Thom Hartmann: Obama Gives in to GOP on Bush Tax Cuts

Read full article at: http://www.truth-out.org/news-thom-hartmann-supreme-court-decision-favors-big-money-politics-and-more/1309282627

Last year they 'extended' the Bush Tax Cuts for just one more year, we promise!. When I heard that, I turned to my friend and laughed (the mocking, cynical laugh). "Yeah, right," we said almost in unison.

This shouldn't be a surprise. It's sad, it's depressing...but it's not in any way a surprise.

This is definitely a case of being prepared for bad news not making it any easier to take.

nt

Remember that? The one where he slammed Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and said: "I refuse to renew them again"?

I'd never heard him use such strong language before and I actually believed he was going to call their bluff this time. We all have our lines and this one happened to be mine. How on earth will he be able to govern with a tough opposition when he makes an ultimatum and then folds so easily. Fuck.

everyone to vote for the similarities between them

The White House stated yesterday that tax cut repeal is off the table, and we didn't hear about it until now? I'm looking for a statement, but haven't found it yet. Help?

I was afraid he might give in but I really believed he wouldn't. He has to know what this will do.

him to do -- doubly repeal them? A single repeal isn't enough?

did they decide to let it trickle down like Regan's urine on the country.

Obama doesn't have the power to take it off the table if it is not on the table. If Harry Reid refuses to bring it to a vote, then it doesn't make it to the President's desk for a signature... I don't think the President has the authority to extend the Bush taxcuts on his own? Is that not correct?

claiming that Obama took off the table the repeal of the Bush tax cuts in the debt ceiling negotiations. But that would be dumb to be on the table in the first place, because they are ALREADY going to expire in 2012 without any additional action. It makes much more sense for Obama to go after ADDITIONAL tax breaks for the rich now, since those would be above and beyond what he can already get by simply doing nothing. The whole piece is nonsense.

There will be a bill authorizing a debt limit increase. Unfortunately, if the piece from The Hill is true an extension of the Bush tax cuts will also be part of that package.

If Obama is faithful to the promise he made to the public he'll veto the bill. Unfortunately, if that bill actually reaches his desk he will have already broken that promise. He's not given Pelosi a seat and he'll own this deal.

It simply says that they won't be repealed with the debt ceiling.

This is fine, since they will be automatically repealed in 2012 absent additional action. The piece from the Hill says nothing that wasn't known long ago. There is no reason for Obama to ask for something he is already going to get in 2012, when he can instead ask for new tax increases that he would not otherwise get in 2012.

Enjoy.

And since they consider the expiration of the tax cuts to be a tax increase on their buddies, I could see them holding the debt ceiling increase hostage to that demand. Like, "Sure, we'll increase the debt ceiling, but in the same bill, we're going to make the "boosh tax cuts" permanent. Whatcha gonna do about it? You're gonna sign it, that's what you're gonna do."

Same tactics they used with the extension of unemployment benefits. The only "negotiation" left is whether or not the White House can get them to agree to just extend them for a finite period of time instead of permanently.

And in a couple of years, they'll all do the same thing again. The only thing that ever changes is the dance partners.

incredibly stupid to extract a concession from Republicans that they are already going to get, by law, in 2012. It is much smarter to go after DIFFERENT tax breaks for the wealthy now, so that when 2012 comes around, both the new tax increases now and the 2012 ones set to occur both happen.

As an analogy, to get the bush tax cuts as a concession now would be like, in a negotiation for a car, agreeing to pay the full retail price. That is not a concession at all, since the buyer could have always already agreed to the full retail price. The optimal negotiating strategy would be to ask for something BEYOND what he is already going to get absent any action.

Or have you forgotten this? Why should I have any faith that 2012 will be different from 2010?

Perhaps he took them off the table (which I don't believe either), but that doesn't mean he will extend them.
All Obama has to do is NOTHING about them and they will automatically expire.

If Obama wants to tell the GOP that the tax-cuts are off the table in order to get the GOP to raise the debt ceiling - let him.
He can always just let them expire after the debt ceiling is raised and then there will be nothing the GOP can do about it.

...or have you forgotten?

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

Their meeting with Obama tomorrow.

he does`t need our votes.


my generation is just about the last that remembers when our president`s cared about the workers in this country.

who have benefited the most and paid the least according to their means. Let their multi-trillion dollar welfare scheme continue, compliments of a mindless, corrupt, venal, and ideologically-driven government: the proof is in their works. :patriot: