

imo...

[Marr]

9. I think Team Obama is trying to maneuver itself into a 'compromising position'.

I'm expecting them to either kick the issue down the road, and let a Republican Congress make the tax cuts for the wealthy permanent while saying, "what could we do?", or they'll make the wealthys' tax cuts permanent by pretending it was that or nothing.

It seems to me that, if Team Obama really wanted to let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire and lower taxes for the middle class, they'd just let them all expire and then push a separate tax cut for the middle class. This entire approach makes me think they want to maintain the cuts for the wealthy, and are just maneuvering themselves into a position from which they can claim they had to compromise.

[kentuck]

20. I hope you are wrong...

But if the past is any indication, you may be right on target.

How can the Democratic Party, the Party of the People, fold on an issue that gives more taxcuts to millionaires? What do they stand for?? And they wonder why there is no "enthusiasm"??

[chimpymustgo]

23. The usual pattern. Talk tough, then capitulate. Tell your base to fuck off.

[TBF]

37. That is my guess as well -

this wouldn't even be a discussion if he were going to let them expire. It's just like everything else he's been doing the past two years - pretend to have a progressive position and then capitulate under pressure.

[Warpy]

5. This is the one issue he needs to dig his heels in and threaten a veto

and then actually carry one out if the conservatives try to force a continuation of the Permanent Income Gap* tax cuts. He also needs to address the nation briefly in prime time to defend the veto. Quite simply put, the PIG cut will bankrupt this country and make it certain that no other jobs recovery measures will ever be instituted.

The country will be with him and they will know where to place the blame, IMO.

*Gleefully stolen from a poster last night. Imitation might be the highest form of flattery, but naked theft is up there, too.

[earthside]

6. Tough?

You've got to be kidding.

This is the easiest decision for Pres. Obama.

He's for the working class or he's afraid of the Repuglicans.

He stands with extending the middle class cuts and vetoes anything with that extends the Bush cuts for the wealthy -- or he caves, gives-in to the teabaggers and corporatists.

Obama leads or falls ... pretty simple.

[Enthusiast]

7. Let them expire,all of them.

Then introduce a bill to reduce middle class taxes only. Let the Republicans filibuster that one.

[kentuck]

8. That seems so logical...

doesn't it? How do our Congressmen think??

[BrklynLiberal]

35. Seems so logical. Why didn't anyone on the White House staff or Dem in Congress think of that??

[Uzybone]

10. The Obama admin has been very clear on this one

selective listeners will continue to say otherwise.

[kentuck]

11. Very clear?

Then why are so many folks still confused about it?? They have subtly intimated.

[Uzybone]

15. because they have selective hearing

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/us/politics/08obama.html


President Obama on Wednesday will make clear that he opposes any compromise that would extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy beyond this year,

[kentuck]

17. So Democrats should take him at his word, right?

And if he does something different, what then?

[Uzybone]

18. no one should be taken at their word alone

the sad part is that a lot of scummy democrats (blue dogs) want all the tax cuts to remain in place. The issue here is congress, the President has been clear on what he wants to do.

You can sit and worry about Obama or you can make your concerns known to Congress. After all they control the purse strings.

[Arkana]

26. Because they've chosen to be.

I don't know how many times Obama and his people have to say "NO TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH" before you people listen.

[kentuck]

28. people listen but...

they don't believe. Why??

[Marr]

12. They were very clear on the "public option", too.

And all the while, they were maneuvering themselves into a position from which they could say it had to be dropped.


I'll watch what they *do*, not what they *say*, thanks.

[Uzybone]

16. ok

[chimpymustgo]

25. Time after time.

[txlibdem]

43. Do as I say, not as I do

Or, as I saw in this commercial about a narcissistic bankster who says, "Trust me!"

Thanks to President Obama, the following is now true of Democratic presidents: past performance is no guarantee of future results.

[Nite Owl]

19. He has refused to even use

the word veto. It makes him look powerless. He said he didn't think it would be needed so what will he do if they want those upper class tax cuts? No one knows, that isn't clear.

[COLGATE4]

13. A clip on today's Bartcop says it best about what to expect:

Subject: I met a genie who would grant me one wish


"I want to live forever," I said.

"Sorry" said the genie, "I'm not allowed to grant wishes like that!"

"Fine," I said, "I want to die after the Democrats grow some balls!"

"You crafty bastard," said the genie.


Thanks to Fgbash

[kentuck]

14. Sounds like the Democrats are walking on thin ice...?

If they don't play this right, they could lose a big part of their base?

[sofa king]

21. No, it's a clever maneuver, actually.

The President can say whatever he wants, he's only going to have a rubber stamp at the end of the process. The clever part is that the Senate has already arranged for a vote to be taken in favor of extending the tax cuts for "everyone else," which the Republicans will have to vote for, and then they have to vote in favor of extending the cut for the remaining 3%, which won't pass.

The GOP doesn't get to hold the middle class hostage as they planned, and won't gain any new converts for doing the bidding of their 3% masters. The Democrats risk nothing; the Republicans have to risk all to defend their vanishingly small but financially essential "base" on the eve of an election in which the GOP is already proving itself wildly divergent from most voters. They can potentially piss off 97% of the voters by holding up the procedure.

Even though the traditional mid-term reaction against the President's party still seems to be in effect, there is a whole lot of momentum building up for the Democrats, and these votes--or non-votes--are going to be a big part of it.

[kentuck]

22. Under that scenario...

They could pass the middle-class tax cut separate from the taxcuts for the wealthy.

Then they could take a vote on the 3% for the millionaires. You say, "then they have to vote in favor of extending the cut for the remaining 3%, which won't pass." I'm not so sure it wouldn't pass??

But if it did, couldn't the President veto it?

[sofa king]

24. Yes, the President could veto it.

But there's no reason for the President to roll his party under the bus by vetoing it before election day. It's highly unlikely the process will reach that point by early November, anyway.

[ProSense]

27. "The President is not totally unarmed in this argument"?

The GOP are losing this argument. What is the fascination with creating a fairy tale that Democrats are losing this argument?

[kentuck]

29. the Democrats are winning this argument???

they should be, I would agree. But, somehow, it doesn't feel that way.

[ProSense]

30. It may not feel that way to you, but

it's reality.

[tritsofme]

32. dupe

[tritsofme]

33. 38 House Democrats have already come out in support of extending the tax cuts for the rich

Can Pelosi even win a vote on the issue?

If this is winning, I'd hate to see losing.

[tritsofme]

31. He has so far declined to and doesn't appear likely to issue a veto threat.

That is Washingtonspeak for saying he will sign whatever appears on his desk. I think the absence of a veto threat hurts the credibility of his argument, not only with the public, but with individual members of Congress in tough races that are looking for signs of which way the wind is blowing.

[BrklynLiberal]

34. Tough decisions are part and parcel fo being President of the United States.

This is EXACTLY what those who voted for him expect him to do..and he would be well-advised to stay on the side of those that "brought him to the party."

[TBF]

38. Tried to rec this, but will give it a kick at least -

:kick:

[spanone]

40. it's easy. expire for those over $250,000 as he's already proposed and stick to it