Permanent droopy faced
Downercraticandipendent Sen. Joe Lieberman never met a terrible idea he didn't love, or missed the chance
to play spoiler and screw everyone over on some important issue or another. It's his raison d'être!
When you're the intentionally annoying, token backstabbing leper, unwelcome in either party, you do whatever you can to stay relevant, in the hopes of once again feeling the shiny, warm gaze of the media's spotlight as its luxurious heat spreads throughout your frail limbs, filling the cold empty vacuum where a heart should be.
Which is why Traitor Joe couldn't wait to announce his awesome plans to do "everything I can" to stop Democrats from allowing Bush's upper-class tax cuts for the obscenely rich to expire, because haven't America's heirs and barons been through enough already? I mean it's bad enough they can't even prance around in diamonds and furs, toss $100 dollar bills into the air and laugh at the gross poors scrambling around below for sport, without feeling all weird and self-conscious anymore!
Ummm, there goes the neighborhood!
But does "everything I can" include stomping on the poor, unemployed, or otherwise downtrodden, while spitting in the face of average, hardworking blue-collar Americans in order to achieve this end?
Ha ha, only if he's lucky, my friends!
Naturally, Republicans would like nothing more than to extend
all of the Bush tax cuts forever, because why on God's no longer Green Earth would the federal government need to fund itself? Sure, we're already an embarrassingly broke nation, and permanently extending Bush's tax cuts would result in a $3 to $4 trillion loss of revenue, but isn't that why ol' Georgey planted all those money trees behind the White House in the first place?
The flippin' cowboy genius!
Not surprisingly, arugula-eating, Socialist comrade Barack Obama only wants to extend, at least for a few years, tax cuts for the
pesky, disappearing middle class, while ending the cuts on the top two brackets: reverting the 33% one back to 36%, and the top 35% one to 39.6%.
But apparently letting the $1.3 trillion Bush tax cuts on the richest human beings in world history expire and return to their
slightly higher Clinton-era rates is considered very controversial in Washington, DC!
Even some Republicans like
tanning bed salesman and Snooki's older brother, John Boehner, made the grave mistake of admitting that, given a choice between extending the tax cuts
just for people who are less than very, very rich and no tax cuts at all, he would choose the former. Which, unlike everything else Republican leaders have said over the past couple of years, doesn't make less sense than one of Sarah Palin's tweets about
"cackles of rads" and
"cake inks."
Well this does not bode well with the rest of the Grand Ol' Patriots, and even some pseudo Democrats like ol' Joe Lieberman and Ben 'Nebraska' Nelson, who would simply prefer to hold hostage tax relief for 98 percent of the American people, in order to get (desperately needed) tax breaks for the top 2 percent, like say each and every 'illionaire in Congress!
Leave it to the lame, poor-loving Democrats to even so much as question
why the richest of the rich need to keep their tax cuts!
Helloooooo?? Sure, the Wall Street titans, corporate CEOs, and banking executives did
cause this whole recession thing, what with their predatory lending, and reckless bundling of toxic assets passed off as good investments not piles of hot garbage, which is why
we, the American taxpayers, need to protect
them from all this terrible damage they brought upon themselves!
How dare we ask our precious rich citizens to contribute as much to big, bad government as they did before El Savior George W. Bush came into office??
"When you have a huge national debt, when you have people who are unemployed, need to get to work, you do not -- not this year, not next year or the following year -- give tax breaks to millionaires or billionaires," said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). "That is obscene to my mind...I will do my best to defeat that proposal."
Ha, what a typical Socialist thing to say, Bernie! What's next, a national Give-Your-Gucci-To-A-Poor-Day?
But the big question remains, whatever will Congress do now? Since it is far more likely that dinosaurs come waltzing across the congressional floor than Democrats and Republicans actually
coming to some sort of agreement before the deadline, all rates will go up this January, and Democrats will naturally be attacked for "raising taxes," or "destroying the suddenly-robust economy" or whatever.
Recently departed Obama budget director Peter Orszag believes
he has the answer, which elitists can find in the Commie rag
The New York Times:
In the face of the dueling deficits, the best approach is a compromise: extend the tax cuts for two years and then end them altogether. Ideally only the middle-class tax cuts would be continued for now. Getting a deal in Congress, though, may require keeping the high-income tax cuts, too. And that would still be worth it.
Why does this combination make sense? The answer is that over the medium term, the tax cuts are simply not affordable. Yet no one wants to make an already stagnating jobs market worse over the next year or two, which is exactly what would happen if the cuts expire as planned.
OMG, like totally! Because everyone knows tax cuts for the richest folks will definitely create more jobs....in China.
But then there's
still the other little issue of putting this off until the presidential election season, when Democrats will suddenly have grown some balls, and
certainly be willing to let
all of the cuts expire, especially with a huge election on the line.
Much better to just keep kicking this can down the road, as far as it will go, indefinitely. If you're really lucky, eventually it might just pass through your trailer park or tent city.
Better yet, why not just kick
Congress down the road, and let
them expire instead?
Problem solved!
