Is there any other way to look at Bush's obscene Tax Cuts for the Rich, from now on

[mtnsnake]

as anything else other than as, "Obama's Tax Cuts for the Rich?"

Bush's tax table has expired. Win or lose, do you think this is now Obama's baby, no matter how you want to look at it?

(late edit to change my post from being a one-dimensional assertion on my part to being more of a question that's open to discussion.)

[ProSense]

1. Fascinating observation. n/t

[mtnsnake]

2. Truth hurts. nt

[Skinner]

3. "Only one way"

I guess that settles it. We wouldn't want to actually have a discussion on the merits. Because there is, after all, only one way to look at it.

[mtnsnake]

4. With all due respect, what other way is there to look at it?

I'd really like to know.

[Skinner]

5. Obviously, there is no other way. (nt)

[mtnsnake]

16. It took me a while but I finally got the message, I think

Sometimes I can be a little thick. Anyway, I edited the post and should have done it that way to begin with.

[NV Whino]

8. I don't see a lot of room for discussion

As of January 1st they become Obama's tax cuts. I would love to read your argument to the contrary.

[prairierose]

9. Skinner, unfortuntely, every MSM whore, all of the punditocracy...

and all of the repugnant party will call these the Obama tax cuts now because they see the value of the weapon they have been given.

[stray cat]

10. Some DUers did not want the unemployed to get unemployment if the wealthy benefited

[vaberella]

15. It's better to fuck the poor over even if includes having to help some rich. n/t

[Enrique]

6. photos 2001, 2003, 2010

change we can believe in!

[stray cat]

7. So it is Obama's umemployment for the unemployed and tax cuts for those under 250000

If you collect unemployment - its all because of Obama! Same goes if you keep or get a job. (using your same reasoning)

The progressives were clearly not in favor of the unemployed getting unemployment because when it came up for a vote alone - it FAILED. So the GOP and Obama gave people unemployment!

[mtnsnake]

12. The point is, a lot of people are calling this an "extension" of Bush's tax cuts

I don't believe it should be called an extension of Bush. We always used to call this tax table, "Bush's tax cuts for the rich", so win or lose, is it not "President Obama's tax cuts for the rich" now?

Maybe I should have done this as a poll, asking if this latest tax table should be labeled as an "extension of Bush's tax cuts plan" or if it should be labeled as "Obama's tax cut plan" from here on in.

[sofa king]

11. How about as a 2012 election issue that attracts 75% of the voters?

Run on the promise of splitting the next extension into two votes, and the only way we, the 75%, are going to get ours is by tossing the GOP to the curb. The Republicans are already locked into running on a record of holding a middle class tax cut hostage. As long as we keep a vote on a further extension out of reach until November, 2012, they can't get out from under that. It's a pall of doom, and all their spin won't keep it from being one of the five major issues in 2012.

We should give President Obama a hand for framing the compromise in this way. He turned a trap set for him against his rivals, and used their own avarice to lock up the next election before the new Congress even takes the flippin' oath.

We can live with this for two years, if it puts those chumps to bed for the next decade.

[mtnsnake]

14. OK, the way he framed it deserves some credit, but I don't agree that we locked up the next election

with this tax deal.

Maybe I'm living on another planet or something, but I think we just hurt our chances tremendously with this tax deal unless Palin is the repukes next candidate. I was on board with the President until all hell broke loose with this tax deal. I realize how badly he is striving for some bipartisanship, but I don't see how this deal is going to get the country back on its feet. I really don't, and I'm worrying that the tax cuts will be made permanent in 2012.

[sofa king]

17. You're probably right that it's not as clear cut as I put it.

But I've been watching Congress enough to know that the GOP is being led around by the nose, just as the Big Dog did at various times in his term. They'll come back with a government shutdown because it excites the knuckle-draggers and pisses off everyone in DC, and because now that they got what their backers want, they have nothing left to do but screw things up.

But the tax issue is one of those issues that is "framed" straight around everyone's bottom line. If voters can be convinced that Republicans are the kinds of a-holes who will hold our tax rates hostage for the top-hats, they're doomed. And they already did it once.

They can't put that genie back in the bottle, now. It will loom in the background of every political race for the next two years. Every Democratic candidate can run against just 3% of the population, and three out of four voters will be able to recognize which side they should be on--if they are constantly reminded of it.

If we have to be proactive about things, then we'll float a middle-class tax cut extension just before the August recess, 2012, and force the Republicans in the Senate to vote against cloture. That'll put a dozen Republican Senators upside down on the issue straight in the middle of a reelection bid. Obama and Congress are already moving to secure a supermajority in the Senate. That's a plan, and a big part of it just worked.

[Lint Head]

13. The only way to look at it is this way.

The rich get more money from a tax break while the elderly and poor suffer and die from lack of basic needs. Social Security dead. The idea that the federal government will come up with a way to prevent finding the elderly dead in their homes, as happened prior to SS, will not happen. No one gives a rats ass about the elderly. The emphasis is the young because they are the future voters. Corporate fascism is killing us today and it will only get worse. It's over unless the people do something drastic.