REVEALED: 43 House Democrats to SIDE WITH GOP on tax cuts for THE RICH

[nashville_brook]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/44-house-dems-press-pelosi-for-more-upper-income-tax-cuts.php

44 House Dems Press Pelosi For More Tax Cuts For The Wealthy


As TPM first reported last week, Rep. John Adler (D-NJ) has been rounding up signatures on a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, urging her to extend more than just the upper-income Bush tax cuts, passed in 2001. In addition, Adler and his crew want to extend the 15 percent rate on capital gains and dividend taxes, created by the 2003 Bush tax cuts. Other media outlets have since picked up on the story, and now Adler's effort is gaining steam.

A source sent over a list of 44 Democrats (one was listed in error: David Wu, OR) who have signed on to the letter. That would be enough to tip the balance if these tax cuts come up for a vote before the end of this Congress. Pelosi has a great deal of discretion over whether that happens but, as we've seen today, the Democratic party doesn't have an overwhelming desire to take a stand on letting any of Bush's tax cuts expire.

The signing deadline is tomorrow.

(snip)




John Adler (NJ)
Jason Altmire (PA)
John Barrow (GA)
Melissa Bean (IL)
Shelley Berkley (NV)
Marion Berry (AR)
Sanford Bishop (GA)
Dan Boren (OK)
Rick Boucher (VA)
Bobby Bright (AL)
Chris Carney (PA)
Travis Childers (MS)
Jim Cooper (TN)
Jim Costa (D-CA)
Kathy Dahlkemper
Lincoln Davis (TN)
Ted Deutch (FL)
Joe Donnelly (IN)
Brad Ellsworth (IN)
Ann Kirpatrick (AZ)
Kissell (NC)
Ron Klein (FL)
Suzanne Kosmas (FL)
Dan Maffei (NY)
Betsey Markey (CO)
Jim Matheson (UT)
Mike McIntyre (NC),
Michael McMahon (NY)
Walt Minnick (ID)
Harry Mitchell (AZ)
Scott Murphy (NY)
Glenn Nye (VA)
Gary Peters (MI)
Collin Peterson (MN)
Ciro Rodriguez (TX)
Mike Ross (AR)
Steve Rothman (NJ)
John Salazar (CO)
Loretta Sanchez (CA)
Albo Sires (NJ)
Zack Space (OH)
Betty Sutton (OH)
Harry Teague (NM)

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. Let the scum have a separate vote on only the rich part

[doc03]

13. Is that the new Democrat logo? Who was the f----g moron that

come up with that? I can see it now the Republicans will just run a diagonal line through it "NO DEMOCRATS". It's even blue for "BLUE DOGS" I guess

[Techn0Girl]

58. Actually the guy that made that logo used to work at Target.

[HillbillyBob]

118. I rather thought it looked like a target.

A bit too suggestive to the teabaggies with their second amendment remedies.

[thereismore]

79. That would be "Democtatic" logo. nt

[w4rma]

47. Yup. If they want it they can vote on that bill separately and vote *against* the middle class

cuts. It's pretty obvious where these Limousine Neo-liberals' priorities are.

[TicketyBoo]

2. I do not understand

what good it does to have a Democratic majority when the Democrats are such cowards.

This is disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.

[ArcticFox]

112. Democrats and Republicans are the same for the most part

They all want to please the rich. Republicans are deliberate about it. Democrats pretend to be against it, but then use their supposed "cowardice" to refuse to do anything for the 98% of us who can't buy their votes.

And us being the stupid serfs that we are, we keep falling for it. Lesser of two evils, my ass. Two sides of the same coin maybe, but that coin's falling down a chasm straight to hell.

[placton]

3. and the DCCC wants our money? for these folks?

vote early vote often, but not for DINOs

[dhill926]

22. another reason........

I'm only donating to individuals who deserve it and not any of the Dem organizations.

[nashville_brook]

38. i completely second that emotion.

[bullwinkle428]

72. ABSOFREAKINGLUTELY!! Timmy Kaine's e-mails go straight

to the e-circular file.

