Which promise by President Obama is more important?

[JamesA1102]

1 - Not raising taxes on low and middle class workers?
2 - Ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich?

You can't have both so you have to choose which is the more important to you.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Both

If he held firm, the Republicans would cave like they did with Clinton in the 1995 government shutdown.

Most important was Obama's promise to fight for working Americans - this promise has become a total joke.

[Clio the Leo]

3. The unemployment rate in 1995 was 5.6%....

.... it's going to be interesting to see how much the Democrats can get done by "holding firm" when the GOP has control of the House next month.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. Can You Show Me The Mechanism By Which They Cave Please

If The Grand Bargain fails the Tan Man will make the following speech:

" Despite our best efforts the Democratic party has voted to raise your taxes. Rest assured, it will be the first order of the new Congress to prvide tax reflief for every American."

[Clio the Leo]

5. And they were already doing that before the election...

..... which is precisely why the House Dems refused to vote for the tax cut in September or October.

Some of us act like this happened before recorded history. How can we forget so easily?

[JamesA1102]

14. Can't have both.

You have to choose one.

[Clio the Leo]

2. #1 obviously and.......

.... quit trying to inject logic into this argument. :)

[Warren Stupidity]

6. "You can't have both": false.

Until this congress's term expires, that is the only option that should have been offered. If Republicans refuse to extend the tax cuts for the middle class, that would be on them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Let's Accept Your Premise That The Repubs Will Get The Blame For Raising Taxes

What happens next year when the first bill they send to the Senate includes tax cuts for everybody.

Even in your most optimistic scenario we get the issue for one week, They get the issue for two years...


You're smarter than that. Come over to the light side, my friend. It will make your headache go away.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. Do exactly what the republicans would do: reject it.

And when the issue comes up, make it clear that a bill that does not extend tax cuts for billionaires will pass. Then let the chips fall where they may.

But I see your point, playing hardball has risks. We could lose. Best to get the losing part over with right at the start. Much less uncertainty that way. Plus looking like a weak willed party that doesn't even believe in its own core principals is a sure way to win at the polls.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. I Just Think If The Compromise Fails We Will Get Nothing Or Something Crappier In January

There's going to be non stop media coverage of the new Congress... The first order of business for the Repugnants will be to pass a tax cut for everybody bill which will easily pass the House. It will easily pass the Senate too... There will not be forty Democrats who will go on record as opposing taxes for the middle and working class, no matter how its framed, just to stop tax cuts for the rich. I do think the bill from the new Congress will include UI extension because that will be the cost to get the five Democratic votes they need.

If Obama vetoes it he's breaks his pledge to lower taxes on the working and middle class, If he signs it he breaks his pledge raise taxes on the upper class... Either way he and us are screwn...

I know some of the compromise opponents see it as appeasement. In light of the evidence it looks like more of a tactical retreat. There's going to be lots of fight next year. I just don't this issue is our "hill".

[Warren Stupidity]

22. Well we never find out because we capitulate at the start.

So you can speculate that we would fail, and I can speculate that in fact the Republicans would actually fold if we called their bluff, but we will never know because our leaders will not fight.

[JamesA1102]

15. Sorry but you can't have both.

You have to choose one.

[MannyGoldstein]

25. I *could* have had both

But that was denied to us by the Spelunker-in Chief.

[BklnDem75]

29. No you couldn't

You keep yelling in the wrong direction, so the ones actually responsible for giving you both got a pass.

[Vinca]

7. If the citizens knew where the money was coming from, maybe

the uproar would cause a rethinking of this entire bill. Booga! Booga! Booga! I saw a picture of a bank that had "Islamic" in its name and apparently it buys U.S. debt.

[mtnsnake]

11. It's a no brainer: Ending Bush's tax cuts for the rich

It's the only responsible thing to do, even if it means ending Bush's tax cuts for everyone including you, me, rich people, everyone. This country is flat out broke.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. Last Time I Checked American Paper Was Rated AAA

As long as we can spend trillions of dollar to maintain an empire, dire warnings about the deficit ring hollow...

[JamesA1102]

16. OK Fair answer. Thanks nt

[jefferson_dem]

12. The first one, obviously.

No brainer.

Could you imagine POTUS (or anyone for that matter) making this case when people open up their January pay checks to notice they didn't earn as much in December? "Hey, no worries. The rich didn't get their taxes extended either..."

[JoePhilly]

17. The middle class wants their tax cut and is unwilling to give it up ...

to ensure that the rich don't also get their cut.

That's just a fact.

