Skip to main content

One of the most disheartening moments I've ever had as a democrat was when Obama extended the Bush tax cuts for a couple more years.  That's taking ownership.

I didn't care whether he thought it might not be a good idea at that moment in political time.  He campaigned on that concept in 2008... and when they held ALL the cards... they (dems) couldn't even bring themselves to do NOTHING... and let those cuts expire (like the republicans originally designed them to because they had no choice in the way they rigged the Congress)... and they (dems) threw their political advantage in the trash.

All I want... and I would say all a LOT of folks want... is just a start.... back up this promise for a change.  Make a threat to the right wing (stand your damn ground) and back it up.  In this case all you have to do is NOTHING!

You'll be AMAZED how much the electorate will appreciate this.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (4+ / 0-)

    Some folks trust to reason. Others trust to might. I don't trust to nothing. But I know it come out right.

    by dalemac on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 10:07:24 PM PST

  •  Trapped (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

       I think 2010 was a Republican trap for Obama. We were just pulling back from the edge of a real fiscal cliff. The stimulus was starting to work but bringing back higher tax rates could have taken away our progress and even if it hadn't the pace of the continued slow recovery would have been blamed on allowing the tax cuts to expire.
        Pushing them forward to 2012 makes them a trap for the Republicans. Obama campaigned on having the rich pay their fair share and is now taking a stand that makes it clear that Republicans are only interested in tax cuts for the rich.
        One really good reason for letting them expire is that any new legislation for middle class tax relief will be named the Obama Tax Cuts instead of the Bush Tax Cuts. Once they expire we start with a clean slate, a fresh etch-a-sketch if you please.

    •  This is the right strategy. We will se how this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Neon Mama

      Negotiation progresses.

    •  Pushing them to 2012 was a huge risk (0+ / 0-)

      I grok the idea that the economy was in big trouble and that they wanted/needed the stimulative effect of lower taxes.

      However, failing to let the Bush tax cuts expire the first time around (the first two years we held all the cards) just emboldened the republicans to get crazier with their hostage taking strategies.  They looked at the Dems and said to themselves... these pussies can't even follow through on a pledge when they hold all the cards... they haven't got the stomach for a fight.  That was how it looked (and felt).

      2010 turnout was definitely affected by this failure specifically.

      Some folks trust to reason. Others trust to might. I don't trust to nothing. But I know it come out right.

      by dalemac on Wed Nov 14, 2012 at 09:24:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  tip'd & rec'd. similar feelings/thoughts at the (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RandomNonviolence, David54, Neon Mama

    time the wh extended them.  it made for a hard sell to voters as a reason to reelect the prez when the campaign kicked into high gear this yr, too -- i was met with "yeah, but he said he'd end the bush tax cuts but he didn't" comment a lot when i was trying to persude people to give obama another chance.

    someone posted a comment/diary earlier (monday?) about a deal struck in 1983 between tip o'neill & st ronnie to give the upper tax brackets tax breaks for 30 yrs with funding coming out of the ss trust, at which point, after the 30 yr cycle ended, ss would be repaid by letting the tax rates go back up on the rich, & the middle & lower brackets would get our turn at tax cuts.  2013 is the end of the 30 yr cycle & now that it's time for the middle class/poor's turn, suddenly the rich don't want to honor their part of the bargain.

    gee, that sounds familiar.

    •  Agreed. I'd forgotten about the 83 history. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Wed Nov 14, 2012 at 05:49:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  i'd never even heard of it! apparently it was a (0+ / 0-)

        deal the d's & r's kept close to the vest -- & for good reason -- if i'd known about it at the time i would have raised holy hell with my congress critters!

        which was, of course, the whole reason it was kept secret.  another stellar moment for our fourth estate, too :(

        i wish the history of that deal was made more public now -- it would go a long way towards explaining why the middle class standard of living has been so eviscerated over the last 3 decades -- & why the rich have become so obscenely wealthy.  the middle class would be better off, too, if we'd been able to enjoy the breaks the rich got.  

        fuck tip o'neill & the d's for going along with it.

    •  1983 secret tax deal? (0+ / 0-)

      I'd be very skeptical that such an event actually took place.  If you can provide a link to where it came up I'd appreciate it.

      suddenly the rich don't want to honor their part of the bargain

      This is because I doubt anybody who considers themselves rich is aware of any such bargain.  It sounds ludicrous on the surface.  And besides... how's anybody supposed to honor a bargain that is a secret?

      The Bush tax cuts came with an expiration date because the republicans bent the rules to get them through in the first place... but the whole world knew about the expiration date.

      Some folks trust to reason. Others trust to might. I don't trust to nothing. But I know it come out right.

      by dalemac on Wed Nov 14, 2012 at 09:12:58 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  it was a comment/diary someone posted & i (0+ / 0-)

        tried to relocate it but was unsuccessful.  it was the tax deal tip o'neill agreed to with st ronnie in 1983 & i believe it was referred to as something to do with saving ss, but as for its official name, i don't know what that was.

        i characterized it as being kept secret b/c i don't recall the details of the 30 yr agreement ever being made public, so as far as i was concerned, it was a secret to me & probably a lot of other people who didn't have the luxury of following the minutia of politics.

        this may come as a surprise to you, but politicians don't always tell voters about the deals they cut with each other behind closed doors in secret 8-)

        •  Nothing surprises me anymore (0+ / 0-)

          After my initial political awakening in 2003 with the Dean campaign I learned how politics works on the ground.  It's an ugly sickening place, but it is what it is... and we need to deal with what is.

          The only thing people really need to know when trying to make a determination as to who the good guys are in politics is D's want everybody to be able to vote... R's consistently use voter suppression as a historical tactic to keep their opponents from voting.

          Even if you think all politicians are equally corrupt on both sides of the aisle (which is crazy but let's just assume)... which side believes in democracy?  One side believes cheating is just part of the game and therefore everybody must do it.  One side doesn't.

          politicians don't always tell voters about the deals they cut with each other behind closed doors in secret

          Not only would we not know about any such secret deal... we also wouldn't know if anybody kept their word on such deal.  Therefore such speculation is likely to be hooey because nobody can prove anything.  But more importantly - voters would have no knowledge of these deals and would have no opportunity to react to them.

          Some folks trust to reason. Others trust to might. I don't trust to nothing. But I know it come out right.

          by dalemac on Wed Nov 14, 2012 at 08:03:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  my evidence that such a deal was struck is only (0+ / 0-)

            anecdotal, but that's what my family experienced from 1983 onward, so verifiable proof or not, there was a noticeable transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy & the tax burden became very heavy for those of us in the lower brackets.

            before st ronnie took office we were doing pretty good, but after 1983, we barely managed to scrape by, while my bro's family (he married into wealth) were able to afford new suburbans every yr, 3 homes, each worth a million-dollars or more, mink coats for their dtrs who were in grade school (private, of course), & ski trips to park city, etc, every christmas.  it was never overtly stated (but understood nonetheless) that we owed our misfortune to ourselves, & not to any jiggering with the tax code that favored one class over another 8-I

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site