OBAMA To GOP: I DARE YOU!

[kpete]

Obama dares GOP to oppose middle class tax cuts
By Greg Sargent

President Obama, during his event just now calling on Congress to extend the Bush tax cuts on those making under $250,000:

We should all agree to extend the tax cuts for the middle class. Let’s agree to do what we agree on. Right? That’s what compromise is all about. Let’s not hold the vast majority of Americans and our entire economy hostage while we debate the merits of another tax cut for the wealthy. We can have that debate. But let’s not hold up working out the thing that we already agree on.

In many ways the fate of the tax cut for the wealthiest Americans will be decided by the outcome of the next election. My opponent will fight to keep them in place. I will fight to end them. That argument shouldn’t threaten you. It shouldn’t threaten the 98 percent of Americans who just want to know that their taxes won’t go up next year. Middle class families and small business owners — they deserve that guarantee. They deserve that certainty. It will be good for the economy, and it will be good for you.

Much More:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/obama-dares-gop-to-oppose-middle-class-tax-cuts/2012/07/09/gJQAqfBYYW_blog.html

[pinto]

1. Bring it on...

[ProSense]

2. Let's hope

the Republicans remain obstructionists and all the tax cuts expire. I mean, what is the likelihood that they're concerned about giving the impression that they're out to protect the rich by holding the middle class hostage?

[Flying Squirrel]

19. Obama wins either way.

He either gets to show the country a crystal clear example of their obstructionism, or he gets an economic boost just before the election.

[Kablooie]

27. Or he caves and extends the Bush cuts for the 1% again.

Sorry, I'm not optimistic about this.

[NashvilleLefty]

28. Were you asleep? Did you not see what advantages Obama gained

for the middle-class, unemployed, and poor as a result of that concession?

So, after all that the 99% gained because of that simple concession all you can focus on is what little we gave up?

FOCUS!

I'm sorry, but this attitude is no better than the "compromise means we get everything we want" attitude of the GOP.

Remember, 3 steps forward and 2 steps back means we're still forward by 1 step. Why is that such a difficult concept?

[magnifisense]

3. Or "Go ahead, make my day!"

[Indydem]

4. Nice thought.

Except the tea part pukes hold all the cards.

They'll pass a bill extending all tax cuts and either Harry Reid or Barack Obama will have to kill it.

Then, we look like the bad guys.

We aren't going to get the tax extension on <$250k without the rest. It just isn't going to happen.

[TBF]

5. Fine, let them all expire -

and then pass relief for those with incomes under 250K as a separate bill. Add it on to something the repugs want to pass. Assholes.

[Xyzse]

7. This is what they should have done to begin with.

[leftynyc]

6. I think the President will take that battle

Portray it as holding a gun to middle income voter's heads until the rich get their goodies. Fits into the picture of romeny protecting his rich buddies quite nicely.

[Xyzse]

8. Yes but...

That was the battle at 2010. If this is a repeat of the 2010 battle, prepare to get hosed.
I think it is a mistake to do this, but I may be wrong, and hope that I am.

That's all I can say about this.

[Indydem]

9. The majority of the expense of the cuts is for those under $250k.

The popular support is still with keeping all of the tax cuts.

The battle is just a repeat of 2010, and we saw how that ended up.

[TBF]

12. Do you have a cite supporting the assertion that the expense of

the cuts is those under $250K? If so we should be working harder on repealing the capital gains tax cuts or something like that. It's got to be the wealthy that pay more - the poor have already lost their shirts.

[Indydem]

14. This is from 2010

Total Cost (10 Years): 3.3 trillion
<200K (Which was the cutoff in the 2010 debate): 2.2 Trillion
200k + :1.1 Trillion

While we all know that those making over 200k (or 250k in the 2012 debate) is a smaller portion of the population, people know that they are a bigger portion of the taxpaying population. Them getting a third when 2/3 goes tot he middle class just doesn't piss people off.

http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Economic_Mobility/Tax%20Cut%20Addendum%20FINAL%209%202%202010%20_v2.pdf?n=7577

[TBF]

15. Thank you - it's got to include the capital gains portion too then -

if it already does then we've got to look at rate hikes and closing loopholes for the extremely wealthy. Somehow there is a huge gap between the rich and poor in this country, and there has got to be a way to lessen that.

[jeff47]

17. No, that wasn't the 2010 battle

The 2010 battle was "extend the tax cuts or we won't extend unemployment".

Unemployment isn't getting extended now. It's a different battle.

[Xyzse]

32. Just slightly different

To the average news watcher or general citizen, to them it is merely another Tax Cut battle.

I hope it goes well for him, but I have misgivings about this tact.
Still, he was widely successful in changing the discussion from the jobs report, which may have been his reasoning.

[Mkap]

10. The GOP wants to know...

But what about the people with caymen islands and swiss bank accounts??? WWWWAAAAHHH

[obxhead]

11. They called this bet (bluff?) once already.

Obama folded that hand.

