President Obama calls for compromise, won't budge on tax cuts

[cal04]

Source: The Hill


Days after Democrats received a self-described "shellacking" at the polls, President Obama called for an end to campaigning and an embrace of compromise.

But he signaled no willingness to bend on the first challenge likely to face him from a Republican House as he advocated the permanent extension of Bush-era tax cuts for families making less than $250,000 a year despite the GOP's resolve to extend the tax cuts for all income brackets.

In his weekly address Saturday, Obama said that Democrats and Republicans not only agree on middle-class tax cuts but the need to rein in spending, and used this to try to drive his position on the tax cuts.

"At a time when we are going to ask folks across the board to make such difficult sacrifices, I don’t see how we can afford to borrow an additional $700 billion from other countries to make all the Bush tax cuts permanent, even for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans," the president said. "We’d be digging ourselves into an even deeper fiscal hole and passing the burden on to our children."


Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/127983-obama-calls-for-compromise-wont-budge-on-tax-cuts

[Seedersandleechers]

1. Yes

Good to hear this especially after so much bad news lately.

[liberalmike27]

28. Even Better, The Tax cuts under Reconciliation Will Expire

So Democrats, should just craft the tax cut bill to the lower classes they desire, and put it up for a very loud and present vote. If the republicans vote against tax cuts for the lower classes, it will firm up support for them if republicans vote against it.

Damn, if Dems don't do this, they just don't have any natural savvy at all.

[Frank Booth]

36. Right, I've seen this idea being kicked around for a while, and it sounds great.

Has anyone come up with a reason why it can't be done?

If it does work, this would have been great politics back in say, September. But it should still be done before the end of the current term.

[liberalmike27]

52. I know, I know

It might work, it shows backbone which they seem to lack, and it makes the democrats look good. They seem to not want to do any of these things.

Plus there is that ratchet thing, where we all move to the right, the democrats follow, then republicans move more to the right, the democrats follow. This would actually represent an untightening back to the left a bit, which isn't party of what the two major parties have been doing since 1980 especially, but we could choose to go back to 1964 if we're just talking tax policy.

Of course some say the kennedy Johnson tax cuts knocked out some deductions, but I'm not so sure of that. From the moment we knocked that percentage of marginal tax cuts back from 91 to 74, I think we've declined as a nation. The further down the percentage has moved, the worse off we've become.

[Cosmocat]

40. The ship has all but sailed on that ...

they SHOULD have done this two months ago ... For the reasons you noted, beyond it simply being the right gosh darn thing to do ...

BUT, if they don't do it now, not a stinking change the house R leadership allows anything other than a bill that has the upper tax cuts attached to it ...

I agree with most that Nancy Pelosi did a pretty good job, but this was a dropped ball ...

[liberalmike27]

55. No

I've been floating a theory for a while now that the democrats didn't want to win. It's embarassing to them to have 60, or 59 votes. Truth is, they didn't have 60 for very long, with Franken's slow count, and Kennedy dying 1.5 months after Franken was finally sworn in. That's another lie endlessly repeated by both the conservative, and the slightly less conservative corporate media.

Yep, now that they are off the hook, they no longer have to actually try to pass "liberal" legislation.

I don't think they ever expected Howard Dean's influence and stewardship to work so well. What happened? It just made them look bad--I guess it's a problem with having all millionaires in the Senate, and mostly in the House.

Not sure where that leaves us, but I just try to hold on to a little hope. Seems in this country you've got to have an Eugene Debs Socialist thrust to finally get our politicians to actually do anything to make the lives of workers better.

[Cosmocat]

98. My sense was this was on squeemish house blue dogs ...

I agree that the senate would have spiked it, but Pelosi was good about knowing her counts, and I think she WANTED to get this up, but didn't have the votes ... I guess her rationale was if it died on a House floor vote, it would have given the Rs fuel to say even the democrats did not want a stand alone bill without the top rates ...

House dems got cleaned out anyways, they probably should have gone out in a blaze of glory, but I can see the weakness allowing them to not want to throwmore kerosene on themselves (in their minds, choosing to not just flat out run on progressive ideas)going into the election ...

[DallasNE]

42. The Problem Democrats Faced With Doing This Before The Election

Was that they couldn't bring it up for a vote because of a Republican filibuster. Republicans wanted this delayed to the lame duck session for the very reason you cite. Because the Bush tax cuts expire 12/31 the Republicans will have to compromise so Obama has the upper hand for once.

Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) is floating an idea to change the filibuster rule at the start of business for the new Senate session. Senate rules allow for a simple 51 vote majority at the start of each session to change the rules. Years ago it took 67 Senators to stop a filibuster but someone actually had to be constantly speaking for it to remain in effect so it was seldom used except to block civil rights legislation by the Segregationist block of mostly southern Democrats.

[babylonsister]

2. Stand firm, Mr. President! nt

[coti]

126. Make sure you're reading the fine print there- "permanent." nt

[snot]

154. sorry, but cd you make this clearer--are you saying he might agree

to extend the cuts for the rich temporarily?

Tragically, that seems only too plausible.

[coti]

157. YES. In fact, I'd say it's downright likely that he'll agree to temporary extensions of the top 2%

cuts, given what he said here. He left that possibility open to them deliberately.

[Fruittree]

3. Good for him!! Let's hope others will back him up...

[Scuba]

4. Stand tall and firm. Don't even bend on this one. Call their bluff. Them call them out. n/t

[BeyondGeography]

5. This issue is a gift for our side...glad he's taking advantage

[nradisic]

6. The backbone is finally in place?

I hope he keeps his word....let the Republicans eat crow, shut down the Government and throw fits all fucking day....No more tax cuts that will exasperate the economic situation and add to the deficit...

