UPDATE: White House Denies Giving In on Bush Tax Cuts

[Hissyspit]

Source: Washington Post

The Morning Plum
By Greg Sargent
UPDATE: White House denies giving in on Bush tax cuts:

The White House is sharply denying the Huffington Post story I noted below claiming that David Axelrod signaled a willingness to accept a temporary extension of all the Bush tax cuts, claiming that their position remains unchanged.

Axelrod emails:

There is not one bit of news here. I simply re-stated what POTUS and Robert have been saying. Our two strong principles are that we need to extend the tax cuts for the middle class, but we can't afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

And White House comm director Dan Pfeiffer adds:

The story is overwritten. Nothing has changed from what the President said last week. We believe we need to extend the middle class tax cuts, we cannot afford to borrow 700 billion to pay for extending the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and we are open to compromise and are looking forward to talking to the Congressional leadership next week to discuss how to move forward. Full Stop, period, end of sentence.

The question remains, though, whether the White House will hold fast to Obama's demand last week that the extension of the tax cuts for the middle class remain permanent while extending the high end ones temporarily. The main sticking point is that Republicans won't allow the two categories to be extended for different durations, because that would force them to push for just an extension of the cuts for the rich later.

Read more: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/11/the_morning_plum_129.html

[wndycty]

1. I knew this was coming but its too late, DU has already convicted Axelrod

:kick:

[glitch]

32. Watch for weaselly keywords like "permanent extension" on tax cuts for the wealthiest.

Especially since he repeated them.

[savalez]

61. self deleted.

[Ganja Ninja]

104. Exactly. n/t

[Little Star]

131. yep

[AllyCat]

151. Right-e-o

His words exactly state that they are "open to compromise" for the rich. It may not be a change from last week, but the plan is figure out how to help the rich without committing political suicide. Again.

[eridani]

212. One extension after another = PERMANENT--at least in the real world n/t

[spotbird]

124. so Axelrod issued a nondenial denial.

It doesn't fool me.

[liberation]

152. Stop believing your own eyes, and trust damage control statements...

... regardless of track record, citizen!

[lark]

139. Axelrod and Obama are convicted by their weasley words &

actions. "We are open to compromise". What exactly does that mean - it means they are totally caving in advance. Remember what happened to single payer - exact same thing is happening here. I'd bet anyone that Obama will pass a bill extending tax breaks for richest and it won't have anything in there that separates the middle class and rich tax breaks. He'll fold as usual and say he had no choice.

[closeupready]

178. This is exactly right. We saw the EXACT SAME PROCESS on health care.

n/t

[StarsInHerHair]

207. too true, too true

nt

[Moonbat2]

180. just maybe

this was his plan all along, only now he can say "the big bad republicans" forced him into it

[harun]

174. Wait until you see how this ends up, then you can come back and apologize.

[StarsInHerHair]

208. can the President do a line-item-veto?

that way he could roll that needed $700 billion back into government & keep the middle class tax cuts.

[quakerboy]

199. Compromise

What does it mean?

Or, in other words, I will believe it when I see it.

[MsPithy]

204. Axelrod is not the problem.

He speaks for his boss, if he didn't, he'd be out!

[no limit]

2. UPDATE: The white house is lying

[Moosepoop]

12. Please point out the lie.

The WaPo article gives comments from two people at the White House. Exactly which part of Axelrod's or Pfeiffer's latest remarks is a lie?

[no limit]

13. That the white house has not given in on tax cuts. They have. You want to take that bet?

[Moosepoop]

20. Let me try this again.

Axelrod:

There is not one bit of news here. I simply re-stated what POTUS and Robert have been saying. Our two strong principles are that we need to extend the tax cuts for the middle class, but we can't afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

Pfeiffer:

The story is overwritten. Nothing has changed from what the President said last week. We believe we need to extend the middle class tax cuts, we cannot afford to borrow 700 billion to pay for extending the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and we are open to compromise and are looking forward to talking to the Congressional leadership next week to discuss how to move forward. Full Stop, period, end of sentence.

Exactly where in either of these quotes is your "lie"? Please point out exactly which words are untrue. It's a very simple request for you to back up your assertion. My bet is that you can't, or won't.

[Javaman]

26. people have a hard time admitting they were wrong...

even in the face of evidence contrary to their opinion.

Now what group of people does that remind me of? Hmm...

[no limit]

28. I wish I was wrong. I'm not

Again, the thread title is "White House Denies Giving In on Bush Tax Cuts". In fact they will give in on those tax cuts. Any suggestion otherwise is a lie.

[Javaman]

194. Meh.

I beg to differ.

Since the statement from the WH reads that they didn't concede.

but you what? does any of this kabuki show of horror really mean anything? We don't have any say or power in the matter yea or neigh.

[24601]

206. Reminds me of English class. "We have not given in," (past tense)

"We are not giving in." (present)

As opposed to "We will give in." (January, oops my freudian slip is showing. I meant/mean/will mean future tense.)

[madmax]

67. Hmmmm ;-) you read my mind.

[humbled_opinion]

167. Politicians ? n/t

[no limit]

27. When someone is hiding the truth from you I consider that a lie

The thread I responded to was "Update: White House Denies Giving In on Bush Tax Cuts". In fact they are giving in on tax cuts.

What Axelorod is saying is that the fact they are giving in is not news. They are not disputing the huffpo story and they are not denying they will give in. Any suggestion otherwise is a lie.

Like I said, would you like to take that bet?

[Moosepoop]

42. When someone says "that's a lie" I expect them to back it up.

I know what thread you responded to -- it's the same one we're both still responding to. ;-)

I didn't ask for your interpretation of the quotes in the OP, I asked for exactly which statements were demonstrably false.

As for your "bet", I already stated what I was betting on, and I won. :)

[no limit]

53. You didn't win anything. The Bush administration played this stupid game of "technically not a lie"

like I said, when someone hides the truth from you they are lying. In this case the administration is hiding the truth. They have given in on republican demands and instead of coming out and simply saying that they are lying by giving us bullshit spin.

I guess you don't think that Bush ever lied about the Saddam and 9/11 link, right? Because if we use your logic the truth is Bush never actually said Saddam was responsible for 9/11. Or do you apply different standards to different presidents based on what political affiliation they happen to have?

[Moosepoop]

59. Yes, I did.

Now you're veering into "if you disagree with me, you must agree with Bush!" territory. :rofl:

You have completely spun yourself out. :crazy:

[no limit]

63. I am pointing out to you that according to your logic Bush wasn't lying about Saddam and 9/11

since he never actually said Saddam was responsible for 9/11.

We know that the white house will extend ALL tax cuts. And if they tell you otherwise they are lying. Period.

[Moosepoop]

82. Don't bother pointing anything...

You can't back up a simple assertion of your own, let alone identify another person's logic. You're just stuck... so, time for me to move on from this conversation. Nice meeting you. :hi:

[no limit]

84. have a nice day. I just wish you had answered my simple questions to you

I will repeat them one last time in case you change your mind.

Do you not believe that the Obama administration is about to cave on tax cuts for the rich?

Was Bush lying about a Saddam/9-11 connection?

[Moosepoop]

97. You too! And no, I don't answer questions that are posed as

answers to questions that I originally asked. But thanks for playing!

[no limit]

100. "White House Denies Giving In on Bush Tax Cuts" is a lie. They did not deny that

I pointed out this to you in my replies above, you chose to ignore that. In regards to the Bush thing I am making the point that politicians don't have to technically lie to be liars. The Obama administration knows they will give in to republicans on this issue. You know that too (I dont believe you are that naive even if you pretend to be). So any suggestion they make about them not caving in on this is a lie. Plain and simple.