[ProSense]

Why are they trying to hype the blue dogs? Here's their update:

Late update: Note, not all the signers to the list support extending both the '01 and the '03 cuts. A few of them, including Rep. Scott Murphy (D-NY), support President Obama's position on the '01 cuts, but agree with Adler that the '03 cuts should be extended.

Ed note: A spokesman for Rep. David Wu (D-OR) says that Wu is not, in fact, a signatory to the Adler letter. We regret the error.

This list is suspect.

[joe black]

77. One mistake does not make it suspect.

If they were true democrats you would'nt have to cheerlead so much.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Conservadems strike again

[nashville_brook]

11. i'm liking the term "conservacrats" lately too. it's got that "ACK" sound.

as in: "ACK! we're dying over here."

[Ignis]

81. Reminds me of Bill the Cat

[golddigger]

5. I have always felt it, but now I know it.

My democratic party is a much of spineless losers. And they wonder why they can't keep the majority.

[bluestateguy]

6. Fine. Then break it up into two separate bills

Go ahead and have a vote on a bill to keep the middle class taxcuts, and a second separate bill to keep taxcuts for the rich.

Go ahead and hold the votes. I don't care. The first bill will pass, and the second might even pass too, and then be vetoed by Obama.

That's a scenario I can live with.

[ProSense]

10. Exactly,

or let both of them expire.

[depakid]

7. My guess would be that at least half of those Republicrats won't be around come January

[stray cat]

12. And we will get even more radical republicans in their place -progressive insanity

[depakid]

19. Short term thinking- though it's inevitable at this rate

Two years down the line, they can be replaced with Dems who don't cross over an support dysfunctional Republican polices thereby causing other Democrats up and down the ticket and across the nation to lose in their races too.

Makes a lot more sense politically- and in terms of public policy to have a majority of say three that we can count on that one of 40 who at any given moment will stab you in the back.

[Techn0Girl]

59. You have to get out of the "Vote for Us Or You're All Gonna Die" mentality....

It's the same trick that the Republicans use on their uneducated classes - or the Corporatists use to rally up teabaggers.

You have to take the long view.
If you refuse to reward politicians who work against you by not voting for them then those politicians will eventually no longer be around.

And you know what?
Life will go on.
You'll be just fine.

And if things DO get worse than you'll be motivated to get more involved in the political process and back politicians who will really work for YOU.

But if you yield to scare tactics and continue to vote the same corrupt Bastards in you will always get the same result.
And you'll be doing a disservice to yourself, your children and the country.

[kath]

71. + 1000.

[Bryn]

121. +100000

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

123. -100003

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

122. Yeah you're right. Teabaggers setting the legislative agenda isn't THAT bad.

Whatever.

[Jakes Progress]

100. And on this bill, for instance,

how would those scary "radical republicans" have voted. The answer is: Just the same.

[Dr.Phool]

16. I hope every last one of these slime lose.

I wouldn't vote for the repuke in the race. I'd probably be an undervote.

Now everyone's taxes will go up. Karl Rove and the repukes will have a field day with this.

[Jakes Progress]

99. They couldn't care less.

They can't wait to lose. They came to Washington, voted for their corporate benefactors, and will leave office happily into the arms of corporate riches. Their constituencies have been screwed.

[RZM]

108. No doubt many of them won't

They don't get much love from actual republicans, just as RINOs don't get much love here. A lot of them are simple opportunists. They could go either way, but picked the Democrats because that's the way things were trending at the time. Still, the fact remains that while they sell out their party regularly, they do sometimes vote with the Democrats, while I'm imagining most of their Republican opponents never will. For a vote-counter like Pelosi, that's better than nothing. It's not ideal, but it's the situation. Some of those districts will have a very hard time sending an actual person of the left to congress. It's shitty, but that's the way it is. Personally I'd pick a blue dog over a republican if those are the only options, but I certainly understand those who wouldn't do so. It would be interesting to see what would happen if both parties adopted a 'DeMint strategy' and refused to back centrists in their own party. I think there's a chance the Republicans will move that way, but probably not the Democrats.