[doc03]

7. And they want the unemployment extension payed for! n/t

[iamjoy]

8. Silly Idea...

The Republicans want to pay for the tax cuts by reducing spending - and not on military expenditures either. IF the Republicans do balance the budget (rather than just whining about deficits) it will be on the backs of working Americans

[perdita9]

11. Unemployment extension

It was in my paper today -- the GOP will only agree to extend unemployment benefits (5-6 billion dollars) if cuts are made from other areas. They didn't say what -- probably heating assistance for the poor or something like that.

[Hawkowl]

151. Cut defense "contractors"

Easy enough to take it out of Haliburton and Blackwater's pork barrel. Or take it out of the new joint fighter aircraft boondoggle.

[jeff47]

123. Here's the problem

The Republicans CAN'T balance the budget on the backs of working Americans. The tax cuts they want are too expensive. They'd have to also cut defense, SS or Medicare.

Despite the noise of the Tea Party, all three of those are deeply unpopular among the electorate, especially the older voters that the Republicans desperately need. If you remember from all the advertising a week ago, the Republicans were hammering the Democrats for 'cutting Medicare'.

The R's are actually in quite a pickle. They have three constituencies with mutually exclusive demands (older voters, their rich benefactors and the tea party). Making any one of those three happy will require alienating the other two. That's the big reason the Republicans keep refusing to provide any detail on their plans.

[perdita9]

9. We Need to Have His Back On This

Obama is only one man. The liberal community needs to come together and show the nation that we back his position on tax cuts.

Think about what you can do. Can DU start an on-line petition? Can you write letters to your local paper, your elected officials?

The Right Wing Scream Machine -- heck, we know what they're going to do. If you want Obama to stand firm, we're all going to have to work together to make our voices heard.

[TheEuclideanOne]

117. No, he doesn't listen to DU.

If he did, we would have gained 30 seats.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

10. Let's HOPE this stands!

[BlueCaliDem]

12. Dare we hope the President is finally waking up and this is the first signal?

Capitulation is for cowards, and I've grown more and more disenchanted with the President over the past year although I defend him against any rightwinger who tries to criticize him.

I voted for President Obama, knowing full well he wasn't as progressive as I am. But I didn't expect him to capitulate so many times, especially after NoLips McConnell came out swinging, stating the primary goal for the Republicans was "to make Obama a one-term President".

I hope his standing firm against preposterous tax cuts for the uber-rich in this country is the sign we've been looking for, that he's taking the kid-gloves off and is going bare-knuckled.

I hope ... I hope ... I hope ...

[countrydad58]

35. Dont count on it.

I to voted for the man,but just about on every issue,he backtracks & capitulates on.

[BlueCaliDem]

44. I still hold out hope, though, especially after

the sound "shellacking" the Democratic party suffered in the last election. I don't think we can afford to lose faith in President Obama.

Whether you like it or not, he's all who stands between fascism and democracy in this country.

[Beartracks]

62. Love the Coco-Keith poster! n/t

[BlueCaliDem]

90. Thanks! Although I've tweaked it a little, it isn't mine originally.

It's Salviati's.

He gives permission to use it.

You can find it here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9495942&mesg_id=9496081

[lumberjack_jeff]

63. Hope and change became hope FOR change.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results, but it's a strong indicator.

[BlueCaliDem]

89. Past performance can be a strong indicator, but not necessarily so.

Fact remains, that if President Obama doesn't make a 180 degree change, and come out swinging for Democratic ideals, the Democratic Party will be painfully defeated in 2012, and we'll suffer under another Repub WH and Congress for god knows how long.

Although my first reaction is to place all the blame on Rethuglicans, fact remains, we know they're idiots and bullies. They've proven that beyond any doubt, but it seems that historically, it's up to the Democrats to educate them {and the lazy American people}, and if they don't, it's over for us.

The kid gloves have to come off NOW. After last election, they have no choice unless they want to be the minority party for decades to come.

Just my honest opinion.

[polichick]

13. Hang tough, Mr. President - and let the assholes hang themselves. nt

[BlueMTexpat]

14. I congratulate President Obama for standing firm on this.

And no Dem had better back down on it!

[sulphurdunn]

16. There are usually just enough Democrats

willing to sell out. Isn't that strange?

[Windy]

39. He has a veto pen.... nt

[Democat]

17. Congratulate him on saying he will stand firm...

We'll see what happens when words are turned into action.

[BillH76]

91. Why should we "congratulate him"?

This is what he was elected to do.

[Joe Chi Minh]

114. Weariness? Continual disappointments, I expect, are guaranteed in the end

to make everyone a little querulous and grateful for small mercies. When Jeff offers a cigarette, after Mutt's been at work on a person, I expect if matey is not familiar with the routine, he might squeak a little word of gratitude through his swollen lips. It's only a very, very broad metaphor, obviously.

[BlueMTexpat]

120. I'm hoping that positive reinforcement may help.

Thus the congratulations ... and yes, I do prefer actions to words.

But he can't stand alone.

[highplainsdem]

15. Good for him!

[nevergiveup]

18. Unfortunately there are a handful of Democratic Senators

who will stab him in the back on this one including Nelson and that whoosie senator from North Dakota. I hope the president holds firm but it is possible he will be put in a no-win political position especially without full support from Democratic Senators. I have my fingers crossed but don't have a lot of hope on this one.

