Obama to End Series of Tax Breaks For Hedge Fund Managers, Oil & Gas Companies to Pay for Jobs Plan

[ClarkUSA]

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama will pay for his $447 billion jobs plan by ending a series of tax breaks for oil and gas companies, hedge-fund managers and people making more than $200,000, the White House said Monday.

In total, Mr. Obama's plan will end about $467 billion of tax breaks over 10 years, said White House Office of Management and Budget Director Jack Lew. The president has previously proposed ending the tax breaks, but has faced stiff resistance from Republicans.... By choosing to end the tax breaks, the White House is likely setting itself up for a fight with Republicans. Over the summer, Republicans said they wouldn't end tax breaks amid concerns doing so as the U.S. is coming out of a recession would hamper the recovery.

The White House disputed the notion that raising taxes on the wealthy would hurt growth. The measures to pay for spending "are spread out so that there aren't negative impacts," said White House press secretary Jay Carney.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904353504576566802250477510.html

President Obama is speaking up for liberal Democratic principles. Now it's time for all of us to support our Democratic President and our Democrats in Congress. Call your DLC/Third Way/Blue Dog Democrats if you have 'em because they tend to side with Republicans against President Obama.

Contact your Congressmen now using this directory: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt?command=congdir

President Obama can't do it alone. He needs us to call/fax/email/twitter our Congressmen, write LTTE, protest outside local Congressional offices (after calling the local TV station to set up a news story, of course) and show up at townhalls to agitate for "aye" votes.

[valerief]

1. Jobs for people vs. gazillions of buckos for gazillionaires. Progressive vs. Conservative values.

We know where the American media stands. Will Americans have a voice *anywhere*???

[leveymg]

2. Finally getting smart and beginning to fight. May be too little, too late, though.

I wish him and all Dems all the luck. But, they've been glued to the centrist third-rail for too long. Barely breathing.

[robinlynne]

4. exacaclty. had he let the cuts expire in december the economy would be much much

better all around. and of course he could have passed an unemployment measure separately (and months before when congress was Dem even) ! the unemployment benefits were tiny compared to the tax cuts. a bad deal was had by all.

[ClarkUSA]

6. Name the Republicans who would have "passed an unemployment measure separately".

[frylock]

7. we'll never know for lack of effort

[cottonseed]

11. ^^ I love this one. Mystic progressivism.

[bvar22]

27. I would rather fight and lose,

then to give up without a fight.
Most of America feels the same.
We respect fighters,
and people who STAND for Something,
even when we don't agree.

"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed



Solidarity!
The problem I have with "Centrists" is that they agree with Republicans on policy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[uponit7771]

14. I can say the same thing about jumping to the moon no?

[frylock]

19. why don't you give that a shot and let us all know how that worked out for you

[rury]

48. Lack of effort??????

That's a goddamned lie frylock.
He was in CONSTANT negotiations with irrational, racist Rethuglikkkan Teabaggers over that very issue.
You're a bitch of a troll here!!!!
Enjoy your visit until you tire of trying to dampen enthusiasm for President Obama.
Then you'll tuck your tail between your legs and slouch back to redstate, free republic or stormfront!

[robinlynne]

8. didnt need any republicans last year to pass a bill.

[Inuca]

17. You forgot about the magical 60 in teh Senate n/t

[no limit]

25. You forget that these tax cuts were set to expire on their own, no senate action required

[JNinWB]

10. You will have to wait a l-o-o-o-ng time for your answer.

When I ask for the list of 60 Senators who would vote for the Public Option, or vote to close Gitmo, I only hear the crickets.


This is the legislation the GOTP House has been toiling over:

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/09/most-anti-environment-congress-history

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

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

[ClarkUSA]

28. FACT: Joe Lieberman killed the PO when he sided w/the Republican filibuster threat.

Read the FACTS before you accuse others of lying:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=joe+lieberman+killed+the+public+option&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[ClarkUSA]

32. You are ignoring the facts I gave you via Google, which is unfortunate.

Why are you ignoring the truth and pushing a false narrative?

Read the FACTS: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=770662&mesg_id=771685

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

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

[ClarkUSA]

35. "They did not need Joe Lieberman"? Wrong. History aka. NEWS STORIES refute your false narrative.