[marmar]

8. They serve their corporate masters well

nt

[stray cat]

9. These are not cowards, they are rich and protecting their own butts

It's not conservative or progressive but feeding their own faces at the expense of the country

[Blue_Tires]

90. exactly...

when all the congresscritters are multimillionaires, it's easy for them to forget where their priorities lie

[femrap]

14. Why don't we just give the Rich

a printing press and they can print up as much money as they want. 'A Printing Press in every McMansion!'

Greedy fucks.

[femrap]

15. Why don't we just give the Rich

a printing press and they can print up as much money as they want. 'A Printing Press in every McMansion!'

Greedy fucks.

[L0oniX]

17. The rich are clearly our enemy.

[LAGC]

18. Shame on Walt Minnick (D-ID)

I know he ran as a "conservative" in a very red district in a very red state, but on this issue at least I expected him to act like a Democrat. I didn't fault him when he voted against the Health Insurance Company Giveaway or the Bailouts, but damned if he's not willing to let taxes slightly increase on the rich when we have such huge budget deficits! For shame!

[BlueIdaho]

21. Minnick is no Democrat and he never was.

He is an opportunist. No way he could out crazy the likely republican replacement for the insanely bad Bill Sali, so seeing an Obama bandwagon he hitched his star and slid in under the radar. He worked in the Nixon White House and supports republican amendments over Democratic policies every time.

I am a life long Democrat and I wouldn't cross the street to shake his hand if he was giving out $100 bills. I will never vote for a republican and that includes that fucking piece of shit Walt Minnick.

[Dr.Phool]

20. Kick and Rec!

[nc4bo]

23. I see NC's well represented in this pile of DINOs. No surprises. nt

[nashville_brook]

26. so's FL -- my rep, as a matter of fact. she should take her cues from Grayson, instead of Hoyer.

[Mnemosyne]

24. Dahlkemper, PA, has an ad running accusing the repube of helping his rich friends... I am so

fucking sick of voting with my nose pinched close.

She's a "pro"-life warmonger. :puke:

[DirkGently]

25. That's just nuts. Dems ought to make the Republicans vote against *middle class* tax cuts NOW.

[nashville_brook]

27. per KO's first segment tonight -- this isn't just bad strategy. it's no strategy at all. cowards.

[flyarm]

44. but we are all bad democrats if we hold back votes to these "cowards"?

or so we are told that daily here at Du these days!

[HillbillyBob]

130. I frankly don't give a shit.

I will vote for D because they aren't as bad as the assholes over there, but I do not like it. IT is time to get rid of the not as bad as thems hypocrites.

[DirkGently]

63. As he said, what is the benefit of a "defensive crouch?" Nothing is not better than something.

[AnOhioan]

28. Why bother even having two parties?

[shawn703]

29. With "friends" like these...

I don't get this party. Even when polling is in our favor there's these "Dems" that lack the spine to stand up to the Repukes. Maybe they're positioning themselves for favorable treatment if they switch parties after a Republican takeover. They know we won't punish them (look at Lieberman), so there is no reason to not hedge their bets.

[autorank]

30. k*r What to say?

[nashville_brook]

31. it's a hell of a message to go into the midterms with: "we stand with the rich (and against YOU!)

[Techn0Girl]

89. But hasn't that always been the message really?

When Harry Reid decided to let the Senate go on Summer vacation rather than staying to extend the unemployment benefits package last July, about 2.5 million American went without any source of income for nearly a month.

Did he wait that long I wonder to vote on TARP funding?

Same as it ever was , NAsh.

[27inCali]

32. We could dump practically every single one of them

and still retain the majority in the house.

just saying.

puke.

[spanone]

33. and people lay the blame on Obama....

[FrenchieCat]

34. Everything is his fault.....

especially if it is a bad thing.

Get.with.the.program.

[spanone]

36. i'm trying to laugh.....