[jeff47]

125. Not really

The odd thing about this situation is Obama _doesn't_ need a bill to pass. The tax cuts can just expire as scheduled and he moves on with his day.

The R's need a bill to pass. They need to convince Obama to sign it, and they need to convince the progressives in the Senate to not block it. While the conservative democrats are not going to be any help, they're also not in a position to harm.

[soryang]

19. Not much time before new years day

"If Congress doesn’t act by New Year’s Eve, middle-class families will see their taxes go up starting on New Year’s Day," he warned.

[disndat]

20. An Obama checkmate?

Let's hope so. The Tea Party and Republi-can'ts campaigned and won elections on their version of "fiscal responsiblility," now let them eat it.

[area51]

21. Pssst, Obama:

Compromise with the republinazis is what got you into this mess. When people are presented with DINOs and republicans, they'll vote for republicans every time.

[grahamhgreen]

22. He should double down like Mcconnell and increase taxes on the ultra rich to pre- Reagan levels, but

He'll most likely cave in to the nice Republicans

[earthside]

23. Talk is cheap.

My prediction is still that all the Bush tax cuts will be extended for two more years.

That's what the Congress will pass and Pres. Obama will sign it.

[madokie]

24. All I can say is if you cave on this one buddy I'm gone

[lonestarnot]

32. Yeppers. Gone!

[hay rick]

34. I'm already gone.

But if I wasn't, a cave to the "temporary extension" would put me out the door.

[HughBeaumont]

56. I'd say if the cave for 250k and above happens, that's it for me too.

The plutocracy will officially no longer be lurking behind a curtain for Joe Nosepicker, but rather exposed in all it's ugly nudity.

[sueh]

25. Yes, Mr President. Keep shouting out how the Bush tax cuts are "paid for"

at every opportunity. And that goes for all Democrats who make appearance on TV. And say it over and over and over. Time for people who vote for Republicans to learn that they are supporting a ballooning debt to make the top 2% even richer.

[truthisfreedom]

26. He's right. And he'll find a way to embarrass the thugs.

[Zambero]

38. A clear message to the Senate MINORITY Leader

If you're serious about deficit reduction, ditch the discredited talking points, do the math and act accordingly. Tax cuts for the middle class and working poor will stimulate the economy and create jobs. Extended to millionaires and billionaires, the tried and true result is a bloated deficit and an increase in the type of global investments that do not serve to stimulate jobs, with the exception of further outsourcing.

[Enrique]

27. read the fine print

he's "standing firm" on a PERMANENT tax cut extension. He says nothing about a temporary extension, which is how the cave would happen. Everyone who's talking about caving is talking about a temporary extension.

[hay rick]

37. Sad but true.

A "temporary" extension has been defined by the media as the new moderate, pragmatic, almost-liberal-almost-conservative position. A NOT PERMANENT extension would qualify as "standing firm."

[spotbird]

53. Damn, for a second I thought Obama learned

something on Tuesday.

The only reason to do this is political, because the Democrats will benefit from the extension in two years. It has absolutely nothing to do with the good of the country. It will be even less feasable to allow them to expire in two years than it is today.

I thought the headline was too good to be true.

[eilen]

94. Obama will lose anyway in 2012

why not stick it to the leisure class and the assholes who shellacked him this year.

This past election proves that no one remembers 2 years ago.

[coti]

122. Right. nt

[Cartoonist]

29. Now we know

the first compromise Obama will make. Or should I say "cave in"? I have no disillusion that the repubs will get everything they want. They are fighters, with the media and corporations at their back. We don't have a chance.

[DirkGently]

30. Well said. Let's stick tom this, Mr. President.

[lonestarnot]

31. I've been waiting to see this! YES!

Hang tough Mr. President! :applause:

[JCMach1]

33. We will see if this position holds...

just call me burned before by this administration...

[JNelson6563]

41. There's been a lot of pearl clutching

for nothing. lolz.

[JitterbugPerfume]

43. If he stands firm on this

he will have the wind at his back . They will challenge him at every turn , but he will have the moral edge.

[Demoiselle]

45. Well FINALLY! A SPINE! Hang in there, Mr. President.

[DailyGrind51]

46. I would rather see my meager tax cut expire than see the top 2% keep one more dime of their's!

[tomg]

48. Absolutely agree. nt

[kath]

92. Agree - said the other day that I would MUCH rather pay a thousand or two more dollars in taxes

(which is what ours would be, tops) than to see the top 2% continue with their ridiculously low top rate.

W's tax cuts for the middle class were really pretty small - as usual, it was the wealthy who made out like bandits.

[Bryn]

47. I am looking for graphic drawing of tax cuts

I saw it once here on DU. Will someone post it again?

[Bryn]

49. I found it!

[subterranean]

50. You mean this one?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/08/the_bush_tax_plan_vs_the_obama.html

[bonzono]

51. Fool me again...

Fool me thirty-six times,
shame on you, Mr. O.
Fool me thirty-seven times,
shame on me, Mr. O.

[spotbird]

54. It only makes matters worse when

he raises hopes and then disappoints. It doesn't make a bit of sense.

[howaboutme]

93. The real secret to success is under promise and over deliver

and under budget and ahead of due date. Washington politicians have the uncanny ability to do just the opposite in every aspect.

I had big hopes that we finally had one of these effective success types in the White House.

[snot]

155. Wow, have you got a list? If so,

cool; and wd you share? I actually find factual info useful, if unfashionable.

[MBS]

57. good for him. n /t

[wisteria]

58. I live it, he is using their words to drive home his point to the American people.

I hope he stands firm on this!!