If we use your standards for what a lie is then Bush didn't actually lie about 9/11 and Saddam. Which you and I know is a absurd argument to make. But for some reason you have different standards for different politicians.

[Moosepoop]

115. Keep playing your broken record, sweetie...

I've moved on.

[no limit]

118. I'll check back with you in a few weeks, have a nice day "sweetie"

[Pholus]

123. The administration is hoping you do move on...

it makes their job easier, after all.

[lark]

141. Duck and weave however you want, truth is truth

and will come out. Obama is lying and will 100% cave - there is no doubt about that. He's already giving heavy signals that he will by using the word compromise regarding Repugs. We do know damn well that Repugs don't compromise - they go full bore for the rich and always will. Obama will have a choice of vetoing a bill extending the tax cuts for the richest of americans in perpetuity or of signing the bill. Guarantee, he'll say he's HAD to sign due to
1 - keep recovery going
2 - doesn't like it but can't jeopardize middle class tax cuts so they made me sign it

I'll bet on that any day and get much richer if anyone is foolish enough to take the bet.

This does not make me happy at all, but I have learned it's better to recognize an ugly truth than to try to delude yourself with false premises.

[molly77]

193. Only problem, with the republicans made me do it meme.

They made him do it with a dem house and senate. If the repubs. and blue dogs could make universal health care into the sorry health care bill they finally passed...we know with a repub majority in the house , those tax cuts will be extended. Sorry about the run on sentence.

[DontTreadOnMe]

175. Moosepoop will look very foolish if the tax breaks for the rich are extended

It will also be the deciding point for me to continue to support Obama.

If the rich get tax breaks, I am done with Obama.

[laughingliberal]

170. Bottom line: WH will support extension of tax cuts for the wealthy. Just not 'permanent.'

An accurate headline would be "White House Caves, Supports Kicking Can Down the Road."

[jberryhill]

85. "Nice meeting you."

You're a better man than I, Gunga Din.

[Moosepoop]

93. I don't know about that...

but I'm pretty certain I make a better woman! :)

[jberryhill]

98. Blame Kipling /nt

[NoSheep]

37. Thanks for posting this. DU has become a fucking zoo.

[no limit]

40. The white house is lying, I'm glad another person wants to eat their words in a couple weeks

[jberryhill]

58. "The white house is lying, I'm glad"

And that says it all.

You seem more fascinated by berating others than in discussing differing points of view.

That is because anyone who disagrees with you is lying.

Has it been like that your entire life, or has this phenomenon become more pronounced as you've grown older.

In any event, it is now the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, and I am taking a break.

Have a nice day, and enjoy your friendships.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jberryhill]

72. WTF?

You are the one reveling in your perception that you've caught the White House in some kind of lie.

What that has to do with Sean Hannity is only clear to you.

[no limit]

73. What this has to do with Hannity is you took my statement and cut off the end

to attribute a statement to me that I did not make. Sean Hannity did the same thing with Obama when he played a clip of Obama saying that everyones taxes are going to go up this year.

[jberryhill]

77. Because your entire statement is directly above

To wit: "The white house is lying, I'm glad another person wants to eat their words in a couple weeks"

So let's be clear.

If the White House is lying, I will be disappointed.

You, on the other hand, will be glad that you "win" some epic battle of ego on an internet forum.

I'm sorry that your life is so apparently devoid of other sources of joy or accomplishment that you are reduced to such bizarre and trivial pleasures.

[no limit]

81. Again, you attributed a statement to me that I did not make by cutting off what I said

So lets be clear, Sean Hannity does this all the time. And I'm sure when he does that you think he is a real asshole for it.

Lets also be clear about this. The white house IS lying. And I am glad to hear you will be disappointed when you finally find this out. I already know what will happen, as most people that have been paying attention for the last 2 years do. You on the other hand want to live in denial. That's your choice.

But the argument that we need to wait and see no longer flies. We needed to wait and see on the public option eventhough most of us knew what would happen with that. We needed to wait and see what Obama's debt commission would release eventhough most of us knew what they would put out. Now you are telling us we need to wait and see on tax cuts even though we know exactly what will happen there (because the president himself is telling us what will happen by using weezle words such as "permanent").

This game of wait and see is for naive people, and I find it hard to believe that you are truly that naive.

[kenfrequed]

163. Ellipses

As in you forgot them. Granted the poster was a smidge inflammatory, and it would have been better if he had put some more content in the message portion, but you aren't being entirely accurate about the intent or meaning of the other posters statement.

And actually ellipses wouldn't have helped. Really you can only use them in such a manner that does not change the meaning of the the original sentence or statement. By leaving it as it you give the impression that the poster is merely glad that the white house is lying, rather than glad that he believes that You will want to eat your words.

Whether or not his position is defensible, using such tactics against him is not.

[jberryhill]

182. That would be a point if the original were in some far off place

Instead of visible right above my post.

This person can only find joy in taking reservations for an "I told you so" party.

There's something sick about that, and it goes well beyond having any particular disagreement about what may or may not happen re: tax policy.

And I think that how one treats other people is more important than one's acumen at predicting future political events.

[kenfrequed]

222. No, it still is dishonest

No, even if I can look back at what he wrote, you are still misrepresenting what he said. Just because I can easily see what he wrote it doesn't mean a falsehood is acceptable or that spin is just an attempt to wash clothes.

[LanternWaste]

137. I'm wondering if you will

I'm wondering if you will back up your assertion in the here and now, or simply continue dismissing and denigrating those who disagree with you. :shrug:

[Time for change]

130. "The story is overwritten"

The story contained several direct quotes from an interview with Axelrod. Either the quotes are accurate or they're not. Quotes are not a matter of interpretation.

So, it's disingenous to claim that the story was "overwritten" without pointing out specifically which quotes in the story are inaccurate.

[lark]

140. Can I play?

Here's the part that troubles everyone and would you too if you removed the rose colored glasses.

" we are open to compromise and are looking forward to talking to the Congressional leadership next week to discuss how to move forward."

What the hell do you think that is? Congressional leadership means Repugs and he's signaling his usual flip flop in advance.

[jberryhill]

30. The tax cuts expire automatically

At midnight on the last day of this year, the tax cuts expire.

That is the reality of the situation.

There is nothing to "give in" about, and the White House is perfectly aware of that reality.

[no limit]

33. The reality is they will give in to republican demands. spraying perfume on a pile of shit

doesn't change the fact it's still shit.

Yes, the tax cuts expire. All the democrats had to do was pass new legislation that extended the tax cuts for 98% of americans and allow republicans to vote against it. They chose not to do that. Instead they chose to give in. That is the reality.

[jberryhill]

43. No, a prediction is not "reality"

Reality consists of things which actually happen.

[no limit]

49. Reality is that this is not a prediction and you know exactly what will happen

I am sick of the bullshit arguments of lets wait and see what happens. How did that work out for you on the public option? Back then we (we as in the base) were told to just shut up and wait to see what happens. It was a lame argument then it's a lame argument now.

[jberryhill]

55. "How did that work out for you on the public option?"

I believe it is inevitable.

We didn't get it this time, and the world, as far as I know, is not coming to an imminent end.

But please - either stop telling me what "I know", or seek professional help with your belief that you can read the minds of others.

[no limit]

65. ahahahaaha. Jesus

so people like you didn't want us to bitch about not getting the public option back when the healthcare bill was being debated because we needed to wait and see what happens when the final bill was passed. Now that we didn't get the public option you don't want us bitching about that because it might still happen in some unknown time in the future.

Too funny.

[jberryhill]

75. "people like you"

I am not representative of a class of persons "like" me.