[OnyxCollie]

35. But if elect more Democrats

it'll be rainbows and ponies for everyone! Democrats are the answer. Why do you want Republicans to take over and enact their bad policies? You're not a true Dem!

Just kidding. :sarcasm:

Fuck these blue dog scumbags.

[Dr.Phool]

37. I wish they'd change their names.

They give dogs a bad name.

They're more like cats.

[OnyxCollie]

40. I thought about that.

Cats are sneaky and only concerned with themselves.

Dogs are concerned with keeping the pack strong.

(Full disclosure: I love both kittehs and puppehs.)

[hfojvt]

39. it might help if people from their districts call them

and who is the majority whip?

[Techn0Girl]

84. That would help a LOT ! ....

Amazingly enough people don't tend to do that.
They will, the vast majority of them, spend an hour looking at DU and replying snarkily back about how rotten their reps are - then spend 15 minutes on the phone talking to their Congressman's office and telling them what they think.

Strange but true.

[rucky]

41. Dems are going to fuck this up, aren't they?

All the have to do is absolutely nothing, and they're going to fuck this up.

[CrispyQ]

126. Ok, sad as it is,

that made me laugh. You are spot on. They are going to fuck it up.

[B Calm]

42. Brad Ellsworth (IN) is running for Senator Bayh old seat in the Senate. . .

[Rex]

43. The owners will always win and the workers will always lose.

Easy money. Always bet on the house.

[w4rma]

48. Nope. It's just that way temporarily. It won't be that way forever, even if years from now it comes

down to the same kind of rebellion going on in many places of the world. People will take up arms when the wealthy and the powerful get too far into their police state pipedreams.

[Radical Activist]

45. Remember those articles and blogs accusing Obama of switching?

There was an effort to get Democrats to change their position but it didn't come from Obama. The accusations were more baseless speculation.

[depakid]

46. Huh?

My recollection was that Obama waffled in public on the veto threat, like he did on the public option.

That sort of behavior doesn't exactly create a lot of confidence either in the electorate at OR send a strong signal of support to the representatives and Senators.

Not that the latter makes much difference anymore. He's pretty well lost his credibility at this point- since no one who crosses or extorts him pays a political price.

Joe Lieberman and Blanche Lincoln being the more prominent examples.

[Radical Activist]

50. He spoke very clearly on this issue.

You're adjusting the facts to fit your narrative. Again.

Obama deserves credit for using the bully pulpit and pressuring members of Congress on this issue. Your obsessiveness about never giving Obama credit for anything is mind-boggling.

[depakid]

51. You're living in a fantasy world if you think that

Seriously.

Some of what you write reminds me of what I heard in 2004 when John Kerry was asked a very simple question by George Bush.

If you knew now what you knew then... would you still vote for the Iraq war?

A lot of posters on DU were floored by the (non)response -and a few of us reckoned that was tipping point we would never get back. And if you look at how things are going- it's pretty much the same damn thing(s) today on issue after issue.

I mean- come on now- take a fucking stand!

How hard can that be?

On the other hand, there were then (as there are now) contingents of posters here who were- how might one say? Divided between empty headed "mean girls" and "rationalizers."

Between the two, for what it's worth, a good many of us (here and gone) prefer higher levels of debate with the rationalizer subset- of which to your credit you have largely been a part.

[Radical Activist]

55. You should give Obama credit for standing up for something you believe in.

Instead, you deny that it ever happened and still attack him for it. Could you explain that to me? I can't understand how it's rational to spit in someone's face because they argued for something you believe in.

Here are two videos of Obama pushing passionately for repealing tax cuts for the rich. You just accused me of living in a fantasy world for believing this happened, but here's the video proof. Maybe you blocked it out of your memory because it doesn't conform to what you want to believe about Obama. Are you ready to apologize?

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/obama-defends-tax-increase-wealthy-11591326
http://community.myvoa.com/_Obama-Says-No-To-Tax-Cuts-For-The-Rich/VIDEO/1309857/45137.html

[depakid]

56. Looks like projection and denial to me

It goes around and you're not the only one by any means to have to deal with and figure out this sort of dynamic.