[LynnTTT]

59. Look for the hidden compromise word

Notice that Obama said "permanent" cuts. He's leaving open the possibility to extend the cuts for , oh, I don't know.. 2 years, 3 years. forever?
I am losing all hope- who do we want to start looking at for 2012?

[mvd]

60. A good sign!

Keep it up and don't back down. If taxes rise for everyone, Obama can pin it on the Repukes.

[emulatorloo]

61. Thanks for posting this. ReC and Kick n/t

[ProudDad]

64. Now where have I heard this before. Oh, Yeah... The "Public Option"

first you must understand that the Democrats are PLANNING on losing the next couple election cycles. UNTIL you understand that, the events to unfold in the next couple years (unless you act to derail them) will make no sense to you.

You don't have to believe us. Just listen to the way the Democrats themselves are talking. Nancy Pelosi concedes that they will likely suffer substantial losses in the House come November, though she still will not admit that they will lose their majority in the next round. Barack Obama says doesn't "know" how his ever more determined push of the universally despised Senate health care scam will play politically. He doesn't know??? Was the loss of the eternally Democratic senate seat in Massachusetts not enough of a wake up call?

....

Their original plan, which we told you about no later than last September (and we can point you on OpEdNews.com to our published article at the time to prove it), was to lull the liberal/progressive base into thinking a "public option" was some kind of mumbling substitute for a single payer reform system (that would have represented REAL change), with the INTENTION of throwing even that option over the side before final passage. We saw it all coming, and we tried to warn you how important it was to keep speaking out to demand better.


For the corporate special interests controlling the whole legislative process (but only in the absence of your voices of course) this was a heads they win, tails the people lose, proposition. By getting the Democrats to squander their mandate and political capital for actual change, by getting them to meekly abandon their professed principles in favor of a bill that would benefit as a bottom line the insurance corporations only, the people en masse would justifiably conclude that the Democrats had completely betrayed them. And the Republicans, who by the tactic of enfeeblement of government in fact just empower the same ultimate corporate agenda, even as disliked as they are themselves, would be swept back into office in the next election. Net result ... reform and change discredited, hopes dashed, defeatism rules, the corporations win again, one grand circular tag team.

...

Now, it would be one thing if Barack Obama and the Democratic party "leadership" were going to the wall for what the PEOPLE want. But they are not. They are bracing to go to the wall for what the corporations want. As perverse as George Bush was, at least he always had his most dedicated and delusional core base on his side when he thumbed his nose at the rest of us. The exact opposite is the case here. Barack Obama is standing in diametric opposition to his own base, and willfully so, displaying all the leadership qualities of a bull in a bull fight.

...

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Democratic-Party-s-Pla-by-thepen-100307-583.html


I don't know about you but I won't get fooled again (of course, I wasn't fooled the first time either.)

So get ready for another hundred billion giveaway to the rich...it's gonna happen!

[and-justice-for-all]

65. Because with the puke plan, 98% of us still lose...

the wealthy 2% need to pay their fare share, they do not deserve a reward just because they are millionaires; their reward is that they are millionaires. If you want to live in a country where you can keep all that you make and never contribute to society, move to Somalia.

[RickFromMN]

66. Is he standing firm against permanent tax cuts or temporary tax cuts for the rich?

I hope he isn't going to allow temporary tax cuts for the rich.

Forgive me Mister President for not trusting you...but just in case.

I hope there are enough Senate Democrats,
willing to filibuster temporary tax cuts for the rich.

[bc3000]

67. Once again he has the right position. Now will he stick with it or give up again?

[defendandprotect]

68. ..Obama signals may compromise on tax cuts

Source: Reuters

..Obama signals may compromise on tax cuts

By Matt Spetalnick Matt Spetalnick – Sat Nov 6, 7:04 am ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama gave his clearest signal yet on Saturday of a possible post-election compromise with resurgent Republicans that could prevent tax rates from rising for any American, even the wealthiest, come January.

Obama, in his first weekly radio address since his Democrats suffered big losses in Tuesday's congressional elections, reasserted that Bush-era tax cuts should be made permanent for the middle class before they expire at year-end.

But while insisting tax cuts for wealthier Americans should not become permanent because of a $700 billion impact on the deficit over the next decade, he left the door open to a temporary extension for higher income levels -- as long as it falls short of costing that much.

"I believe there's room for us to compromise and get it done together," Obama said, previewing his administration's negotiating stance when the current Congress returns later this month for its final session.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_usa_elections_obama

[ProSense]

69. "left the door open to a temporary extension for higher income levels -- as long as it falls short"

Ignoring the editorial assumption, here is what the President actual said (and there is no "as long as" implied)

Weekly Address: President Obama Calls for Compromise and Explains his Priorities on Taxes

WASHINGTON – As Congress prepares to focus on taxes when it returns to work later this month, President Obama called on both parties to work together and focus on the areas where all sides agree. First, the President underscored that middle-class families need permanent tax relief, so Congress should permanently extend tax cuts for all families making less than $250,000 a year – 98 percent of the American people. And second, he noted that, with the nation’s challenging fiscal situation, the country simply cannot afford to borrow another $700 billion on permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

The full audio of the address is HERE. The video can be viewed online at www.whitehouse.gov.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
November 6, 2010

This week, Americans across the country cast their votes and made their voices heard. And your message was clear.

You’re rightly frustrated with the pace of our economic recovery. So am I.

You’re fed up with partisan politics and want results. I do too.

