Did Feingold vote with the Republicans again?

[Uzybone]

are you shitting me Russ?

How are we supposed to win anything when a "progressive" like this votes like a nincompoop time and time again.

[gateley]

1. Why? What is his reason, do you know? I don't see how ANYBODY could vote

against the Schumer amendment.

[stray cat]

2. I am guessing he is against extending any tax cuts- he is fiscally responsible

and knows the bill won't pass anyway

[Uzybone]

3. I hope that is his reasoning, he is a head scratcher sometimes

[Uzybone]

4. I hope that is his reasoning, he is a head scratcher sometimes

[gateley]

5. I can see his point, then, but these are desperate times. I wonder how much

revenue NOT extending the tax cuts on the middle class would generate. We know those in the upper end would generate over $700 billion over ten years, but I don't think I've ever heard what would be gained if none of us got the extension.

Well, since Feingold is not coming back next year, I'm glad he was able to vote with his conscience (especially since it wouldn't have mattered). Thanks.

[dsc]

7. 3.3 trillion

[gateley]

10. Seriously? Wow. I'm almost tempted to agree with him, then. nt

[dsc]

12. the total has been reported as 4 trillion

with 700 billion coming from the cuts for the wealthy. that is where I get the figure. Though, I admit, I am not sure if the estate tax is, or isn't included which would make a pretty big difference.

[gateley]

13. Boy, that's a tough one. So many of us need the break, but if it could help decrease

the deficit and get us out from under our creditors' thumbs...

Isn't it telling that we, the great unwashed masses, think about making these sacrifices but the wealthy don't. Money is their God.

[ProSense]

15. The cuts have to be paid for that's the point.

People can't claim that deficits don't matter and that we should be stimulating the economy, and then reject things that improve it.

The tax cuts for the rich do not.

Feingold is a deficit hawk, that is why he opposes this.

[dsc]

16. I have consistantly argued that all the cuts should be removed

it was one of the reasons I supported Dean back in 04.

[grumgrum]

6. Clearly its because he wants these Tax Cuts to Die across the Board -- He's a Good Man!

Feingold is consistent. He wants to help the nation as a whole and he understands that these tax cuts should end for all. I am in that group as well. The others however are not being genuine (e.g. Lieberman)..they just want tax cuts for the wealthy.

However, if that is not going to happen i am willing to bite my tongue, close my eyes and vote for a tax-cut temp extension for ONLY the middle class...but seriously, this entire thing has ot end or the US will be finished sooner than later.

[Laelth]

8. Hear, hear! n/t

-Laelth

[Kaleva]

9. + infinity!

[Phx_Dem]

18. He apparently wants the unemployed to die along with them, of starvation.

[Aramchek]

11. he's just sooooo principled

[mitchtv]

14. I tend to agree, no cuts for anyone

until the debt is paid

[Phx_Dem]

17. Indeed he did. Along with ConservaDems Ben Nelson, Jim Webb, Joe LIeberman and

Joe Manchin. I guess I won't be missing Russ afterall.

Good riddance.

[Mass]

21. I will. There are not that many people who are as principled as he is.

Too bad you cant see the difference. Webb, Lieberman, ... want to give tax cuts to everybody. Feingold thinks we can afford any of them.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

19. He did it because he opposes ALL tax cuts. It makes sense. We cannot afford tax cuts

He supports job creation and unemployment benefits over tax cuts. Tax cuts don't spur an economy. Unemployment benefits and a robust jobs bill would.

[Mass]

20. An honest man who recognizes we can afford these tax cuts and vote accordingly.

I understand that some people here cant recognize that, but it is very sad.