I bitched quite a bit about a public option. It didn't happen. So, as a consequence of that, I should remain in a state of perpetual bitter rage for the rest of my life?

It remains inevitable that the shrinking private healthcare insurance system is not sustainable.

I don't know how old you are, but for most of my life it things like the end of the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall were inevitable.

Things that don't work, don't last. That's just the way it is. Along the way, you can do a few constructive things, or simply put other people down for remaining optimistic.

But I guess you are going to ignore some of the OTHER stuff in the debt commission report - such as reviving the public option.

[no limit]

83. The public option will not happen under this administration

will it happen at some unknown time in the future? Maybe. But we live in today, not 20 years from now.

Today what is happening is Obama willing to extend tax cuts for the richest americans which goes directly against his stated principles. I love the fact that you think a public option is inevitable yet you call anyone that says these tax cut extensions are going to happen mentally challanged.

[Pholus]

86. The Berlin Wall...

I remember the CIA taking heat for not seeing that in advance, but it was inevitable?

I was optimistic 2 years ago. And yes, they've done a lot, but after the election I see nothing but surrender. No alternate vision whatsoever.

Is that really going to play well in 2012? If the prez cannot defend his vision, why should the average American?

[StarsInHerHair]

209. the way the Pres. has been acting makes me wonder

about "his vision" quite alot; how much of what Obama said while campaigning was just from the writers? All the goals & ideas, what happened? If they were Obama's would he so readily give up without a fight? I'm sick of hearing about the Right & their "unapologetic" ways, THEY don't compromise-why should Obama? The President DID say recently that he "had stopped listening" & maybe that means he will pivot & do the *proper* thing & veto extensions for the wealthiest. America is too big to fail-NOT the banks.

[provis99]

205. give it up dude. You completely lost this argument.

You just look like an Obama cheerleading fool, now.

[sabrina 1]

214. The world might not end for you if you have access to good healthcare.

But we know that it has been ending for over 40,000 Americans every year because we, in this so-called democracy do not have a National Health Care system where every citizen has a right to real healthcare. I am happy for you, but for those to whom a PO might have made the difference between life and death, I am not happy nor do I think it's any consolation that sometime in the far distant future, since the opportunity was blown this time, we might get there.

[kenfrequed]

169. I hope you are wrong

The White House can make this a win and hamstring the Republican Party early by forcing a lame duck bill now and make it as progressive as humanly possible. Force it to the floor and make it crystal clear.

Personally, I think the Blue Dogs are partially responsible for the capitulation rumors. I think they want to hamstring and gut the party on the way out of office since so many of them in the house have been handed their walking papers. I can imagine more than a couple of them like the idea of getting to keep a little fat tax break bonus when they move onto becoming lobbyists in the private sector and get paid for giving tips to freshmen repukes for how to beat up Democrats.

I think you may be wrong about your interpretation of this 'story.' Of course my interpretation is not much better but I just don't think we should jump to the capitulation thing. It is more likely that the White House wants to let the bill die quietly.

[beforeyoureyes]

15. +1000

All my chips on the tax cuts being extended for the wealthiest Americans...

[Scruffy1]

21. I'm all in on this one ,too

klobuchar said it last week. You can always read the next play coming out of thishitehouse.

[grahamhgreen]

78. Leaves plenty of room for equivocating sleaze.

[BlueJac]

144. I'm all in on that bet too!

+1000

[BillH76]

125. This kind of semantic trickery is insulting. I wish he would just lie instead.

A lie would not necessarily insult our intelligence. But this sophistry about no "permanent" cuts for the rich treats us like fools.

[truedelphi]

177. However an outright lie would break his pattern of behavior.

And patterns of behavior are hard to break.

Look at the recent past;

As Senator from Illinois, Circa 2008: Obama says he will filibuster any bill that has to do with immunity for the Telephone companies that spied on Americans.

Then he went ahead and voted to allow those companies their immunity.

Then as President, Summer of 2009, Obama stalled on making a case for "public option"

He even yammered weird and confusing statements to a college student, stating "At this point (ed: mid August 2009) no one knows if the public option will even be included inside the legislation on HCR. And the public option is only one tool of many tools that we have."

When it was pretty much way too late, he came out for Public Option (early September, 2009.)

He issues a few statements friendly to the overall concept of gay rights, then makes sure that there is an appeal process put before the Court such that any advances for the Cause are set back.

He puts together a much touted HAMP program, that holds a total of fifty billion dollars to help home owners with their mortgages, so they can have some chance
of modification, but as to date, only 1.5% of the money has actually gone to the home owners. Most homeowners are continually lied to by the banks, stalled, screwed over, and then find out they are dismissed from having the right to "re-modification." but the banks are quite happy to collect the money they' re entitled to, for putting the home owner through this hellish process.

Most importantly, we have managed to see this White House pass:
Item 1) A major piece of legislation "The Health Care Reform Act" that was not so much about helping Americans as offering increased premiums for the insurance companies. Almost every other nation on earth has left the insurers out of the government-run Health Care system, but Obama wanted something "uniquely American." which I guess is his pet phrase for "I don't wanna screw the pooch that offers me so much of my needed campaign funds."
Item 2) Financial Reform - a piece of legislation that operated pretty much the same way that Item One operated.

[Arkana]

223. Thank you for your well-written post citing respected news sources

detailing WHY the White House is lying about its position on the Bush tax cuts. In no way is this an angry, impotent outburst of rage against a President you irrationally hate for reasons as yet unbeknownst to normal people.

[Seedersandleechers]

3. First thing I thought of when I saw the HP article

I'll wait for more credible information!

[ipaint]

4. Amateurs.

Temp or permanent, both are tax cuts to the richest extentions both will cost taxpayers billions and both will require slashes to social programs to fund.

Shit or get off the pot.

[truebrit71]

5. "open to compromise" " can't afford a permanent extension" this means ALL tax cuts will remain..

..and Obama will eventually back down on sunsetting the rich ones as well...

More of that 9th dimensional chess I see...:eyes:

...meanwhile we will keep on funding two unnecessary wars whilst cutting medicare and pushing the retirement age higher and higher...

[jberryhill]

31. No, the default is that the cuts expire on their own terms at the end of the year

[no limit]

38. right. And your point is?

To make them not expire new legislation needs to be passed. The democrats today still hold the house, the senate, and the white house. And with that these assholes can't even get middle class tax cuts passed. Only democrats could fuck up such a winnable issue so badly. And I think that's by design.

[jberryhill]

44. "And with that these assholes can't even get middle class tax cuts passed"

Maybe they will, maybe they won't.

But the bottom line is that the cuts expire automatically, and I don't see that as a "loss".

[no limit]

47. This is not a maybe, stop pretending that you don't know what will happen

and yes, throwing your values under the bus so you can give in to the republican demands without getting anything in return is the very definition of "loss".

[jberryhill]

54. "stop pretending that you don't know what will happen"

Thanks for the chuckle.

No, I don't know what will happen.

What you need to understand, as do many others, is that people who do not see things your way are not "pretending".

Persons with certain types of neurological or personality disorders do not grasp that other people are actually sentient individuals with their own thoughts and opinions. Hence, they believe that manifestations of individual personality by others are some sort of act.

So, let's be clear. You are not the Universal Omniscient Mind. You do not have psychic powers, anymore than the next guy at the betting window at the fourth race at Belmont Park. Maybe that guy's ticket will pay, and maybe it won't.

But, quite transparently, if the tax cuts do not expire, you will not be facing a "loss". Think of all of the dullards, trolls, and deluded people here at DU to whom you will have demonstrated your formidable powers. We will evermore bow down and be humbled by your greatness.