So I congratulate all of this week’s winners – Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. But now, the campaign season is over. And it’s time to focus on our shared responsibilities to work together and deliver those results: speeding up our economic recovery, creating jobs, and strengthening the middle class so that the American Dream feels like it’s back within reach.

That’s why I’ve asked to sit down soon with leaders of both parties so that we can have an extended discussion about what we can do together to move this country forward.

And over the next few weeks, we’re going to have a chance to work together in the brief upcoming session of Congress.

Here’s why this lame duck session is so important. Early in the last decade, President Bush and Congress enacted a series of tax cuts that were designed to expire at the end of this year.

What that means is, if Congress doesn’t act by New Year’s Eve, middle-class families will see their taxes go up starting on New Year’s Day.

But the last thing we should do is raise taxes on middle-class families. For the past decade, they saw their costs rise, their incomes fall, and too many jobs go overseas. They’re the ones bearing the brunt of the recession. They’re the ones having trouble making ends meet. They are the ones who need relief right now.

So something’s got to be done. And I believe there’s room for us to compromise and get it done together.

Let’s start where we agree. All of us want certainty for middle-class Americans. None of us want them to wake up on January 1st with a higher tax bill. That’s why I believe we should permanently extend the Bush tax cuts for all families making less than $250,000 a year. That’s 98 percent of the American people.

We also agree on the need to start cutting spending and bringing down our deficit. That’s going to require everyone to make some tough choices. In fact, if Congress were to implement my proposal to freeze non-security discretionary spending for three years, it would bring this spending down to its lowest level as share of the economy in 50 years.

But at a time when we are going to ask folks across the board to make such difficult sacrifices, I don’t see how we can afford to borrow an additional $700 billion from other countries to make all the Bush tax cuts permanent, even for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. We’d be digging ourselves into an even deeper fiscal hole and passing the burden on to our children.

I recognize that both parties are going to have to work together and compromise to get something done here. But I want to make my priorities clear from the start. One: middle class families need permanent tax relief. And two: I believe we can’t afford to borrow and spend another $700 billion on permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.

There are new public servants in Washington, but we still face the same challenges. And you made it clear that it’s time for results. This a great opportunity to show everyone that we got the message and that we’re willing, in this post-election season, to come together and do what’s best for the country we all love.

Thanks.

[AlbertCat]

75. as long as it falls short of costing that much.

699 billion?

[OnyxCollie]

70. That's our fierce advocate! nt

[MannyGoldstein]

71. 'Peace with Republicans in our time'

Great stuff.

[OHdem10]

72. Elections have consequences: The GOP can get enough

Blue Dogs and Centrist to make themselves the 'majority"
on some issues.

Obam is going to have to play the hand he is dealt.

If he hangs on for Middle Class Taxcuts.

[WhiteTara]

73. fewer blue dogs

they were turned into gopers.

[Windy]

74. Note the AP headline.... totally disjointed from the content of the address

therein lies the major problem with the perception of our president in this country. The corporate owned media who know that many many american's dont read past the headline!

[defendandprotect]

76. "he left the door open to a temporary extension for higher income levels" .....

he left the door open to a temporary extension for higher income levels -- as long as it falls short of costing that much.

Wish you were right ... !!!

At this point, Obama is so busy capitulating he's practically bouncing off the see-saw!!

[tomm2thumbs]

162. yup - the disclaimer makes it all irrelevent - a secret escape hatch

[BrklynLiberal]

77. So, what else is new?

Will that "compromise" entail giving the repukes exactly what they want...?

[Skittles]

148. that's what his compromises ALWAYS mean

he certainly isn't compromising with LIBERALS

[JTFrog]

78. Opposite take on this earlier this morning:

President Obama calls for compromise, won't budge on tax cuts
Source: The Hill

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4603749&mesg_id=4603749

*edit fixed link

[polichick]

80. Really, which is it?! This is ridiculous and shows why he needs to draw clear lines...

...in the sand and quit triangulating.

[niceypoo]

84. He needs to start calling their bluff

Their aim is to destroy, he cannot allow himself to be fooled into helping them.

[polichick]

85. Agreed - he has an opportunity to change the game here. nt

[polichick]

79. So one minute he's standing strong and the next he's caving? WTF?

Why leave room for the media to slant it this way and that - JUST BE BOLD AND CLEAR!

[hughee99]

81. Is this the very same address he said he "won't budge" on tax cuts?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4603749

[Jakes Progress]

82. It is time for compromise -- from republicans.

If that is what the president means, then I support him. If he means that the millionaires who shorted our country should get another free pass, then screw it.

The speech was fine. But he needs to remember that the public has short attention spans. Most companies are paring their tv commercials down to 15 seconds. And that's with music, flashy production, and every gimmick in the book.

If the president wants to say "I will only approve extending the tax cuts for the middle class" That's what he should say. No nuances or details. If he wants to win this his message should be short and honest. "The republicans passed a law that would end the tax cuts for everyone at the end of the year. I want them to extend those cuts for the middle class. It will be the republican law that goes into effect on Jan 1 if they refuse to grant cuts to the middle class without giving 700 million to the rich. I'm asking them to stand up for the middle class."

[niceypoo]

83. He needs to let them all expire

The CBO says letting them all expire alone will balance the budget by 2012. Balancing the budget will bring back confidence that the economy is headed somewhere.

[howaboutme]

86. Realistically who believed that the billionaires

that control the Ds as much as the Rs wouldn't get to keep their income and estate tax cut?

The billionaire banker class and the billionaire CEO class each have tentacles into both Parties. Greed is something that in many cases increases with wealth. The tax cuts for the rich will inevitably lead to cuts in government programs and reductions in opportunities (education etc) for those without wealth.