[CakeGrrl]

18. Number 1, of course.

The reason this post will, of course, be recced at zero is that you ruined it with that annoying reality reminder that you can't have both.

That's the sticking point.

Some people here still think the Republicans would actually do the right thing if the tax cuts were to expire. Even after they've already voted down unemployment extensions and tax cuts for the middle class only.

Somehow in Dreamland, if you just try it again, they'll suddenly change course.

[Honeycombe8]

19. Being a strong leader. THAT'S the point. It's not the bill...it's the lack of negotiation &

leadership skills in the art of the deal, and winning politically.

As you can see, Obama failed politically. Because of his lack of leadership skills, he has created a political bomb around himself. Presidents don't normally do that. They generally are more politically astute than that.

[JamesA1102]

21. Who said there was a lack of negotiation?

Weren't they negotiating all weekend?

[Dawgs]

20. 2. n/t.

[Exilednight]

23. You can have both. We just need someone who is capable of making it happen. n/t

[JamesA1102]

32. Who? Merlin? Superman? James Bond? Jed Bartlet?

[Exilednight]

37. I was thinking about the man who ran for the presidency in 2008, but it seems that he's now MIA. n/t

[JamesA1102]

40. Guess voted for a guy with superpowers

I voted for a human being.

[Exilednight]

41. I voted for a guy who I believed to be an intellectual, but all we got was a man who is

intelligent. Sadly, his intelligence does not equal out to the ability to be a statesman or an intellectual.

[JamesA1102]

42. How so? nt

[Exilednight]

44. An intellectual is a person who uses ...........

critical thought to arrive at an intelligent conclusion, and (this, also, goes to his ability of statesmanship) to accomplish their stated goals.

Being intelligent does not equate to being an intellectual.

[phleshdef]

46. I nominate Gary Busey!

[Aramchek]

38. I can't believe you aren't smart enough to realize the error in your logic.

[Exilednight]

50. I'm not surprised that you aren't smart enough to realize the error of your logic. n/t

[polichick]

24. We could have had both if the pres had outed Republicans to the people instead of caving. nt

[Jakes Progress]

27. Not only should we have had both,

we should have also had universal health care, an end to bush's wars, and trials for cheney.

I worked, I campaigned, I voted and all I got was this lousy administration.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[phleshdef]

47. He spent the entire 2010 campaign season "outing them" over tax cuts...

...and yet the Republicans were rewarded for that and many other atrocious stances that they made perfectly clear to the electorate beforehand.

Elections have consequences and they aren't always the good kind.

[Jakes Progress]

26. Which would you rather have?

You children's lives or world peace. Now. Now. You can't have both. Why not? Because i said so.

This is a stupid and misleading OP.

[JamesA1102]

35. Unless you can figure out how to get 60 votes in the Senate

then you can't have both.

[Jakes Progress]

43. Unless you know how to get 60 votes

when you have a majority in both houses and an issue with 95% public backing, then you shouldn't have asked to be president.

[Phx_Dem]

28. Easy. #1. Because it has a major financial impact on middle class

the #2 doesn't. We're not giving the rich more tax cuts, we're simply extending the ones they already have and it has no negative affect on middle class or lowere income people. They don't need it and I wish they weren't getting them, but it's not worth giving up everything else in the package.

[Hoyt]

30. Exactly. And publicly turning on Obama just makes the right wingers gloat.

[JamesA1102]

33. Thank you for a mature answer. nt

[BklnDem75]

31. #1 obviously

As much as many would love to stick it to the rich, people in the real world don't want to see their taxes go up. Politically speaking, anyone suggesting pissing off 99.5% just to stick it to the top 2% has zero interest in getting anything done.

[yurbud]

36. he set it up so he couldn't have both and congress dithered until the GOP won

there was no reason they couldn't have had the vote before the election, and since it had a money angle, even the Senate could have passed the Dem version through reconciliation.

[JamesA1102]

39. Reconciliatiion can only be used once a year

and they already used it on Healthcare; so that wasn't an option.

[FrenchieCat]

45. The most important promise is the one the GOP made.....

To make sure that Obama fails, no matter what it takes.

[harun]

48. 2

[TheKentuckian]

49. Since I want neither it doesn't really matter which one is more important.

The people that need relief are getting a token and some will still pay more next year than this year.

This is all for the top 20%. They threw most of the rest into "the middle" to cause us to fight for more resource funneling to the top brackets.

I can't believe all these flag wavers talk all this shit but when it comes to it would happily sell their nation for 10 or 20 bucks a week.

The Soviets were stupid, all they had to do was send a check or a money order and the brave American people would have gladly surrendered to their whims.