[no limit]

62. Yes, call me mentally ill while you insist extending the Bush tax cuts would not be a loss

it is not my fault that you are in denial and you don't know what "loss" means.

[jberryhill]

64. It is your fault that you have a distaste for others of your species

I did not say that extending the cuts would be a loss.

I said the cuts expire automatically, and if they expire across the board, I do not consider that a loss.

[no limit]

66. You also don't consider giving in to republican demands a loss.

If Im understanding you correctly

[jberryhill]

70. No, I do not consider hypothetical future events to be "facts"

Because I do not possess either your psychic power nor your ability to read the minds of others.

[no limit]

74. Why can't you answer a simple question. If they give in on tax cuts for the rich is that a loss?

It's a very simple question.

Also, can I add you to my buddy list and check back with you in a couple of weeks to see what your opinion will be after they give in? We can all then look back at this thread and have a chuckle. Deal?

[truebrit71]

50. No way do these cuts expire...they will be extended for ALL..the Dems don't have the stones to stand

firm on allowing the rich to pay more...They will cave, as they always do..

[Larkspur]

6. The WH response shows that they may be more sensitive to the Dem base right now

and that is good.

The preliminary Catfood Commission Chair report is a PR disaster and that's good for us against the oligarchs and a WH who may lean more to the oligarchs than to the People.

[madokie]

7. Finally

I first went to GD and it was all gloom and doom. I had to turn it off and get some breakfast. then checked the weather to see if we were going to get any rain then I come to latest and see this post. I was about to jump out a 40 story window and I don't even have a 40 story window to jump out of. Geeze the hysteria over there is maddening

Sounds like a good day to spend in the shop
rec

And thanks for some sanity Hissyspit, you just saved mine :-) or what is left of it that is.

[rosesaylavee]

48. Had the exact same reaction...

Sent a suggestion to the mods to replace this as the top story... not there yet. Thought it would spare someone stroke this morning.

[pacalo]

166. Same here. Now's a good time to take a break & start reading books again.

"Lord of the Flies"?

[LiberalAndProud]

8. A walk back is welcome, however tepid.

The Post reporter seems to think that Axelrod is only contemplating about a temporary cave in... kicking the can down the road. I hope this is a hill that is worthy of a strong defense, but it seems that ceding ground is considered the way forward these days.

[saigon68]

9. Nope------ its just " More Change We can Believe In"

Disgusting

[SHRED]

10. Of course the base "reacts"

All we have seen is compromise so we are primed for it.




---

[onehandle]

11. Uh-huh. Let's bookmark this and review on December 31st. nt

[beforeyoureyes]

16. Please do.

[onehandle]

22. My guess is that there will be a deal made on tax cuts for the rich.

A 1.5% 'increase' instead of the full 3%.

Something like that.

[rosesaylavee]

14. Thanks HS - am breathing again...

Just thought I would take a quick look at the headers here on DU and literally stopped breathing when I read the other one.

This is welcome news after that shocker. Hopefully Skinner will replace that one with this one.

[truth2power]

17. What's this, "willingness to accept a temporary extension" BS?..

More bafflegab from Obama.

How temporary? And do they think they'll be in a better position later on? :mad:

[Moosepoop]

25. No, the bafflegab you quoted was not from Obama,

it was from the original Huffington Post article that is the subject of the current WH rebuttal. ;)

[truth2power]

114. You're correct, Moosepoop (and I love that screen name)

:) but it appears that the HuffPo article and the WP article (excerpt) are saying the same thing with different words.

I wanted to support my position on that, and what I usually do is to put both articles in my taskbar and then compare them. Unfortunately, I can't get to the WP article.

* * * *

<whine> Whenever a website doesn't respond for some reason (in this case, I think that article is getting heavy traffic) my computer locks up and I have to re-boot, wait for everything to load, and then login again because it erases my cookies. The ctrl/alt/delete doesn't function for some reason. Been that way for about a year. Don't know how to fix it. It's a real time-sink. :banghead:

* * *

Anyway, I digress. I do think sometimes it takes a linguist to parse what the Obama administration is really saying. We shall see.

[crim son]

18. The story was "overwritten"?

Whew! I feel totally reassured. (insert sarcasm smiley)

[mymomwasright]

19. This is nauseating!

It's not compromise, it's capitulation! Stop being nice; our kids need leaders with backbone!

[nyc 4 Biden]

23. good news. n/t

[Javaman]

24. What? You mean all my pent up indignation was for nothing?

LOL.

Well, that's good to here.

Nothing like a bullshit story to get my candies in a bunch.

I really need to kick back more and stop listening to first reports of anything.

Now where is my blood pressure meds...

[no limit]

36. Save your blood pressure meds for when Huffington post is proven right

you and I know the white house has given in on this issue. How do we know? They aren't disputing it.

[groundloop]

29. I certainly hope this report is closer to the truth than the other one

I pray that President Obama is capable of putting up as good a fight now as Candidate Obama put up in winning the election. I just have to believe that this is one issue that could make or break his chances in 2012 - and while he may not be as perfect as I nor many here want him to be, he's certainly a far better choice than anyone the other side will put up.

[BlueMTexpat]

35. +1,000,000! nt

[jpak]

34. The Obama haters won't like this

nope

[Pholus]

96. Who is an Obama hater on this one?

I want our guy to win, but he seems to be running the ball the wrong way towards his own goal!

And yes, the Charlie Brown picture is now permanently stuck in my head on this issue so everything is a football analogy all of a sudden!

[bjb]

150. Bush only had to fight the Republicans

Obama has to fight them both. Democrats eating their own as usual.

[Pholus]

154. I'd rather he have to fight both than cave to republicans with dem acquiesence. Wouldn't you?

I guess I'm strange thinking that giving in to 700 billion in pointless spending while chopping social security and medicare might be a bit unseemly.

[Iggo]

39. ...yet.

[disndat]

41. Whew! That was like a kick in the stomach.

The least I expected the WH to do was to put up a good fight. Now we will have to wait to see if the second report is true. The first report sounded like Obama has already given up on 2012. That was what was so sickening - a doomsday scenario.

[Occam Bandage]

45. So they'll "temporarily" extend the tax cuts for the rich. Whatever. nt

[NorthCarolina]

46. Search for the "key word"

"We can't afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy."

If you're really really good, you should be able to identify the "key" word that unlocks the truth.

If you chose "permanent" then you are quite perceptive.

Antonyms of noun permanent: temporary

[JaneFordA]

51. Still think Obama should be pressured to resign

and let Joe finish out the term with the understanding HE will not make a bid in '12. Open up the field NOW and back the progressiv-est Democrat in the bunch. Sure wish Alan Grayson would declare!!!

[Bosso 63]

57. really?

You might want to think that one through a bit more.

[tabatha]

52. Please take this off the front page, since it has been debunked.

**********************************************

[NorthCarolina]

88. Denied - Yes. Debunked - No. eom

[jberryhill]

91. Here's the way it works

There is a link labeled "Recommend" and one labeled "Unrecommend".

You get to click one of those.

[anachro1]

56. Not only will Republicans get the tax cuts

Obama will also fold on the health reform issue.

I WANT to believe, but the man is spineless.

[BlueJac]

146. And I'll raise you .........

social security and medicare cuts too.

[harun]

176. I certainly won't bet against you.

[Jefferson23]

60. Get your surrogates out there and start showing Americans what these

hideous tax cuts for the rich has done thus far.

Damn, this is not rocket science.

[fascisthunter]

69. we shall see, won't we....