I heard a report today that Obama would not accept a continuation of a tax cut for the wealthiest. Sadly I'll believe it only when I see it. I remember all the Obama sword rattling that went on about the outrageous Wall Street bonuses that turned out to be all smoke but no fire.

I'm sick of pxssy whipped conciliatory Ds who are afraid of taking stance on anything, only to get their head handed to them because they refused to take a stance. If the tax cuts are made permanent the Rs will then make the debt and deficit the issue in 2012.

This is one Democrat who is planning to change registration to Independent, not because my philosophies are changing but because I don't want politicians thinking they have my vote in the bag. The Parties need to start scrambling for differentiation and that means they need the Independent voters instead of listening to lobbyists.

[ProSense]

87. Obama: Extend middle-class tax cuts, forget borrowing for the rich

Daily Kos: Obama: Extend middle-class tax cuts, forget borrowing for the rich

[Jakes Progress]

88. Sounds good. Let's see it play out this way.

Two years ago, I would have been cheering rhetoric like this. I have become wary. Nice words. But worse than a lie if there is no carry through.

[howaboutme]

95. Mr President you cave on this and Rs will make you eat the deficit in 2012

The right thing to do is to begin requiring those who have done so very well to start reinvesting in the USA by paying for services and our military. Obama should make paying for these wars a major point about requiring no tax cuts for the rich.

Most Americans have been far less successful and their job loss as been due to decades of capitalist shenanigans and trade policies. When we had good manufacturing jobs that allowed a decent lifestyle these people paid good taxes and often met the max payment in social security. That was all lost when coupled with the Reagan and beyond tax cuts which resulted in record deficits and debt but more billionaires.

If Obama caves as I suspect he will, it come back to bite him in the ass in 2012 when the deficits will be far higher and the Rs will hammer him on it. More taxes from the rich will not help the economy.

My only concern is that Obama was supported by the same greedy rich banker types that permeate Wall St and CNBC and they never miss a chance to tell the world (and certainly Democrat politicians) that no tax cut for billionaires will hurt our economy.

[coti]

128. Entirely?? Or is he just saying we won't make the Bush cuts PERMANENT, which was never on the

table?

He's negotiating all wrong- again.

He needs to be starting from the position that we're only going to pass middle-class tax cuts.

[Divine Discontent]

96. and don't fail to notice WHO gave the GOP response! Marco Rubio - newly elected golden boy/mule to

do their bidding! the BFEE is in place with him as senator, and itching to be vp then president...

America must continue it's progressive push!

[kentuck]

97. That's not what I heard him say.

I heard him say that webegin with what we can all agree on - the middle-class taxcuts. I did not hear any thing that sounded like he would not budge or compromise on after that?

[indimuse]

99. KNR! n/t

[boppers]

147. LOL, that's a Fitzsimmons!

Fun guy, I went to a wedding he had... with a toga party reception.

[Toucano]

100. FUCK YES, Mr. President! Thank you!

Extending tax cuts for the rich would be the wrong thing to do.

This issue is not subject to compromise.

[BillH76]

101. Obama signals may compromise on tax cuts

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama gave his clearest signal yet on Saturday of a possible post-election compromise with resurgent Republicans that could prevent tax rates from rising for any American, even the wealthiest, come January.

Obama, in his first weekly radio address since his Democrats suffered big losses in Tuesday's congressional elections, reasserted that Bush-era tax cuts should be made permanent for the middle class before they expire at year-end.

But while insisting tax cuts for wealthier Americans should not become permanent because of a $700 billion impact on the deficit over the next decade, he left the door open to a temporary extension for higher income levels -- as long as it falls short of costing that much.

"I believe there's room for us to compromise and get it done together," Obama said, previewing his administration's negotiating stance when the current Congress returns later this month for its final session.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_usa_elections_obama

[Swede]

102. This is like the fourth post of this in LBN.

:shrug:

[BillH76]

105. It's the fifth.

If some mod wants to delete it, I won't feel bad. I just don't see how the same radio message could generate such different descriptions. The The Hill concluded that Obama "won't budge." So WTF?
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/127983-obama-calls-for-compromise-wont-budge-on-tax-cuts

[tularetom]

103. RIght now Boner and McConnell are ROFL reading that

They have absolutely no intention of compromising on anything with him. They'll spit in the hand he extends.

And then they'll take credit for beating him to a pulp and getting the tax cuts extended.

And he'll continue to try to make nice with people who flat hate his guts.

[yourout]

104. I will trade them the tax cuts for a medicare buy-in.

[frylock]

106. good to hear him say it..

don't back down on this mr. president! :thumbsup:

[lovemydog]

107. I stand with the President

one hundred percent on this

[old mark]

108. I hope this is an indicator of things to come and that compromise does not mean giving up

everything to the GOP.
Maybe the Democrats need to be cornered before thay start to fight...


mark

[pnorman]

109. "He's FINALLY grown a spine!", seems to be the grudging sentiment

of some of the Obama-doubters here. My personal belief is that many of them had doubted him ever since the "burning issue" of the Convocation Speaker on Inauguration Day.

In any event, "growing a spine" is NOT an overnight event, meaning that he had a spine all along. So lets ALL here support him on this, with a minimum of carping back seat driving!

[The Wizard]

110. I don't believe him

With an overwhelming majority and political capital he capitulated on the public option right out of the gate. Hell, he'll probably tell the Republicans it's all good with him, but to please use lubricant.