As far as I can tell, -and as far as reps and Senators but more importantly the electorate can tell, there's not been much of anything this administration has taken a stand and put their foot down on.

Not one thing.

At least not from a progressive (i.e. effective) policy perspective.

Maybe that will change in some several months- who can say?

Based on the record to date, I wouldn't bet on it- but then again, I wouldn't bet against it.

[Radical Activist]

76. You still deny it with video proof right there. Will you argue that the sky is green next?

How does a person deny what's laid right in front of them? Why are you having such trouble staying on topic instead veering off into generalized attacks against Obama? Do you just launch into a random rant when you know you've lost an argument? You were one of those who posted things accusing Obama of backing down on repealing tax cuts for the rich. In fact, he's the one person doing the most to hold Congress' feet to the fire.

Are you ready to apologize for your mistake, admit you were spreading false rumors, and thank Obama on this board for standing up for your shared progressive values?

[tritsofme]

88. Obama did not issue a veto threat.

In presidential politics, if there is no veto threat, legislators can assume the president will allow what they send him to become law.

Obama has used strong language in support of his position on allowing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire, but he declined to issue a veto threat when given the opportunity, absent that his opposition isn't taken seriously.

[Radical Activist]

91. He didn't play George's game.

That line of questioning about a veto was a game to distract from discussion of the actual issue. Why let yourself be manipulated by the press?

[tritsofme]

93. Obama's position lends itself to the question if he will issue a veto threat.

He has thus far declined, and congressmen view his rhetoric through that lens.

The question of a veto threat is not a distraction, it is a very important part of the process. All of the strong rhetoric in the world does not make up for the line drawn in the sand of a presidential veto.

[Radical Activist]

94. So you're assuming there's enough support in Congress to pass tax cuts for the rich?

That's the problem and the game. If Obama says he will veto then he's also admitting that there might be enough votes in Congress to pass tax cuts for the rich. It wouldn't help the issue to make that suggestion.

[tritsofme]

96. That is clearly the reason the leadership has decided not to take a vote before the election.

There are not 60 votes in the Senate.

And here we are posting in a thread titled "43 House Democrats to SIDE WITH GOP on tax cuts for THE RICH" which assuming all Republicans support the tax cuts for the rich would lead to the bill passing the House with a few votes to spare. The real problem for Pelosi and the leadership is that if it looked like the bill was sure to pass, she could lose 50 or so more votes on it.

Obama has no problem rattling off hypothetical veto threats to things like cuts to Medicare or Social Security, I really don't think this is a very strong argument.

To me the lack of veto threat simply indicates that the WH is willing to sign a one or two year extension of all the tax cuts if it reaches the president's desk.

I think the smartest thing politically to do would be to make the middle class tax cuts permanent, and extend the tax cuts for the rich for another year or two. When the issue comes back up, we could dare Republicans to act on legislation that would unilaterally cut taxes for the rich. By divorcing the issue of middle class tax cuts, and not allowing them to be held hostage in the debate, Democrats would have a much stronger hand, and could use it to their advantage in 2012. But now a two year extension seems the most likely path.

[Techn0Girl]

57. A video of Obama pushing passionately ....

to repeal tax cuts for the rich is not the same thing as not giving tax cuts for the rich.

A video of Obama pushing passionately for a public option is not the same thing as getting a public option.

A video of Obama pushing passionately for ending the war is not the same thing as actually ending the war.

A video of Obama pushing passionately for banking reform is not the same thing as banking reform.

A video of Obama pushing passionately for stronger unions is not the same thing as him actually supporting unions.

YouTube ≠ Real Life

Open your eyes.
Everyone around you has.

[DirkGently]

62. Exactly.

[fascisthunter]

66. .

hard to argue with that.. say one thing, then do the other He presents himself as being sincere but actions of his tell me otherwise. And he did appoint people around him who seem opposed to many of his past statements so it can't just be those around him who may be at fault.