I'll believe it when I see it. All they have to do is report dropping poll numbers.

[Poll_Blind]

13. GOP will demand all tax cuts extended. Obama will acquiesce. The End.

This is not some kind of prediction, there simply is no other way when the President refuses to veto.

PB

[Flying Squirrel]

21. I think something has changed.

Call me overly optimistic, but I`m seeing a difference in Obama`s demeanor lately. I have a feeling that we could soon see the first of many vetos here. He wants that second term and he`s gonna make it count.

[sweetapogee]

31. If it gets

to the Presidents desk that means it made it past the Senate. Explain to this simple mind how could he then veto it? Not to depress your optimism but there are a lot more Dems than pukes up for re-election in the Senate this time. Let's hope the pukes don't gamble the farm and insist that the cuts be made permanent. Just sayin'

[JoePhilly]

24. There will be nothing to veto ... do you not get that fact?

The GOP thrives on inaction. They can't pass anything. Obama can allow the GOP to do nothing, and let the tax cuts expire during the lame duck.

Obama can now demand that Congress act, and the GOP can't act. This is the entire reason that Obama pushed this to the 2012 lame duck session. Win or lose, the GOP can't hold his promise to not raise taxes on the middle class taxes over his head.

He can demand that the GOP pass an extended cut for the middle class, and the GOP House will not do it. Harry Reid will try to pass such an extension, and the GOP will filibuster it.

And so again, there is no veto needed because there will be no legislation, unless the GOP collapses and helpes pass an extension for the middle class only.

There were be many on DU who will not get this until after it happens.

[Sirveri]

29. They were holding unemployment hostage. They aren't this time.

I still think we got hosed on that deal since we only gained a year of extended federal unemployment benefits and some trinkets for two years of the Bush tax cuts. Then again maybe he wanted to fight the fight again right now.

[JDPriestly]

16. I support President Obama 100% on this issue.

Thank you, President Obama, for doing what is right. We are counting on you.

[DallasNE]

18. Obama Continues To Define The Campaign

And is keeping Romney off balance. Here he is putting Romney on the defensive by running against the Republicans in Congress. I look for this to continue to happen right up through the conventions. The crystal ball doesn't look beyond that time frame because Romney should have a good week and a bounce coming out of the Republican convention but will it be too late by then to turn things around.

[Lex]

20. He needs to stay on the offense, and keep Romney on the defense.

I'm liking what I see so far.

[Flying Squirrel]

22. If there`s no floor fight... nt

[B Calm]

23. Now if only he could get

the democrats in congress on the same message and in line!!

[Abra]

25. This would be more exciting if...

Obama actually followed through on this kind of thing.

[Historic NY]

26. One of my bagger friends was all upset the President was doing tax cuts...

before the election to buy votes........yup

[wiggs]

30. Just heard on Geraldo...some business owner and Dan from Wall Street Journal were

talking about if 250,000 makes you rich or not. The business owner said he has 100 employees and personally makes 150K to 350K per year...but that a 4% increase in tax rate might cause him to close his business. Ridiculous crap that Geraldo, of course, did not question.

I emailed Geraldo: 'Greetings Geraldo. Was able to tune in for a short time during the 10:00 hour and was dismayed to hear unexamined, unchallenged bunk regarding a potential tax increase. The fellow on the air said he pulls down 160K to 350K per year and has 100 employees (which must gross the company at least 6 million per year if not much more)...but a 3.9% tax increase on his ADJUSTED gross income might result in an additional tax of 8,000 dollars could put his company out of business? Disappointing bunk.'

Why can't the dems...or even unbiased pundits, reporters, and journalists...shed light on the real numbers to show that this tax increase on those making 250K or more is tiny? Why does the meme of killing job creators through tax persist when it is not the truth?

[4lbs]

34. Because GOPpers and most people in this country cannot do or think about more than simple math.

They understand 4% more TAX.

They think it's 4% more on the entire gross amount.

They don't understand, cannot comprehend, that it's 4% on the amount that exceeds $250K.

So, if that business owner makes $350K, it's 4% more on just $100K (the amount above $250K).

That's just $4,000 more.

Most of the luddites in the GOP just think it's 4% more on the ENTIRE $350K, which it isn't.

So, they think it's $14,000 more. Or approximately $1160 per month.

However, they cannot comprehend that even if it was $14,000 a year more, they still wouldn't go bankrupt.

A person that makes $350,000 per year in gross income probably would get $240,000 per year in net income.

That's $20,000 per month after taxes. So, there is no way in hell that a person that gets $20K per month in real net income will go bankrupt or hungry if you take away $1160.

Because you know, $20,000 per month, a person can comfortably live, but hey, make it "only" $18,840 per month and suddenly they are on food stamps!

[99Forever]

33. I said it before...

... I'll say it again. I'll believe it when I see it,