I swear, every time I see that little weasel, Mitch McConnell, I want to take a pitch fork to his dome. (I am speaking metaphorically so save your damn e-mails.) I love you Claire McCaskill, let's raise our pitchforks together. These wingnuts can try to spin this tax brake for wealthy folks anyway they want to, it's still a tax break for folks who don't need it, and it will cost us money, damn it! I thought that they wanted to reduce the deficit.
And now, to add insult to injury, "the One" has decided to go ahead and cut a deal with the weasels of Washington. Wingnuts are crying a river, and they claim that raising taxes during tough times for any A-merry-can would be wrong. Bulls^%t! Not raising taxes for high end wage earners will cost us more than the extended unemployment benefits and the payroll tax cuts combined. His O ness wanted those things in his little deal with the devils. Not enough! -BTW, I am writing this as someone who would be hurt more than many of you reading this by these cuts, so I come to this debate from a position of moral rectitude.-
"Administration officials sought to cast the deal in a positive light, saying many of the new provisions would do more to accelerate the economic recovery than the tax cuts at high income levels.
But Congressional Democrats have expressed increasing anger that the payroll tax cut and the jobless aide, which Mr. Obama demanded in exchange for continuing the Bush-era tax rates for the highest-income Americans, were not enough in return for such a big concession.
The payroll tax cut would put about $120 billion back in the pockets of workers and the unemployment benefits would cost about $60 billion, officials said. Continuing the lowered tax rates for the highest-earners, by contrast, would cost the government $700 billion in lost revenue over the next 10 years, according to budget analysts.."
And now, to add insult to injury, "the One" has decided to go ahead and cut a deal with the weasels of Washington. Wingnuts are crying a river, and they claim that raising taxes during tough times for any A-merry-can would be wrong. Bulls^%t! Not raising taxes for high end wage earners will cost us more than the extended unemployment benefits and the payroll tax cuts combined. His O ness wanted those things in his little deal with the devils. Not enough! -BTW, I am writing this as someone who would be hurt more than many of you reading this by these cuts, so I come to this debate from a position of moral rectitude.-
"Administration officials sought to cast the deal in a positive light, saying many of the new provisions would do more to accelerate the economic recovery than the tax cuts at high income levels.
But Congressional Democrats have expressed increasing anger that the payroll tax cut and the jobless aide, which Mr. Obama demanded in exchange for continuing the Bush-era tax rates for the highest-income Americans, were not enough in return for such a big concession.
The payroll tax cut would put about $120 billion back in the pockets of workers and the unemployment benefits would cost about $60 billion, officials said. Continuing the lowered tax rates for the highest-earners, by contrast, would cost the government $700 billion in lost revenue over the next 10 years, according to budget analysts.."
Do you hear that O? SEVEN HUNDRED BILLION. (With B) Remember that figure come 2012 when the little weasels in Washington are slamming you about the budget deficit.
Still, I am glad to hear that hard working folks who lost their jobs and now depend on their unemployment benefits might be spared. Folks like Felicia Robbins might still have a happy holiday. You know who won't have a happy holiday? Folks like yours truly who are sick and tired of seeing the weasels in Washington get over on hard working people.
I know what I want from Santa this Christmas: a nice pitchfork.