[blindpig]

70. Bingo

Pay no attention to what is said but rather to what is, or is not, done.

Talk is cheap.

[Radical Activist]

74. I just poitned out this little game the other day.

First, accuse the President of not using the bully pulpit or fighting for anything.
When shown that he clearly does use the bully pulpit and fight, move the goal posts to say that words don't matter. In any case, nothing will ever be good enough.

The topic is that people here posted news articles suggesting Obama and "top Democrats" were changing their position on repealing tax cuts for the rich. It set off another round of speculative griping about Obama. It turned out to be completely false. Obama was leading the argument against Republicans and Conservative Democrats in Congress. I'm wondering if anyone will admit they were taken in by yet another flimsy, speculative attack on Obama. I doubt it.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

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

[Radical Activist]

85. Wow. Deflect much?

It's not an actual Simpsons cartoon, ya know. Is throwing insults always your way to avoid making a response to an argument?
Some people were caught spreading false gossip in their ongoing campaign to trash Obama. It's time for them to admit they were wrong and apologize.

[Techn0Girl]

86. Wake up. Become aware.

[Radical Activist]

128. I'm aware that your list included things that actually have been done.

You didn't notice banking regulation pass?

[Techn0Girl]

92. Are you aware that you are using Copyrighted material and putting DU at risk by doing so?

[Radical Activist]

95. Nice troll but

since the above isn't an original Simpsons comic and doesn't fall under copyright laws. I notice that you still haven't responded to the argument it makes. Is that what you always do? Throw insults and try to shut others down when someone makes an argument you can't respond to?

[Lorien]

106. +1,000. Well said!

:applause:

[inna]

114. +100 and thank you

[WCGreen]

49. I went to college with Ron Klein, served as a page in the Ohio House

with him...

I'm very disappointed...

[JonLP24]

52. Harry Mitchell??? WTF???

I guess I'll vote for him.

[Skidmore]

53. Wow! Boswell isn't on the list. This is a pleasant surprise and

he has seemed less Blue Doggish during the past year. I'll have to call his office and reinforce continued thinking in this vein.

[RandomThoughts]

54. heh, insane, that really is crazy.

And people say the stuff I post is crazy. LOL

Sounds like a comment on corruption.

[craigmatic]

60. I recognize some of the names on the list they're mostly in races rated as toss ups.

They do this at their own risk.

[Techn0Girl]

83. If good Democrats keep voting FOR them , the we send the message to the DLC...

that we don't care.

We need to send a different kind of message in order to get a different kind of Democratic candidate.

This isn't about whether we win or lose the next election.
This is about long term change in our Party.

[tomp]

61. that's "our" democratic party there, yesiree.

just vote -D, damnit.

[kentuck]

64. Two of my Reps are on that list.

Sorry. I will not vote for them. If they lose by one vote, I am willing to accept responsibility.

[Ganja Ninja]

65. Now you know why they're waiting until after the election before they pass the tax cuts for the rich

Who didn't see this coming?

[nashville_brook]

69. well, there's always the filibuster.

[fascisthunter]

67. not one from MA...

that's encouraging

[ladjf]

68. I'm saving this list so that after the Nov. I can see if their cowardice

rewarded them. nt

[bullwinkle428]

73. These bastards don't want to go on record with a vote, so I'm guessing

their reward will be that they never get to vote on anything for the rest of their lives within the halls of Congress!

[Terra Alta]

75. WTF is wrong with Kissell?

I will vote for him since he's better than the alternative, but I will hold my nose in doing so.

[Jamastiene]

78. I am asking the same thing.

He has been good on many other issues, but on this one, he falls way flat. :thumbsdown:

[TBF]

80. This makes me sick. nt

[Blue_Tires]

87. Glenn Nye?? FFS

He has moved WAY to the right because the paltry teabag rabble has him scared shitless...

[Odin2005]

97. I will never vote for you ever again, Collin Peterson, you worthless peice of SHIT.

[Scuba]

98. These 43 are due some tough challenges in the next primary.

[mstinamotorcity]

101. well none in

my district. Or else I would send them an e-mail everyday.