[PensiveGadfly]

71. Hope I'm not reading too much into this . . .

In reading Axelrod's clarifying statement it's important to notice the subtle shift. Axelrod says nothing's changed and then adds their position all along was "we can't afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy."

NOTICE the word "Permanent" THAT IS NEW. It used to be we can't afford an extension...

Pfieffer says the story is "overwritten" but he doesn't claim it's untrue or false.

We saw this with the clarifying statements on "drawdown" in Afghanistan versus what used to be a "withdrawal" and now it is a starting date to PLAN the drawdown.

This is the third issue on which they use these kinds of subtle changes to signal a concession in the opposite direction of the desires of the Democratic base.

[Clear Blue Sky]

76. Someone is lying. Time will tell who it is...

[Time for change]

132. Most likely, Axelrod's interview was a trial balloon

I doubt that the original article was inaccurate. If it was, Axelrod should specifically point out where he was misquoted -- which he isn't doing. So presumably he was accurately quoted.

The administration wants to have it both ways. They don't want to antagonize Republicans or their wealthy patrons, but they don't want to entirely lose the support of their base. So they float a trial balloon to see what the reaction is, and then they reconsider their options.

[Pholus]

79. Replace "Bush Tax Cuts" with "Single Payer" and I've seen this headline before.

Fool me once....can't get... fooled again! ;)

But seriously, if this plays out like health care did with "we surrender, no we didn't, oh wait, guess we did after all" and I'm looking for a third party.

[budkin]

89. You hit the nail on the head... might as well start looking for that new party now...

[Pholus]

90. Not like I want to, but seriously -- am I supposed to try to "kick the football" again?

Edit: (that was a charlie brown reference, and why does that come to mind RIGHT now -- cause I feel like O's playing me for a chump)

This seriously IS my last straw. I'll wait, but if this goes to preemptive surrender again what other option is there?

[wordpix]

185. I WILL be looking for a new party if that proves to be the case; however,

for now I'll take O's word that he won't support extending tax cuts for the rich. Don't know if the spineless Dems in Congress feel the same, though.

[Pholus]

216. We all don't have much of a choice but to wait I guess. His statement this am was kinda positive.

But there are STILL weasel words in there...

[pezDispenser]

102. This administration never advocated for single payer.

[Pholus]

111. You're right. Forgot. That was surrendered from before "go." It was the Public Option.

[Pholus]

112. Axelrod: Obama Firm on Public Option-"not willing to accept that it's not going to be final package"

The DU search feature is kinda kewl...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/13/ftn/main5307095.shtml

[Pholus]

120. Daschle: Public Option ‘Taken Off The Table’ In July Due To ‘Understanding People Had w/ Hospitals'

I'm just quoting DU posts here...

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/10/05/daschle-in... /

Edit. Fixing the link...


http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/10/05/daschle-interview

As an update and to be fair Daschle denies he said it in quite the way he was quoted but the initial quote was pretty measured too. The denial doesn't really change that he didn't really say no to a direct question.

[Pholus]

122. The first (Axelrod) is Sept, the second (Daschle) was from July. Is trust justified here?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

136. Stop bringing facts in here.

[Lorien]

110. Yep. I had a sick feeling once they said that they would delay the vote until AFTER the election

doing so BEFORE the election would have been a win for the dems; the people are sick of the uber wealthy getting a free ride while the rest of us pay. Waiting until later signals that they don't have the stomach to tax the uber rich and they want the repugs to take the blame for the extended tax cuts.

[Milo_Bloom]

80. I love watching the white house try and spin this...

Even in this story, they basically confirm what Huff PO reported.

The language has changed from we WON'T extend those tax cuts because we can't afford them to "we don't want to extend those tax cuts" because we can't afford it.


Wanna know how it will play out?

The bush tax cuts will be extended for 2 years... just in time for the next president, so that the republicans can run on the idea of Obama wants to raise taxes again.

ALL of the tax cuts should be ended because they never should have been enacted in the first place... even the middle class ones!! Now they are looking at cutting social security, medicare and other IMPORTANT programs due to the debt commission, but items like idiotic tax cuts and military spending don't get talked about in any serious matter.

Disgusting.

[budkin]

87. Stop pretending they aren't going to cave... this sounds EXACTLY like the public option thing

[Beartracks]

92. "force them to push for just an extension of the cuts for the rich later"

Republicans would GLADLY do that... except that it would look bad. Um... Waaah? :nopity:

------------------------------

[INdemo]

94. I am ready to help...

organize a progressive third party and stop listening to these corporate........Can we start today
Hell yes the tax cuts for the rich will be extended..this story is just the beginning...

[Pholus]

99. This ends in a cave & I'm ready too. Put me on a buddy list so we can talk after the dust settles.

[barbtries]

95. i get so sick of it.

when i saw the previous headline i didn't even click on it. i didn't believe it and even if it was true i wasn't up to the bellyaching. my knee has lost its jerk.

[mzmolly]

101. "we cannot afford to borrow 700 billion to pay for extending the tax cuts for the wealthiest ..."

:toast:

[Pholus]

103. but continue the sentence.... "and we are open to compromise..."

So the current position is:

1) extend the cuts for the middle class
2) don't extend the cuts for the wealthiest

How do you compromise without either

1) Cutting the middle class cuts (fine, but that's slitting his own wrist)
2) Caving on tax cuts for the wealthy and finding SOME money for it.

Would "500 billion" be considered a compromise for instance?

[mzmolly]

116. I don't know what will come of any compromise.

I'll wait and see, before judging the end result.

[Pholus]

117. That would be okay I guess but seriously why do it at all? We got this serious deficit commission

so why spend money on tax cuts at all? The things EXPIRE and the deficit decreases. What game made it worthwhile to let the elephant's trunk start to enter the room because the tail end is obviously following...

[mzmolly]

119. I edited my original reply to you. I don't want to speculate given the WH denied

the story flat out.

I agree with you. I'd rather pass an middle class extension in the lame duck and include a job creation credit for those making over X amount, so that R's can't falsely claim a "job killing tax increase" over and over again. I have no idea if this is possible, but that would be my dream scenario. ;)

[Pholus]

121. I'm VERY frustrated with this but I am hoping too! ;)

[Frank Booth]

105. DON'T BUY THE SPIN!

This article confirms that the White House is giving in on Bush tax cuts.

The position was: There will be no extension of tax cuts for incomes over $250,000.

The position now is: A temporary extension of tax cuts for incomes over $250,000 is A-OK.

Axelrod and Pfeiffer are saying the exact same thing that was published on Huffington Post, just trying to package it in a more palatable way for us 98% saps.

[Skittles]

135. lots of DU saps, for sure

[Demeter]

106. And another trial balloon gets shot out of the air

After the Olbermann victory, maybe we are getting it back in gear....

[county worker]

107. We started off with extend cuts for those under 250K only

Now we move to extend the cuts for 250k only but extend the rest temporarily. WHY!

Next it will be extend them all permanently!

I'm sick and tired of Obama working with the right! He's a fucking weakling! He's compromising our lives away!

[ProudDad]

108. If the past two years is any indication,

I'd wait until the ink is dry on the bill -- if any...

"Public Option" anyone?

[Love Bug]

157. Yep. Once bitten, twice shy.

[ermasdaughter]

109. Huff Post is still screaming the headline!!

That site is run by republicans. Of that I am sure.

[deacon]

203. HuffPo sucks. They are just like the rest of them. n/t

[Jim__]

113. Was this a trail balloon? And did we just win? - n/t

[madrchsod]

126. my reply on huffington this morning--where`s the .....

huffington is becoming an uptown drudge report

[yurbud]

127. how about this for a compromise: raise the ceiling of those who get to keep the tax cut to $500K

or something like that.

