I still don't understand why we can't do it this way on taxcuts

[bluestateguy]

Have two successive bills to vote on:

The first bill preserves middle class taxcuts, nothing more.

The second bill will extend Bush taxcuts for the wealthy. I think it is a good idea to get Congressmen and Senators on the record, on a stand alone bill
having to vote for or against taxcuts for the rich, without such a bill being attached to any other matters.

The first bill would pass and be signed by the president.

The second bill may or may not pass, but even if it did pass, it would be vetoed by Obama and sustained. Case closed and let's go home for the election.

That's my idea, and don't pee in my Wheaties.

[kentuck]

1. It could be done that way if the Dems wanted to pass it that way...

I will not pee in your Wheaties but I can't guarantee the Congress won't piss all over the table...

[gateley]

2. Right this minute on MSNBC they're saying that 31 House Dems want to

extend it for a year. :grr:

[niceypoo]

4. Stockholm Syndrome

“Segments of populations under chronic siege commonly embrace the indictments of the besiegers, however bigoted and outrageous. They hope that by doing so and reforming accordingly they can assuage the hostility of their tormentors and win relief.” – Dr. Kenneth Levin, The Oslo Syndrome

[chimpymustgo]

7. "Compromise" is the new meme for extending tax cuts for the wealthy.

[Warpy]

3. Conservatives are digging in their heels and refusing to do it that way

and they want both bills tied together so that they can paint Democrats and Obama as tax hikers before the election.

That's why.

Whether or not it will work depends on whether or not Obama demands prime time air time to explain a veto of such a terrible bill.

What those tax cuts to the fat pigs represent is bankrupting the government. It needs to be explained that way. People will listen.

[earthside]

5. I think it is a good idea.

Democrats are the majority and if they have the guts they can present the legislation any way they want to.

And, I'd love to see Senate Repuglicans filibuster a middle class tax cut extension.

[kentuck]

8. I think you are correct...

It is up to the Speaker and the Majority Leader about when and how they want to bring it up for a vote. Is that not correct?

[Lil Missy]

6. That would be too easy, and the pukes would lose. Repukes want the leverage of all or nothing.

[chimpymustgo]

9. Why are Democrats throwing away our trump card on this? We should be RUSHING this fight to the

floors of the House and Senate!

[bluestateguy]

10. Kick

Time to get this going again.

[Marr]

11. Better yet, why not just let the Bush tax cuts expire, then

introduce a bill to reduce middle class tax cuts, and nothing for the rich. Having a majority means you set the agenda. Don't even give them the opportunity to vote for tax cuts for the wealthy. Let them argue against middle class tax cuts if they like.

I suspect it's not being done this way because our political establishment, Democrats included, want to make the tax cuts for the wealthy permanent. They need to maneuver themselves into a 'compromising position', so to speak, from which they can say they had no choice.

[bluestateguy]

12. kick

:kick:

[TBF]

13. Sounds like a good idea to me. nt