[MindandSoul]

111. Good! I hope he stick with it!

Or. . .if he should "compromise," He may want to raise the continued tax cut to people making up to $350,000, but then not only cancel the Bush tax cut for people making over $350,000, but ALSO raises the top tax bracket another 2% for people making over $2 millions a year. That would compensate for his "compromise," and add a few hundred thousands people to his side (people making between the $250,000 and the $350,000!)

[jwirr]

112. Good.

[patrice]

113. Banks are still failing. Proprietary internal trading is maxing-out, so fiefdoms are leaving the

gambling table and the President can figure out who's left there facing China.

[laughingliberal]

115. Very good news! nt

[songbookz]

116. I don't mind paying taxes

I don't mind paying taxes, I happen to like roads, bridges, libraries, police, firemen, etc. I think things like food stamps and other assistance to the less fortune helps us have a soul as a nation.

So let the tax cuts expire, if they can afford to give a tax cut to those earning under $250,000 fine, but I'd rather pay more to get us out from under the thumb of foreign creditors.

What I do resent is spending 44% of our tax revenue on the military while our troops are given malfunctioning weapons and vehicles without body armor, and abandoned when they return home AND when most of our military might is used to defend "free trade" which only harms the Middle Class - let the corporations who benefit the most from our military pay the bill.

[penndragon69]

118. No comprimise with thugs.

Pass tax cuts for the working class and poor through reconciliation.
Then tell the refugs to stick it up their racist tea klanner asses.

[33Greeper]

119. Let all the Bush Era Tax Cuts sunset!

[patrice]

121. I could live with that. We're talking about something less than $100. a year in my bracket, so

if I can't get along without that, I need to hang-it-up and just have myself made a ward of the state, so those upper-brackets ought to . . . oh, wait . . . . maybe THAT'S their problem!!!

[NeonDog]

124. Change the rhetoric: Eliminate the term "Bush tax cuts"

Puhleeze!! Democrats.. wake up and start marketing. Quit discussing the Bush tax cuts, just let them fade away....fade away!!!

The lame ducks Dems should impose a TAX Holiday for everyone dollar earned under $200K in 2010/2011..have the holiday expire in 2012 and replaced with a very progressive middle class rate.

Also increase targeted tax breaks for small businesses that hire new employees or expand health insurance coverage. More tax breaks for businesses that increases their U.S. manufacturing\production facilities.

Call the upcoming Tax Holiday and the targeted tax breaks the War On the Great Recession.
Just quit giving Bush and RepubliCONs positive credit for tax breaks that led to the Great Recession.

SID

[DesertFlower]

127. good. nt

[LaPera]

129. Don't BUDGE Mr. President on tax cuts for the rich & the country will love & respect you for it!

And it's the right thing to do....Do as you say tax cuts for 98% of Americans all of whom make $250,000.00 or less each year!!

[derby378]

130. Compromise with old-school Republicans might be okay...

...but compromise with neo-fascists and teabaggers is heresy and apostasy.

[wtmusic]

131. He needs to frame the GOP as the "borrow & spend" party.

With interest.

[Eric J in MN]

132. "permanent" is the key word

Obama didn't say tax cuts for the rich won't be extended.

Just not permanently.

[MJJP21]

133. PLEASE!

Please tell me WHOM do we borrow money from? What country has the capability to forclose on the US? We print our own cash!Nobody in the WH knows squat what they are doing! I thought Obama at least knew better. WE DO NOT BORROW FROM ANYONE PERIOD!

[Shining Jack]

139. China.

[eridani]

134. I seriously hope he stands firm on this. n/t

[grahamhgreen]

135. "I don’t see how we can afford to borrow an additional $700 billion" Is NOT "we will not borrow"

Remember what he said about the public option?

"An additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available,"

His statement is very non-committal and allows him to equivocate, and then cave in under pressure from the big bad Republicans (and his own agenda?).

[ZombieHorde]

136. I am pleasantly surprised. nt

[Shining Jack]

137. I'm skipping this article.

And I'll do the same with every other ones about him from now on.Waste of time.

[PinkFloyd]

138. He's right

It gets old hearing the right talk about how we need to balance the budget but everytime they talk about balancing the budget they talk about ending programs for the poor, enviromental programs, anything that regulates business like consumer protection or education. What about military spending? Why should we continue to borrow billions from Japan to protect Japan? Why should the richest 2% continue to receive tax cuts we can't afford, especially where it's obvious they didn't use that money to create jobs like Reagan once swore they would? Why continue to give tax cuts to corporations that outsource jobs and create unemployment? Just a few thoughts, sorry for the rant.

[AC_Mem]

140. I would be willing to pay more taxes

It was a nice surprise to see a little more in my paycheck after he took office but I would happily give that back to see the less fortunate get a chance.

It's what we do as Americans (well, as Democrats), we help our fellow man. I'm willing to do my part to help bring down the deficit. Why won't the millionaires and billionaires?

Annette

[bertman]

141. I'm HOPING this is going to happen, but not holding my breath. Rec. nt

[veganlush]

142. the important word in this is "permanent"

..that was never the question in the first place, really. This signals that he's willing to extend them all for at least of couple of years. Long enough for them to blame him for the huge deficits they will cause.

[raystorm7]

143. If history has told me anything, he will fold like a chair tax cuts =/

[garthranzz]

144. A Profile in Courage

Let's have his back on this one, at least.

[laconicsax]

145. w00t

[OlympicBrian]

146. Here's an expert opinion on the US income tax system, with graph

Here's an expert opinion on the US income tax system--as written by a Northwestern University Professor.

