. . . saying that the more pressing issue was the fiscal cliff, the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the beginning of the trigger cuts to domestic and defense spending set for the end of the year . . .

Arrrrrgggghhhh!

What does it take? The GOP law George Bush signed called for “tax hikes beginning in 2010.”

The extensions that the Democratic Congress and now Democratic Senate are negotiating are NOT EXTENSIONS. The Bush law called for taxes to increase in 2010. The return to normal tax rates are what Bush signed into law. The Republican in Congress are the ones responsible for the law calling for revenue increases in 2010. Still, we call them “Bush tax cuts” rather than the “2010 Bush tax increases.” It is the Democrats who have prevented the “2010 Bush tax increases” from coming into effect.

Democrats/Obama are negotiating a “Delay in the scheduled Bush Tax Hikes.” The issue is “Preventing the scheduled Bush Tax Increase from coming into effect.”

There are so many other way to frame this issue other than the “Bush tax cuts.” However, (and once again) the Dems in Congress have ceded the moral, linguistic, rhetorical and policy high-ground. This gives the GOP ownership of the “tax cuts” mantel while they escape their deficit-ballooning failures to reign defense waste, unfunded wars and the obscene refusal to ask the wealthiest to pay their minimally proportionate share.

The Bush tax cuts are not “expiring;” rather the “Bush Tax Increases” are scheduled to begin.

Sigh.

slainte,
cl

. . . saying that the more pressing issue was the fiscal cliff, the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the beginning of the trigger cuts to domestic and defense spending set for the end of the year . . .

Arrrrrgggghhhh!

What does it take? The GOP law George Bush signed called for “tax hikes beginning in 2010.”

The extensions that the Democratic Congress and now Democratic Senate are negotiating are NOT EXTENSIONS. The Bush law called for taxes to increase in 2010. The return to normal tax rates are what Bush signed into law. The Republican in Congress are the ones responsible for the law calling for revenue increases in 2010. Still, we call them “Bush tax cuts” rather than the “2010 Bush tax increases.” It is the Democrats who have prevented the “2010 Bush tax increases” from coming into effect.

Democrats/Obama are negotiating a “Delay in the scheduled Bush Tax Hikes.” The issue is “Preventing the scheduled Bush Tax Increase from coming into effect.”

There are so many other way to frame this issue other than the “Bush tax cuts.” However, (and once again) the Dems in Congress have ceded the moral, linguistic, rhetorical and policy high-ground. This gives the GOP ownership of the “tax cuts” mantel while they escape their deficit-ballooning failures to reign defense waste, unfunded wars and the obscene refusal to ask the wealthiest to pay their minimally proportionate share.

The Bush tax cuts are not “expiring;” rather the “Bush Tax Increases” are scheduled to begin.

Sigh

Jon, Thank you,
I’ve spent far too much time under the polar ice cap, and generally disconnected, since 2009. It’s hard to keep track of every piece of legislation Sens. Baucus, Nelson or Reid have subcontracted out to CIGNA, Wells Fargo or Pfizer (for example) to draft for them.
cl

Jon,
I assume this has been discussed at length previously, but I am assuming that the Act has a severability clause so that if only one portion (or several clauses for that matter) is ruled unconstitutional, that the remainder of the Act will stay on the books and in full force and effect. Yes?

slainte,
cl

Headline: “Obama to Present ‘LONG FORM’ of Bin Laden Death Certificate.”

So this means “The end of major combat operations,” right?

The Middle Class:

It’s easier to protect a class of people when there are so fewer of them to protect.

Crist “Spectered” himself too much and for too long.

The Pennsylvania case study, if nothing else, should have told him that he needed pick a side and run with it. The Florida GOP primary should have told him which side he needed to pick.

He tried to be something for everyone. To most people, that ends up meaning that the politician offers too little for them.

When you spend all your time trying not to offend people, you are also spending all your time failing to inspire a winning base as well.