democrats are inept...this legislation on taxes should have been brought up long ago.

[spanone]

democrats allowed the republicans to get their nuts in a vise.

they had two years to get this done.

President Obama looked pissed when making his statement tonight. he should be.

embarrassed too.

jmho

[MNBrewer]

1. Looked pissed

So what! Too frikkin bad for the N-dimensional chess champ!

Capitulator in Chief

[chimpymustgo]

2. Democrats, my friend, are COMPLICIT. NOBODY'S this stupid.

[leftstreet]

3. Not inept. Complicit n/t

[chimpymustgo]

4. Edit for double post. But perhaps it deserved repeating.

[BeyondGeography]

5. Legislation was never going to happen

The only way to resolve this was if the President was to announce his intention to veto any extension that included $250K-plus taxpayers and take that message to the people aggressively.

I truly thought the guy I supported from the start in Feb. 2007 would do that when I got into the pro-Bama camp. The way he has governed since the election told my gut this wasn't going to happen.

What bothers me the most is he never put any pressure on the other side. No public pressure. Ever.

Inexcusable.

[truedelphi]

6. "One ring to rule them all and in the end to bind them."

Probably would have been brought up a long time ago, but when you only have one party, the Money Party, why would they?

It worked out great for everyone sitting in Congress and at the Oval Office. The Republicans fulfill their pledges to the Uber rich, and the Democrats, also bound to the Uber rich, don't have to create a lot of imaginative, (and time consuming,) Kabuki Theater machinations.

[Skittles]

7. NO SHIT!!!

[Zenlitened]

8. Yep. - n/t

[1776Forever]

9. It was brought up in 2008 & should have been brought up again in '09/'10- Read on:

S.AMDT.4218
Amends: S.CON.RES.70
Sponsor: Sen Sanders, Bernard (submitted 3/12/2008) (proposed 3/13/2008)
AMENDMENT PURPOSE:
To put children ahead of millionaires and billionaires by restoring the pre-2001 top income tax rate for people earning over $1 million, and use this revenue to invest in LIHEAP; IDEA; Head Start; Child Care; nutrition; school construction and deficit reduction.

TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S2016-2017

Bill Summary & Status
110th Congress (2007 - 2008)
S.AMDT.4218

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:SP04218:

STATUS:

3/13/2008:
Amendment SA 4218 proposed by Senator Sanders. (consideration: CR S2055-2056; text: CR S2056)
3/13/2008:
Amendment SA 4218 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 43 - 55. Record Vote Number: 64.
COSPONSORS(10):

Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham - 3/12/2008
Sen Kennedy, Edward M. - 3/12/2008
Sen Harkin, Tom - 3/12/2008
Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. - 3/12/2008
Sen Schumer, Charles E. - 3/12/2008
Sen Brown, Sherrod - 3/12/2008
Sen Durbin, Richard - 3/12/2008
Sen Levin, Carl - 3/12/2008
Sen Casey, Robert P., Jr. - 3/12/2008
Sen Menendez, Robert - 3/13/2008

CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: To put children ahead of millionaires and billionaires by restoring the pre-2001 top income tax rate for people earning over $1 million, and use this revenue to invest in LIHEAP; IDEA; Head Start; Child Care; nutrition; school construction and deficit reduction.

SUPPORTER'S ARGUMENT FOR VOTING YES:Sen. SANDERS: The wealthiest people in the country have not had it so good since the 1920s. Their incomes are soaring, while at the same time the middle class is shrinking, and we have by far the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country. The time is now to begin changing our national priorities and moving this country in a different direction.

This amendment restores the top income tax bracket for households earning more than $1 million a year, it raises $32.5 billion over 3 years, and invests that in our kids, including $10 billion for special education. OPPONENT'S ARGUMENT FOR VOTING NO:Sen. KYL: The problem is we are spending the same dollar 3 or 4 times, it appears. The Sanders amendment is paid for by raising taxes another $32.5 billion, ostensibly from the rich; that is to say, by raising taxes on people who make over $1 million a year. Here is the problem with that. The budget on the floor already assumes the expiration of the current tax rates; that is to say, the rates on the highest level go from 35% to 39.6%, and that money is spent. If you took all the top-rate income, you would come up with $25 billion a year, not even enough to meet what is here, and that money has already been spent. The reality is somewhere or other, somehow, more taxes would have to be raised. I don't think the American people want to do that, particularly in the current environment. LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Amendment rejected, 43-55 Reference: Bill S.Amdt.4218 to S.Con.Res.70 ; vote number 08-S064 on Mar 13, 2008