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF? Your saying so doesn't make it so. Your rhetoric is truly irrelevant in this case because the facts contradict you. Furthermore, you have nothing to back you up whereas I do.

Here is PROOF OF MY CLAIM via the news stories at that time:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=joe+lieberman+killed+public+option&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

You got nuthin' but words.

[no limit]

37. Just to be clear...you are disputing that parts of the healthcare reform bill were passed...

using reconciliation? You are really disputing that?

Or is your confusion with what reconciliation is?

On either point I don't know why you would still be confused. You and I have had this discussion many times. The way this discussion always goes is you dispute basic facts over and over again until you can no longer do so without looking like a total fool. At that point you never correct yourself, you simply leave the thread only to repeat the same lies days later.

Why?

Please be clear about your confusion here. Do you not know that HCR was passed using reconciliation or do you simply not know what reconciliation is?

[ClarkUSA]

39. LOL! So you have no proof of your ""They did not need Joe Lieberman" claim? Didn't think so.

[no limit]

41. Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Care_and_Education_Reconciliation_Act_of_2010

You do notice the word reconciliation right in the fucking title, correct? Would you also like me to find some links to discussions here where I already pointed all this out to you?

[ClarkUSA]

So what? Why are you ignoring all the news stories reporting Joe Lieberman killed the public option?

Hmm?

[no limit]

44. I told you why I am disputing them. Why are you ignoring what I'm telling you?

They used reconciliation. You posting a link to google doesn't mean jack shit. Also, those are not news stories, they are opinion pieces. I have google links that say Obama is a nazi. Does that mean he must be a nazi? You truly don't see how absolutely idiotic this argument you are making is?

[ClarkUSA]

46. You're in the wrong. Your rhetoric are just words. You have no facts to back up your claim.

[no limit]

50. They only needed 50 votes in the senate plus Joe Biden

are you disputing this?

[ClarkUSA]

52. Blah, blah. You have yet to prove "They did not need Joe Lieberman" to pass the public option.

[no limit]

53. Why can't you answer my simple question which if you answered

would clearly tell you why they didn't need Joe Lieberman.

Again, they only needed 50 votes in the senate plus Joe Biden. Are you disputing this?

[ClarkUSA]

54. Why can't you offer proof that "They did not need Joe Lieberman" to pass the public option?

[no limit]

55. I gave you proof. I told you they only needed 50 votes plus Joe Biden

So without Joe Lieberman they still had 8 Democrats left. What more proof do you need?

[ClarkUSA]

56. That's not proof. Those are only your words. You are wrong. Here's proof from many sources-->

Proof that you are wrong to claim that "They did not need Joe Lieberman" to pass to public option:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Joe+Lieberman+killed+the+public+option&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Furthermore, any glance at GD or GDP during that time period would back me up, because there was much caterwauling here over Joe Lieberman's decision.

[no limit]

57. You are saying that I am wrong when I say they only needed 50 votes plus Joe Biden?

If you are saying I am wrong on this tell me why you think that. If you think I am correct and you simply don't agree that they didn't need Joe Liberman then explain to me what they needed him for.

If you can't do that then I'll simply accept the fact that you are incapable of framing your own argument and the only thing you are capable of is posting links to google.

Let me know which of these categories you fall in to.

[ClarkUSA]

58. Your words are not proof that "They did not need Joe Lieberman" to pass the public option.

Reconcilation cannot be used for just anything. Why don't you write to Harry Reid's office and ask them how the public option was killed and who killed it?

[no limit]

59. Thank you for telling me which category you fall in to.

Apparently it's the one where you are incapable of making your own argument. You are only capable of posting links to google while repeating the same thing over and over.

I'll give you one last chance. In your own words explain to me why they needed Joe Lieberman. If you can't do that have a good day, my head hurts at this point.

[ClarkUSA]

60. You're in the category of people who have no proof to offer and refuse to listen to historical fact.

Like I said, now I know how Galileo must have felt. :rofl:

[Cosmocat]

36. Parts that had ALREADY passed the cloiture vote ...

Nothing in there even approaching single payer or universal coverage.

What had passed cloiture would never passed cloture had it had anything related to single payer.