[obxhead]

102. That's what happens when you have the rich passing laws for themselves.

[maryf]

103. +1 nt

[abelenkpe]

104. We should just let the tax cuts expire.

Thanks Adler, you complete idiot, for giving the republicans a nice tangible list of dems who stand with the wealthy over the working class. That should go over well before elections.

Can we kick these fools out of the party?

[Lorien]

105. Vote them all out

No more DINOs. If you won't serve the other 99% of Americans, then you should be serving french fries instead.

[Colorado Liberal]

107. No surprise in CO

The minute I saw the headline, I just knew my rep (Markey) would be on the list - it is a conservative district to begin with and the Repubes are actually running someone sane for the seat - so Markey's been running ads sprinting as far from the left as she can (OTOH, there are apparently no (D)'s or (R)'s in the race - neither candidate makes any mention of their party in the materials I've seen...

[CrispyQ]

127. I'm not in her district, but I sent her money in the past.

My email to Betsey Markey:

I can't believe I gave you money last election.

You blue dogs are going to be the death of the Democratic Party. You’re frauds. DINOs. You don’t stand for the People, you stand for the corporate elite. You’re not quite as vile as a Republican, so you enter the dem party in sheep’s clothing & undermine our platform. The country is bankrupt & the rich & corporations are doing extremely well, thank you American middle class! It’s time for the corporate elite to ante up – greedy jerks. That’s my nice language.

You’ll never get another dime from me. Lucky I’m not in your district, cuz you would have lost my vote, too.

[drmeow]

109. I was planning to give

Harry Mitchell a $50 campaign contribution - I just called his office and told him that I was so disappointed in this that I've decided not to give him the money. I said that I actually will be affected slightly by the retaining the tax cuts but that I'm still opposed to it and that we can't afford to allow the super rich not to pay their share when the economy is in a tailspin and when the CBO has said that it will increase the deficit. Don't know if it will make any difference but at least I told him.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

110. I was suppose to canvas for Scott Murphy all next week...if this is true....

I will vote against him

[DeSwiss]

111. K&R

Fuck you Jim Copper!

[ultimas_blade]

113. How do you keep these people from entering the party? Can you...

...legally kick them out? Don't they dip into the donation pot? Kick them to the Republicans, we don't need the these Blue Dogs who roll over at every opportunity put before them.

[Ruby the Liberal]

115. This is horseshit

My elderly, widowed mother has an effective tax rate of 1.7% on her SS and the survivor portion of Daddy's pension. Of that, she pays 15% for the measly dividends she receives from her $40k in 401k investments.

Raise cap gains to the level of EARNED INCOME already. Income from income is not > than income from actual work.

:grr:

[sam sarrha]

116. there goes your SSI.... but the good news is i hear Walmart is hiring 20 hr weeks..

[opihimoimoi]

117. There has to be an EXPULSION CLAUSE before Primaries to reduce

infiltration...either way...The GOPers weed out non conserves but we are an open tent...hence Blue Dogs..there has to be a way to control the GOALS OF THE PARTY....

As President...Obama should be in charge...otherwise its chaos as is the present

[Forkboy]

119. Fucking Kucinich!

[rustyd55]

120. tax cuts for rich

super rich run the country if a elected official goes against them they wont be re elected they will show us people in haiti earthquake and pakistan floods they wont show us getting thrown out of our houses they dont show the homeless when before bush homeless was mostly by choice today what was middle class is now mostly homeless when it hits upper middle class look out super rich then you will know who this country belongs to

[DailyGrind51]

124. Melissa Bean is the whore of the NorthShore rich in Illinois, what can you expect?

[lovuian]

125. may everyone of them lose their jobs

this can't keep continuing this robbing the poor to give to the rich

[True_Blue]

129. Kirkpatrick & Mitchell?

I'm very disappointed to see them on the list. I'm going to fire off an email to both of them right now.