While it would reduce revenue, it would force the GOP into defending a smaller and smaller, wealthier and wealthier minority.

[ProudDad]

133. Bullshit...

Those who got the bounty from the last 35 years of wealth transfer from the bottom to the top...

Should pay through the nose...

I'd say anyone making over $100,000 per year should PAY and PAY and PAY and PAY...

[yurbud]

188. I'm all for leaving it at $250, I was just thinking tactically

[sofa king]

128. So there are dozens of you who believe Congress will do SOMETHING before they do NOTHING....

Congress' momentum is always toward inaction. Inaction causes these tax cuts to expire. Inaction wins every time. The tax cuts will expire as long as business stays as usual. If they do expire, the Republicans will be blamed for it.

Even in normal times Republicans in Congress are not nearly as procedurally adept as Congressional Democrats are, even without Senator Byrd. With a flood of ignorant redneck yahoos stumbling into Washington, they'll be even less able than usual, and less willing to compromise. They control the weaker house of Congress.

It will take one wise Democrat in any one of half a dozen Senate subcommittees to split the extension along the lines we want, forcing the rich-persons' handout to follow a separate procedural path which will be blocked at every turn by Senate Democrats.

Quietly, Senate Democrats will promise House Republicans a chance to re-enter the rich-persons' provision in conference, just to sucker them into keeping the issue alive long enough to really hurt them. Then, when the bills go to conference, Senate Democrats will laugh at House Republicans and vote their suggestion down.

They can afford to do this because the important part of the action is returning $700 billion to the treasury by doing absolutely nothing, the one thing Congress is expert at doing. It's the one thing we can do for sure. All the Republicans can do is hold the middle-class extension hostage for awhile, which is great because if the cuts can be killed entirely, the next middle class tax cut is going to be a Democratic tax cut, which will also be opposed by the Republicans.

At that point it will take all of two statements, one from the President and one from the Senate majority leader, to cast the stonewalling as a REPUBLICAN EFFORT TO RAISE TAXES ON THE MIDDLE CLASS, which will provide the Democratic Party with an unassailable election issue sure to pave the way for President Obama's reelection and a return of the House to Democratic control. All for following the path of least resistance, which is what Congress always does.

And some of you folks believe that something else is going to happen? Those of you who do need to sit down and actually watch how this new Congress works.

[Pholus]

155. From your lips to the creator's ears.

Me? I say that every BAD bit of legislation I've ever seen comes when both sides cut a deal to make it happen. And if dems say "go ahead" the pukes are going to ram it through.

[Hulk]

129. Gotta have a bit more faith than this, progressives.

I get tired of seeing these bull shit headlines. Give the man a little respect and a bit of support.

You all bitch and moan about "no public option"...selling out to the insurance companies, and then this nonsense. Jesus people...give the man a little confidence and support.

Yeah, he hasn't turned the world upside down and shaken the pennies out of the wealthy scum in this country nor sent the war criminals to their trials...but how long has he been in office again? How much bull shit, lying, treachery and sedition has he faced from the reich wing and corporate thuggery in this country during that time? And you are all so damn willing to cave in and swallow every bit of horse shit that comes down the pike, and bitch and moan about not getting 100% of what YOU wanted.

Get serious for just a moment. There are ONE HUNDRED Senators that he has to deal with. There are 450+ Representatives that he has to deal with. There is the propaganda arm of the corporations and reich wing that he is up against 24/7. There are the ignorant masses that believe any bull shit that is thrown their way....and YOU want him to turn this country around on a dime? YOU disgust me.

President Obama has done more for this country in 20 months than than any president since Roosevelt...and against all of that corporate and reich wing opposition. The only group he has on his side are his wife and a handful of die-hard supporters that believe a start is better than capitulation.

He got us STARTED with Health Care Reform. NO, it isn't what we wanted...but it's A START! He's managed to save the American Auto Industry from being sold off to the greedy corporate parasites that were willing to toss one of the last strong bastions of middle class workers out on the street. He managed to deflect the Great Depression in our age by propping up those lying, cheating greedy banks and Wall Street blood suckers. He's managed to pull thousands of troops out of Iraq; HASN'T invaded Iran for nonsense that is hardly believable; STARTED some reformation within the financial industry to protect YOU and I; and on and on and on. HOW LONG has he been in office again?

Impatient cry babies. Sometimes I'm as frustrated and ashamed by the Democratic Party, progressives, liberals, whatever we call ourselves. Get over it! We are at least headed in the direction we wanted. Just think what he could do with our deserved support!!

Liberals, progressives, Democrats = Big f*cking cry babies. We want it NOW....all of it!!

[Skittles]

134. *yawn*

America is spiraling down and you think you point it out are "cry babies"? :rofl:

[briteleaf]

138. The power of a plutocracy

Extending tax cuts for the wealthy is one of the main agendas of the Right. It would be more fair to eliminate tax cuts for rest of us than to extend the tax cuts for the wealthy who already pay a smaller percentage of their earnings than their secretaries. It's really simple. When the economy is in recovery from the corporate and wall street profiteering that brought about it's crash, instead of cutting taxes, simply withdraw from the longest 2 wars in our history. I'm sorry for the shattered countries that we will be leaving behind but our economy cannot afford these expensive, long term mistakes. It seems obvious that the profiteering of our war machine industries outweighs, in importance, the thousands of americans who we have sent there to be killed and maimed.
The wealthy formerly paid a much larger percentage of their massive income. Their tax cuts over the last 6 decades have been tremendous. Their deductions have also been hugely enlarged. Their secret campaign contributions (Thanks to a legislative supreme court) have multiplied campaign coffers many times over. The ultra-wealthy, corporations and foreign countries now donate without limit to support candidates who they wish to influence. They not only control the republican party but also many of the democrats as well. They will continue to rule the government of america until the citizens are educated about the crucial importance of campaign and election reform.
Think about it. Our economy is in distress so let's give money in tax cuts to those americans who need it the least. If you still believe making the ultra-wealthy even wealthier will boost our economy you're living in a century past. The ultra-wealthy move their corporate headquarters to a tiny island to lower their taxes, buy up gold bars in a swiss bank account and invest in lucrative international interests. They are not creating jobs. The wealthy own america now and have taken control. The rest of us are little fish feeding from their crumbs.

[Scurrilous]

142. Thanks.

K & R :thumbsup:

[ProudDad]

143. As someone who live on Social Security...

who doesn't even make enough money to pay income tax (or much else)...

but who pays PLENTY of regressive taxes (over 25%)...

I'd like to see ALL of the "bush tax cuts" expire...

But, Obama and the rest seem to insist on pretending that there's actually a substantial middle class left in this country...

Silly Obama... :crazy:

Just about the only "middle class" left in this country is between the ears of most of the sheeple...

[craigmatic]

145. Cutting taxes during war time is just financial mismanagement. Obama should let the Clinton rates

stand and give up on cutting taxes for anybody.

[aiki1222]

147. something else Obama admin caving on....

Here's something I would not have forseen.....the current
administration caving in to Wallstreet again and legitimizing
fraud against the citizens of our coutry; see below...
  
