Yes, it's Obama's fault that the tax cuts weren't repealed in 2009

[cali]

It's very simple. If a President has a majority in Congress, HE sets the agenda. That's pretty much the way it's always worked. President Obama wanted to wait and let them expire. He wanted to focus on other issues.

It was a huge miscalculation and it really is one he's responsible for.

[Autumn]

1. Very true.

Cue the we didn't have 60 votes crap. K/R

[dave29]

2. It is not his fault.

As I mentioned in the other thread you had on this, he had plenty on his plate. He did set the agenda. He worked on MANY progressive agenda items, and successfully at that, then asked Congress to take this up before the election. The Congress punted.

We can be retroactively upset that he did not do this at the time, but not by completely glossing over what was going on at the time.

"He chose to focus on other things"

Like ending Iraq, fair pay for women, Healthcare access for 30 million. Best stimulus he could get to fight off second depression.

[niceypoo]

4. Is it his fault that the Bush tax cuts will be an issue in 2012?

Or is it the fault of 'traditional Democrats,' who oppose them?

[dave29]

7. No, I think it is his plan

actually, now that the issue is unfortunately still alive. He has basically said he is more than happy to have this fight. He wants to have it before an election.

And fwiw, what is a 'traditional democrat'? I've been around way too long to put labels on our party, it's a gigantic tent.

[chimpymustgo]

19. WE just had a fucking election and the Dems had the winning hand and didn't play it. I'm SICK of

rationalizations. Just like healthcare. Obama and the Dems FUCK AROUND...then they fold.

EVERY FUCKING TIME.

[dave29]

34. We had a fucking election?

I'm usually up for those, but no one told me.

[Exilednight]

40. Obama was busy getting shellacked. n/t

[rury]

14. Obama...best and most progressive president ever!!!!!

[COLGATE4]

25. You forgot to include the sarcasm icon

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[ProSense]

5. The President does not control Congress.

They were able to pass a foreclosure bill without his approval. They are a separate branch of government.

If they wanted to make a stink about this they should have done it earlier when there was time to work out a better deal.

If they can stand up to the President now, why couldn't they have done this six months ago?

[WiffenPoof]

36. Okay...I Agree...

It was Congress. However, I have to assume that the President speaks with Nancy, right? I mean, they are after all on the same team.

What is somewhat disturbing about the tax agreement is that Nancy seemed to be blindsided by it. Don't they talk?

-PLA

[dflprincess]

39. In this case Obama only talked to and planned legislation with the Republicans

and just expected the Democrats to go along with his latest sell out.

[rocktivity]

6. Maybe you're right about Obama's wanting to focus on other issues

(though I would think that lack of tax revenue would be a major one). Maybe he figured the repeal process would take too long. Or maybe he knew that Congress wouldn't do it (after all, THEY earn more than $250K). That's what makes his current warnings of financial doom if the tax cuts sunset so disturbing.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[CakeGrrl]

8. Bullcrap.

I knew what the President wanted to accomplish by listening to what he said during the campaign.

You could make a laundry list and work on prioritizing it.

Congress doesn't have the werewithal to figure out what the goals are?

The President has to make these people do their jobs?

What good are they if they can't make a single MOVE without being steered and micromanaged?

And it's all on the President to do that while he does all the other things that ARE his responsibility?

I don't think so.

[frazzled]

9. Congress REFUSED to do it in 2009, before the midterms

Direct your venom to the proper culprits.

They didn't want to get into all that "messy" stuff before the elections: Republican opponents might run misleading ads against them.

President Obama, on the other hand, trying to goad them into action, made this speech in Parma, Ohio, in early September (small excerpt from a very long speech):

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/09/08/remarks-president-economy-parma-ohio

Now, I believe we ought to make the tax cuts for the middle class permanent. (Applause.) For the middle class, permanent. These families are the ones who saw their wages and incomes flat-line over the last decade -– you deserve a break. (Applause.) You deserve some help. And because folks in the middle class are more likely to spend their tax cut on basic necessities, that strengthens the economy as a whole.

But the Republican leader of the House doesn’t want to stop there. Make no mistake: He and his party believe we should also give a permanent tax cut to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.

AUDIENCE: Nooo!

THE PRESIDENT: With all the other budgetary pressures we have -– with all the Republicans’ talk about wanting to shrink the deficit -- they would have us borrow $700 billion over the next 10 years to give a tax cut of about $100,000 each to folks who are already millionaires. And keep in mind wealthy Americans are just about the only folks who saw their incomes rise when Republicans were in charge. And these are the folks who are less likely to spend the money -- which is why economists don’t think tax breaks for the wealthy would do much to boost the economy.

So let me be clear to Mr. Boehner and everybody else: We should not hold middle-class tax cuts hostage any longer. (Applause.) We are ready, this week, if they want, to give tax cuts to every American making $250,000 or less. (Applause.) That's 98-97 percent of Americans. Now, for any income over this amount, the tax rates would just go back to what they were under President Clinton.

This isn’t to punish folks who are better off –- God bless them. It’s because we can’t afford the $700 billion price tag. (Applause.) And for those who claim that our approach would somehow be bad for growth and bad for small businesses, let me remind you that with those tax rates in place, under President Clinton, this country created 22 million jobs and raised incomes and had the largest surplus in our history. (Applause.)

The ones who are lying to you are the Congressional Democrats, in the House and Senate. They didn't want to deal with this issue, lost a whole boatload of seats that would make any agenda item impossible, then at the eleventh hour came up with a deal that failed. The president, who still believes every word he said in September, had no choice but to negotiate with the hostage takers. The culprits are the House and Senate.