[no limit]

38. They used reconciliation. They didn't need cloture

[ClarkUSA]

40. You have yet to prove "They did not need Joe Lieberman" in order to pass the public option.

I have proved you wrong, though, so perhaps that explains it. :)

[no limit]

42. Nice edit. You asked me to prove that they used reconciliation then you editted it

what happened? Did you just realize your mistake?

What you keep ignoring is that when you use reconciliation you only need 50 votes plus Joe Biden. You don't need 60 votes therefore you don't need Joe Liberman.

[ClarkUSA]

43. That's false. I keep asking you to prove your quoted reply to me: "They did not need Joe Lieberman"

Which was in response to my telling you that Joe Lieberman killed the public option and linking to news stories via Google proving my claim.

[no limit]

45. Why did they need Joe Lieberman?

Remember, I'm not having a discussion with Google, I'm having a discussion with you. Surely you can give me a simple explaination for why they needed Joe Lieberman in your own words.

[ClarkUSA]

47. One mo' time -> FACT: Joe Lieberman killed the PO when he sided w/the Republican filibuster threat.

Here are the facts to prove my claim:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=770662&mesg_id=771685

Again, you have nothing but words. It's amusing. Now I know how Galileo must've felt.

[no limit]

49. I asked you to tell me in your own words why they needed Joe Lieberman

are you incapable of doing that? Because all the links you keep posting say it was because they needed 60 votes. As I keep telling you over and over again that is not true. They only needed 50 votes in the senate because of reconciliation.

[ClarkUSA]

51. I just did. And offered proof. You, however, seem unable to prove your claim.

Your rhetoric is irrelevant to me. Show me proof from a credible source that "They did not need Joe Lieberman" to pass the public option.

[Cosmocat]

61. You can't just use reconciliation as some kind of joker ...

"A reconciliation bill is one containing changes in law recommended pursuant to reconciliation instructions in a budget resolution. If the instructions pertain to only one committee in a chamber, that committee reports the reconciliation bill. If the instructions pertain to more than one committee, the House Budget Committee reports an omnibus reconciliation bill, but it may not make substantive changes in the recommendations of the other committees.<3>"

You can't just add in stuff that had not passed cloiture on the bill that is being considered.

[lumpy]

30. Thank you. Some people think they know the facts..not.

v

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

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

[leveymg]

15. He had about six months beginning 01/09/2009 to get most of it done.

But, he hired Geithner and Summers, so nothing was done on Wall St reform. There was no mortgage relief bill worth talking about after the bankers got through with it. The Stim was about 1/3 of what it needed to be. No small business relief or development bank. And, he just had to hand the HCR process to Senate centrists and DINOs like his old buddies Max and Joe Lieberman.

By some measures he f-cked up royally, but in reality Obama has done a superb job stabilizing the status quo while letting what's ledt of the blue collar and much of the middle class go done the toilet. He did that because he's basically an Establishment kinda guy without much progressive policy imagination. We all voted for and expected FDR updated for the 21st Century. We didn't even get a good, solid union liberal, like Harry Truman. On the economic front what we got was Herbert Hoover, a competent and accommodating technocrat. America is going to pay for that bait-and-switch for decades.

[Inuca]

16. Tiny if you are employed n/t

[robinlynne]

24. Tiny becuase he got 5% , maybe less, of what he gave up. not the way to negotiate.

[Turbineguy]

3. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what he does

the repubs will vote against it.

[Marsala]

5. But now Obama can say that Republicans preferred tax breaks for millionaires over his job program

The Republicans will have to defend their very unpopular "tax cuts for the rich uber alles!" policy.

[robinlynne]

9. so?

[elleng]

12. And be in jeopardy, support and election-wise.

Tactics, you know.

[elleng]

13. Thanks, Clark; need your (and his) sanity today!

:hi:

[Jakes Progress]

18. Finally. It does sound like he's beginning to catch on.

Too bad it took more than two years. But at least, it sounds like he's finally going to try to do the right thing. If he actually does, it will certainly help his chances in the election.

My email and calls to my congress critters are already done. (Of course, since I live in Texas, they were calls down a well and emails lost in ether. But at least they can't claim all their constituents agree with their corporate whorage.)

[Tarheel_Dem]

20. K&R (nt)

[Babel_17]

21. Good plan, Mr. President

Kudos to President Obama for laying out a plan that we can get behind.

[McCamy Taylor]

22. K&R

[Tx4obama]

23. K&R n/t