 
PARDON! LIVINGLIES OBTAINS WALL STREET PLAYBOOK: MERS TO BE
LEGITIMIZED BY ACT OF CONGRESS 
Neil Garfield | November 11, 2010 at 4:29 am | Categories:
CDO, CORRUPTION, Eviction, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage,
bubble, currency, foreclosure, securities fraud | URL:
http://wp.me/p7SnH-2It 

After years of negative judicial decisions about the use of a
straw-man on mortgages, MERS was about to lose its existence
as well as its credibility. But now all of that is set to
change as Wall Street money is pouring into the coffers of
those who are receptive (i.e., almost everyone in Congress).
The legislation is already being drafted under the interstate
commerce clause to ratify MERS and everything it did
retroactively. It appears that the Obama administration is
ready to pardon all the securitization deviants by signing
this bill into law. This information is corroborated by
several people who are in sensitive positions --- persons who
would be the first to know such proposals. Fortunately, there
are some people in Washington who have a conscience and do not
want to see this happen.
Besides the obvious seediness of this maneuver, it runs
roughshod over state property laws, and the rights of
investors, homeowners and borrowers. It amounts to a permanent
installation of a Federal system that supersedes the county
records for recording property rights. Off-record comments
I've heard from people in power are outraged at this assault
on states' rights. But these people are not legislators, who
are getting promises larger than anything in your imagination,
if they will support such a bill. It might be couched as a
uniform law to be adopted by the states to get around the
states rights issues, but it will permanently remove some of
the power over property that lies solely within the
jurisdiction of the states and place it preemptively within
federal jurisdiction.
All of this is scheduled to happen during the lame duck
session of congress between now and the end of the this year,
2010. That means in a manner of days, some bill that may look
like it has nothing to do with property, mortgages or
foreclosures is going to have attached to it a provision whose
effect will go even further than the notarization bill that
went through Congress like S--t through a goose and almost got
signed by the President. We caught that one AFTER it was
passed by Congress unanimously but before Obama signed it. 
We announced it as an attempt at a presidential pardon to all
those who committed crimes in the notarization of documents
that were fabricated and forged, all those who committed
forgery and perjury and all those who created counterfeit
documentation that was presented to courts as original
documents. 
This time we got the information, we think, before it was
stitched into some innocuous looking bill.  If we don't find
it and block it, the plight of homeowners will get that much
worse. 
Add a comment to this post 
        
 
 
WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Publish text, photos,
music, and videos by email using our Post by Email feature. 

[Blasphemer]

148. No way the GOP will agree to the 2 categories being separated

Why would they? The Obama Admin would be foolish to even temporarily extend the cuts on the wealthy. Just let them all expire and force Republicans to vote "no" on middle class tax cuts subsequently.

[Dinger]

149. Deny All You Want

Let's see what actually happens. (ACTIONS speak louder than words (denial).

[The Wielding Truth]

153. Yay! We have hope that they will do the best thing for the middle class!

[Jakes Progress]

156. But, but. We always said

we would compromise. Just note the weasel words. Our position, prostrate, remains unchanged.

[True_Blue]

158. Got my hopes up when I saw the headline.

How is this denying the HuffPo story?

[laughingliberal]

159. I'm against any extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy.

<The main sticking point is that Republicans won't allow the two categories to be extended for different durations, because that would force them to push for just an extension of the cuts for the rich later.>

Won't allow???

[rasputin1952]

160. I'm not trying to sound facetious, but I knew all along this was...

little more than a RW tactic aimed at stirring people up while PO is out of the country. Why people cant see these things makes me wonder people, (from either side) haven't figured out this act yet...it's all like the magicians main workable point...if you watch the other hand, you'll see how the gimmick is done. While all of this has been all over the net and news...what have they really been doing?

There are always things going on behind this, or any other barrage like this, it's planned and every time, we fall for it.

[laughingliberal]

164. So, you're saying the WH won't support extending tax cuts for the wealthy? nt

[rasputin1952]

192. After this fiasco, I'm not sure what they are going to do...

I believe that D's will come together to ensure the top 2% pay their share. Easy way, let the whole thing expire, there has been legislation since that has brought down the other ranges, and further cuts, if necessary, for the middle class would be pretty easy to pass...no one really supports a tax cut for the top 2%, except those people that would receive the break.

My point is, like comedy and great drama, it all comes down to timing, and this story came out after it was possible to somehow make "palatable"; PO out of the country, congress taking it easy, and to top it all of, it's a proposal, which, like the SS "'cuts" ans upping the age limit are. This hasn't even been discussed yet by those that can actually do the work involved.

[laughingliberal]

198. I agree it should be easy to pass stand alone tax relief for the middle class. I hope they do.

And, as you said, there are other cuts in place for the middle class which have passed since the Bush tax cuts (notably, in the stimulus bill).

As for the deficit commission, I think it was no mistake the chairmen released their mark while the President was out of the country and not really able to comment. Neither one of them has ever struck me as the most honorable.

[Kall]

161. Whatever.

If they haven't caved yet, they will soon.

[kenfrequed]

162. Hmm

I hope that this is correct.

That the White House is not capitulating. Maybe someone was floating a trial balloon to see how outraged the base would get or if the base would be understanding considering the recent losses.

Or maybe it was a flack piece pushed by bad sourcing or a Republican stealth bit in hopes of deflecting actual voting on the issue and weakening any position on the tax bill before the end of the year. It could also have been a Blue Dog thing where they realized they aren't going to have the same pull in the Democratic party and decided to try to benefit their wealthy friends (or themselves) before leaving for the private sector.

[DirkGently]

165. No "permanent" extension of tax cuts for the wealthy. Uh huh. This modifier is no accident.

[laughingliberal]

168. +1000 nt

[donco6]

173. Heh. Tricksy humans. n/t

[DirkGently]

220. Gotta love, "As we've been saying all along (insert subltly modified version that changes meaning)"

[ChairmanAgnostic]

171. deja vu, all over again.

Didn't we see Act 1 with the health insurance reform fiasco?
With single payer, drug importation reform, and more?

First, an aide says one thing, the next day, they "take it back"
A week later, another aide says it again, only stronger, and so forth and so forth?

[bc3000]

172. Headline seem to be missing a "yet"

[AsahinaKimi]

179. Maybe axelrod emails are really written by Tucker Carlson ?

:hide:

[stormpilot]

181. The $700,000,000,000 question

End Bush Tax Cuts For The Rich

Sign up for the National Call-in Day - http://act.truemajorityaction.org/p/salsa/web/common/public/signup?signup_page_KEY=31

[BREMPRO]

191. HA! I love this! great illustration

[Beacool]

183. They are talking about it right now in The Situation Room.

They are saying that they are going to compromise and extend the taxes for all (including those making over 250K) on a temporary basis.

[wordpix]

184. "we cannot afford to borrow 700 billion" - how about, "The richest don't need tax cuts extended"

Geesh, the richest Americans making $250K or more (in some cases, $10's of million$ per year) certainly don't need a tax break when we're $13 trillion in the hole and people are going hungry.

[Creative]

186. Do they have a choice?

[shanti]

210. yes, they have a choice

good grief :eyes:

[ElsewheresDaughter]

187. if the White House folds on this one they will lose even worse in 2012

[bread_and_roses]

189. Didn't we have just this sort of yo-yo game with the Public Option?

I don't recall all the details - hardly any, even - and goddess forefend that I should have to relive that endless, fruitless, agonizing struggle again - but didn't we have a playbook of hints, statements, assurances, re-assurances, etc. batted back and forth from advisor to Obama to spokesperson to Obama to .... Obama abandoning the PO? And didn't we find out later that the play-by-play was all a farce? The decision had long been made. So, if people are quick to jump to judgment, maybe it's just because they're living in the "reality-based community" where past patterns often have a certain predictive value?

Personally, I find the notion that Presidential spokespersons are out there waving red flags without Presidential knowledge and approval pretty hard to swallow.

[DirkGently]

190. Yes. Once again, figuring out what "our" side is angling for is a murky proposition.

Is no Democrat even bothering to point out anymore that Social Security costs and the deficit are NOT the same thing?