[CakeGrrl]

10. But that's the problem; some don't WANT to direct it at all those responsible;

They want Obama to be the sole failure in all this. It's easier to say he needs to get removed from office that way.

Never mind reality. They want a do-over the easy way.

[Bluerthanblue]

11. facts can be so annoying.

:shrug:

[AtomicKitten]

17. Oh I'm pretty sure there are some directing their vitriol

precisely where they intend, facts be damned.

[JamesA1102]

20. Don't confuse the demagogues with facts nt

[laugle]

42. So they waited for the mid-terms,

that's looks pretty silly now considering the results..........bad move, they should have done the right thing, but of course, the elections are the only thing they think about!

[TomCADem]

12. The Blame Democrats, Give The GOP A Free Pass Meme...

...I thought the fact that Republicans have said no to just about everything, and they always get a free pass from the media, the American public, and now DU had something to do with it.

[BeyondGeography]

13. The economy was in a tailspin

Wasn't going to happen.

[truthspeak]

15. Can't raise taxes in the midst of a recession....

even the most liberal of economists would tell you that. Stop with the revisionist history.

[mtnsnake]

16. That's a lame excuse by those who want to profit from Bush's tax cuts for millionaires

[Left of the Left]

18. i think it depends

On who they are being raised, and how much. The only economists I can imagine that would make a blanket statement like that aren't liberals. He ran on repeal, no economists said much about it.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[truthspeak]

21. We're talking in 2009 right?

Nobody would agree to raising taxes then from an economic psychology standpoint. Politically it would be horrible as well.

[bvar22]

23. I agree.

Once upon a time....



"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[joeprogressive]

24. bingo n/t

[phleshdef]

26. That would have been a death knell to the entire agenda over the first 2 years.

[stevenleser]

27. The facts are not with you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=559655&mesg_id=559655

[jenmito]

28. Unrec for misplacing blame. n/t

[BklnDem75]

29. Are you actually interested...

in keeping Democrats in a position where they can make a difference? No sane person would repeal tax breaks, period. 2009? Are you serious?

[mtnsnake]

30. "No sane person would repeal tax breaks, period." Says you

AFAIC, anyone who cares about the long term welfare of this country would be more than willing to repeal all of Bush's tax cuts that benefit the rich far more than they'll ever benefit anyone else. I would be much more willing to sacrifice my short term miniscule Bush tax break for sake of a much more realistic long term solution. Like pay as you go instead of borrow from the Chinese, which is all we be doing again by prolonging Bush's misery.

[BrklynLiberal]

31. +1000. The only way they got passed was with the idea that they WOULD expire..

Typical repuke meme: letting tax cuts expire = raising taxes

[BklnDem75]

37. So your solution..

is long term fixes that will benefit us in the next few decades in the middle of a crisis? A tanking economy and job losses in the hundreds of thousands and a repeal of tax cuts? This is a joke right? That's the very definition of insanity.

[uponit7771]

32. This person forgot the /sarcasm tag....theyhave to be kidding.

[Johnny2X2X]

33. Fault

Where the hell were Obama and all of the Democrats the last 2 years? Especially the anti Deal Dems now, where were you? You wait until December to do something about all of these things and then you hate on a deal that is easily the best you'll see for some time?

If this deal gets killed, you watch people. The deal in January will be much worse. There will be no chance for an unemployment extension, there will be no estate tax and all of the Tax Cuts will still get extended.

[butterfly77]

35. Now,what is Nancy Pelosi's ..

part in this,why didn't she put something on the floor to vote for...what were the house and Senate's part in this I didn't see them supporting the President during the healthcare debate?

[sciencewins]

38. It's Not Obama's fault BUT he needs to Show Conviction to Bring Focus

I agree it is congress's fault for not bringing it sooner but one thing is for certain Obama does not use his bully pulpit well enough to instill strength among his party. He also does not go on the attack against republicans by visiting their home states and explaining to its voters why the senator/rep is wrong. He should be doing this against conserv. democrats especially. If he showed strength then i think congress would be more likely to fall in line and support him when he request something. If i recall Obama made a request to deal with these cuts before the election but congress refused....if they had more respect (or fear that he'd twist their arm by telling their voters) they would have done it sooner.

[laugle]

41. Your absolutely correct!

I remember bringing it up here when he was first elected. Wondering why he didn't get rid of the top 2% tax cuts immediately, since the economy was in such bad shape and we were desperate for revenue. The truth is--he simply lacks the courage to fulfill most of what he promised.

His solutions fall into three categories;punt; kick the can down the road;or throw money at it!

Face it--we've watched him for 4 years and have yet to see him fight for anything......the only people he seems to get angry with, are in his own party.......

[ampad]

43. Total BS

Patty Murry was one of the senators that refused to vote on taxes. She did so because she knew the tax increase proposal in the state of Washington was going to go down hard in the midterms. Only one county in the state of Washington voted for an increase of taxes on those making above 200,000. With Patty in such a tight race with Dino Rossi she was not going to take that gamble. Some may say that Patty made the right decision because of what was going on in her own state. It would be all too easy for Rossi to spin her vote, in a slimy attack ad, causing her to lose the senate seat.

At the time that the tax proposal was put on the ballot the state of Washington had the power to extend those taxes to the middle class. It is not the president's fault that the people of Washington state were suspicious of their state officials. The people of Washington state were not willing to take that gamble; even if it meant sticking it to the rich.

[zulchzulu]

44. Also, the Blue Dogs never vote against their party's interests!

Since we're making shit up....