"We need to know how the ultra rich ensure they pay an effective tax rate vastly lower than the average US citizen. This is an inversion of the federal income tax system put in place in 1913. It was exclusively a tax on the richest citizens. Anyone making less than $95,000 (2010 dollars) was exempt. Zero income tax. It was aimed at those with the greatest ability to pay. It remained a tax on the wealthy until 1939. From then on, the great inversion began, so that by the second half of the 20th century a tax intended only for the rich barely touched them.

We are seeing in the comments a lot of standard complaining about taxes (extortion, theft, etc). It is not just the absolute level of taxes that angers people, but the grotesque unfairness of the system (either burdens fall heavier on those less able to pay, or the supposedly progressive system is subverted by things like the Income Defense Industry so that those with resources evade paying their fair share).

A general 'tax anger' will not get us closer to tax fairness. Folks need to get clear on the fact that one key reason tax burdens are so onerous on the average individual is that the rich are not paying."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/JeffreyWinters/americas-income-defense-i_b_772723_64729413.html

From full story:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-winters/americas-income-defense-i_b_772723.html

KEY graph: Since the 1960s, the total federal tax rate has fallen for low earners, RISEN for relatively high earners, and FALLEN SIGNIFICANTLY for very high earners. The graph is from a 2007 NYT piece, but the graph is still relevant; the same tables still apply, as there haven't been major changes since 2003--except of course the amounts for brackets have shifted up a bit for inflation. This substantiates that the middle and upper-middle class are bearing a greater brunt of income taxes, while the ultra-rich got huge cuts--even before loopholes:

http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2007/11/03/nytimes-historical-tax-rates-by-income-group/

What we need is a major tax increase for the very high earners, to bring taxes back into line with their historical norm. All this talk of extending the tax breaks for the rich is nonsense.

[OlympicBrian]

149. Catch the ultra-rich tax EVADERS

America's Income Defense Industry
Jeffrey Winters

"The debate over ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich sidesteps a serious problem. The issue is not just whether the wealthiest Americans should be taxed, but can they be taxed?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-winters/americas-income-defense-i_b_772723.html

Example:

"I made my living as part of this (tax evasion for the ultra-rich) industry. The brightest minds were drawn to it. My skill was to structure international transactions. I'd learn both the US and foreign tax systems and find and exploit places where the seams between the systems did not line up. I saved clients millions of dollars in tax. What I did was legal
...
The IRS had no chance. I never lost a case. 95% of the time they never found the issue. And when they did, they didn't have the intellectual horsepower to win. $65,000 a year government bureaucrats just can't keep up with tax accountants and lawyers making $1 million. There is a reason why they work for the IRS - they are not very smart and they don't work very hard.

Can Congress shut this business down? Not easily. The IRS has limited ability to tax outside the US, and draconian measures would make American companies uncompetitive in world markets. So there will always be jobs for people like me, moving money around the world, keeping it away from government.

I retired from that business by the way. Now I teach new generations how to do"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Amalek/americas-income-defense-i_b_772723_64700254.html

And a suggested fix for some loopholes:

"Yes, here is an easy one to start. Private equity gets to pay tax at capital gains rates on their earned income. It is called a carried interest. They have been trying to close this loophole for years, but congress keeps getting bought off. There is big money here, and no justification whatsoever for this treatment.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Amalek/americas-income-defense-i_b_772723_64709494.html

[joeglow3]

150. What is that chart showing?

If it is just tax rates, then I don't like it. There are 2 components to taxes paid - taxable income (including deductions) and tax rates. The simple fact is that deductions that were allowed decades ago are no longer allowed today (thus, increasing taxable income and decreasing tax rates).

I agree with what he is trying to convey, but the tax CPA in me gets pissed when people intentionally try to deceive people.

[OlympicBrian]

152. That chart made it through the entire NYT readership for 3 years and it seems clear

And, all tax factors--including things you could itemize--would be the same for each point (year, bracket, rate) on the chart. In short, what you bring up would apply to everyone the same way for the entire chart.

So, as far as I am concerned, that chart still shows "Since the 1960s, the total federal tax rate has fallen for low earners, RISEN for relatively high earners, and FALLEN SIGNIFICANTLY for very high earners."

The cynic in me says that the rich can afford fancy CPAs to itemize more deductions, and hence they pay taxes on a lower amount--so the real gap between the rich and others for any given tax year is actually greater than the chart shows.

As far as trying to intentionally deceive people, I think that is an unfounded statement. You could try writing to the New York Times if you wanted, expressing your opinion.

[joeglow3]

163. You need to read the changes in the tax act of '86.

Your reasoning is "I have blind faith in the NYT." For example, PLEASE explain how that chart quantifies your ability to deduct sales taxes paid prior to the 1986 tax act.

[snot]

153. I'm so discouraged, I was afraid this was a joke. Seriously,

Obama, I beg you, stand up for us on this.

[on point]

156. Obama calls for capitulation

Every time he says compromise, apparently he means capitulation. He has yet to stand on a single issue in a principled way. I voted for him, but now actively seek someone with the backbone to carry the message and the fight.

[Quixote1818]

158. FUCK YES!!!!! k and r

[pacalo]

159. You go, Obama! Use their "rein that spending" mantra & do the right thing.

Glad to hear this!

[bobburgster]

160. K & R n/t

[greymattermom]

161. the only cave I'll buy

Is to change the 250K number to something between 250 and 500K and still have those tax cuts expire. Keep the tax cuts on the first 500K. What's so wrong with that? Most of those small business are just individuals who incorporated.