[ibegurpard]

196. yup

[RollWithIt]

195. Seems like Obama is being surrounded by a perfect storm... Tea Party & Irrational Progressives

Oh well...

[ProSense]

197. What should the President do:

Poll

[sam sarrha]

200. the top 1% richest Americans hold 42% of the Nations Financial wealth.. the bottom 80% has 7%

that means the top 1% has 6 times the Financial wealth as the poorest 80%

the Bush tax cuts subsidize mostly the top richest 5% .,. these are the wealthiest people in the world, they do not spend the tax cuts. warren buffet pays only 14% income tax.!! the bush tax cuts are 1/2 the deficet..$4.000,000,000 yes folks 4 Trillion dollars in the next 10 years.. to people who have 93% of all americas financial wealth. this is meant only to destroy Social Security and medicare.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html



GOP is a Cargo Cult of OCD Wealth Hoarders, they believe that wealth is the Measure of God’s favor

of a man, therefore it is a sin to tax a Rich Man/Corporation. the poor are being punished by God, therefore it is a sin to help them. and they use Mafia tactics to enforce their ideology to keep the money/power coming.

Psychotic Oligarchs think anything they do to horde more wealth is ordained by God, anyone they hurt deserves it..

the GOP is a Psychotic Cult.. their ideology Kills People, men women children in their quest to Horde more and more needless Wealth/Power... they are mentally ill

the GOP has been taken over by these guys... the main players, leaders in the GOP studied under Strauss at U of Chicago
http://doggo.tripod.com/doggchrisdomin.html

"snip...Leo Strauss was born in 1899 and died in 1973. ... He is most famous for resuscitating Machiavelli and introducing his principles as the guiding philosophy of the neo-conservative movement. ... More than any other man, Strauss breathed upon conservatism, inspiring it to rise from its atrophied condition and its natural dislike of change and to embrace an unbounded new political ideology that rides on the back of a revolutionary steed, hailing even radical change; hence the name Neo-Conservatives.

Significantly, Dominionism is a form of Social Darwinism.<48> It inherently includes the religious belief that wealth-power is a sign of God’s election. That is, out of the masses of people and the multitude of nations, wealth, in and of itself, is thought to indicate God’s approval on men and nations whereas poverty and sickness reflect God’s disapproval.

(It was not until I read this article that I realized that this is a fundamental tenet of Dominionists.

Worldly wealth and power are signs of God's favor -- to attempt to limit or decrease one's wealth and power is to disrespect God.

On the contrary, God's elect on Earth are called upon to increase their wealth and power.

It is not sufficient for a man to be a millionaire, or for a country to have sovereignty within its borders -- a man must strive to increase his wealth as much as possible, and a Dominionist government's behavior toward its neighbors must be "invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity".

Furthermore, any attempt to decrease a person's or a country's wealth and power -- to take from the rich to give to the poor, to reduce military spending and power -- is a direct attack on God.)

If “Secular Humanists are the greatest threat to Christianity the world has ever known,” as theologian Francis Schaeffer claimed, then who are the Humanists? According to Dominionists, humanists are the folks who allow or encourage licentious behavior in America. They are the undisciplined revelers.

Put all the enemies of the Dominionists together, boil them down to liquid and bake them into the one single most highly derided and contaminated individual known to man, and you will have before you an image of the quintessential “liberal” -- one of those folks who wants to give liberally to the poor and needy -- who desires the welfare and happiness of all Americans -- who insists on safety regulations for your protection and who desires the preservation of your values -- those damnable people are the folks that must be reduced to powerlessness -- or worse: extinction.

What would a “reconstructed” America look like under the Dominionists? K.L. Gentry, a Dominionist himself, suggests the following “elements of a theonomic approach to civic order,” which I strongly suggest should be compared to the Texas GOP platform of 2002, which reveals that we are not just talking about imaginary ideas but some things are already proposed on Republican agendas.<60> Dominionism’s concept of government according to Gentry is as follows:

“1. It obligates government to maintain just monetary policies ... fiat money, fractional reserve banking, and deficit spending.

“2. It provides a moral basis for elective government officials. ...

“3. It forbids undue, abusive taxation of the rich. ...

“4. It calls for the abolishing of the prison system and establishing a system of just restitution. *...

“5. A theonomic approach also forbids the release, pardoning, and paroling of murderers by requiring their execution. ...

“6. It forbids industrial pollution that destroys the value of property. ...

“7. It punishes malicious, frivolous malpractice suits. ...

“8. It forbids abortion rights. ... Abortion is not only a sin, but a crime, and, indeed, a capital crime.”<61>
. . .

* Gary North describes the ‘just restitution’ system of the bible, which happens to reinstitute slavery,
like this:


“At the other end of the curve, the poor man who steals is eventually caught and sold into bondage under a successful person. His victim receives payment; he receives training; his buyer receives a stream of labor services. If the servant is successful and buys his way out of bondage, he re-enters society as a disciplined man, and presumably a self-disciplined man. He begins to accumulate wealth.” ...snip"
The Dogs aren't the problem.. it's the Rabies..!

[Imagevision]

201. Give million/billionaires tax cuts - reduce Social Security benefits

[deacon]

202. It's time to put ALL media under scrutiny. Obviously, liberal/progressive blogs and media are just

as guilty as the rest of them, preying on liberals, progressives - all democrats - to keep themselves relevent and themselves knee deep in advertising money.

[on point]

211. Obama spells compromise as 'Capitulation'

So already he is giving in.

What doesn't he get? The compromise is all tax cuts extended permanently, except those for the wealthy whose taxes go up now. End of story. I don't want to hear anything less than this. Before you know it, Obama will give everything to the repubs and they will still vote no and blame him for it.

Take a position and stick to it. Make them back down for a change.

Get a clue already!!!

[veganlush]

213. they could and should use reconciliation

to pass the middle class cuts. Let the repugnants do the rich cuts, and pay the price for them, in the next session.

[pam4water]

215. I keep telling Obama "Don't to surrender, until you see the whites of their eyes!"

[Imagevision]

217. Obama,Permanent tax cuts no, TEMPORARY Billions in tax cuts for billionaires yes

Obama has insisted tax cuts for the wealthiest should not become permanent because of a potential $700 billion impact on the deficit over the next decade. He has left the door open to a temporary extension for higher income levels.
Axelrod, asked about the article, said by e-mail that the Huffington Post's conclusion that Obama was ready to accept an across-the-board temporary continuation of the tax cuts was overwritten and contained nothing Obama had not already said.

Obama has no problem with removing some benefits from seniors already receiving social security though, Obama made campaign promises and just doesn't seem to care what he... "Hoped" for.

[Imagevision]

218. And in 2012 Obama to extend "TEMPORARY" tax cuts as election requirement...

[Time for change]

219. The key phrase by Pleiffer is

"Nothing has changed".

In Obama's speech last week, he said that he will not approve "permanent" tax cuts for the rich. That's his loophole. It leaves him the option of approving "temporary" tax cuts for the rich. And that is specifically what the HuffPo interview suggested he would do. But "temporary" until when? Until he or some other Democratic president and Congress develops the political will to end them is what it means. If he extends them now, why on earth would anyone believe that he'll end them later, when we'll have much less support in Congress. This is bullshit, just like we've been getting from him since he was elected.

[texshelters]

221. Obama and the Democrats already caved on the tax extension

By not passing a bill for middle class but NOT top bracket tax cuts. Obama and Axelrod want to NOT deal with the tax cut issue while saying they haven't caved. Not acting is caving in my book.

You can't have it both ways.

However, they can have a make good on this one.

Peace,
Tex Shelters
http://texshelters.wordpress.com/