What Weaselly Cowardly Toads
Of course I’m talking about Congress
House Democrats on Wednesday barely won a 210-209 vote to adjourn the House without extending the Bush tax cuts.
Thirty-nine House Democrats voted against adjournment after Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) urged opposition to the motion in a floor speech that said it would be irresponsible for Congress to leave without providing certainty on the tax issue. Dozens of Democrats in tough races voted against adjourning.
“Vote no on this adjournment resolution. Give Congress a chance to vote on extending tax rates,” Boehner said.
The economy is in shambles, so our bold leadership votes to do nothing and go home.
If we re-elect these people, then I will be forced to admit that John Kerry is in fact correct: we will have shown ourselves too stupid to understand what they are doing.
Via our Special Correspondent I have the following EXCLUSIVE photo of the House Democrats leaving after the vote:
Politics | Mr. Bingley | 
September 29, 2010 6:55 pm
Subscribe
The new Congressional color: Yellow.
I heard Pelosi broke the tie, too. This has done them no favors…. heh heh heh….
I bet a lot more wanted to vote against it too, but would have had all their perks cut off if they did.
I am actually shocked that Patrick Murphy (from my state) voted against it. Can’t figure that guy out at all, but, uh, this time he did something good.
It would have been more appalling had Congress voted to extend the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans. The real issue is that we need more statesmen and women in Congress who will place their party manias and egos aside to negotiate compromises creating effective and beneficial government. But that’s not dramatic enough to feature on our 24-hour “news” channels and society isn’t rewarding the subtle craft of statesmanship, or much else that’s subtle, these days.
“It would have been more appalling had Congress voted to extend the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans.”
Why?
When exactly did the accumulation of wealth become illegal in America?
Ave, so it’s better that the Democrats decided to raise taxes on everyone else?
We don’t need Congress to “create” effective government; we need Congress to “de-create” government and reduce it’s size and reach.
Kate, your response is exactly what his cynical vote was for. He and his party got the result they want despite the fact that America doesn’t want it.
With a one vote margin to pass, party discipline is allowing as many to pretend they’re against it as possible. Then the naive will react as you have. Don’t kid yourself. That zebra still has stripes, he’s just changed the lighting to make him look like he doesn’t.
That’s the damn best question ever. Illegal and something to be coveted, confiscated and redistributed as fast as you EARNED it.
As if EARNING were something shameful.
And “wealthiest” is an arbitrary $250,000? I thought that figure was probably once an attainable dream in EVERY American’s mind, and ne’er did “wealthy” EVER come into that dream as a descriptor for such a “vast” sum. (“Really comfortable” was closer to it, I’d think.) And THAT “comfortable” is predicated on being in a state like Florida or Texas. $250K in California? New Jersey?
Not so much.
Who said accumulation of wealth in America is illegal?
I believe it was Barney Frank who said “we need to recover this money” as if it was theirs to begin with. I don’t think anyone would mind the taxes if they were inconjuction with spending cuts. I have a problem with the notion that my taxes go up to just be spent on some black hole of an entitlement program.
Oh sure it’s a case of mild exaggeration, but when the government taxes things at different rates you are penalizing certain activities or seeking to “disincentivize” certain activity. It’s not a huge stretch to say that in a sense the government is making it “illegal” to make a higher salary by using its power of penalty via taxation.
major dad, I agree with you. Over the past thirty years our country has spent itself into an awful hole and so far we’re sticking our kids and their kids with the bill, which really stinks.
Indeed, the debt that is being saddled on our children is unconscionable.
And unsustainable.
Ave, there are plenty of analyses of what Dem tax policy will do to the country, and none of them are good. Perhaps the worst is over-taxing people whose income is high enough to put people like you to work.
What tends to also happen (re: unsustainable debt) is that the consequences of going bust, on the national level, are dire enough that we are almost FORCED to sustain it somehow, anyhow, until we can somehow pay a lot of it off… but that fools us into thinking it wasn’t as bad as it could have been. Crisis averted often becomes “not a crisis” in hindsight, and encourages further stupidity in the future.
Hi Gary, whoever you are, you don’t know me, so what is it you mean and I’ll assume you’re not just being mean?
Or have I misunderstood something here? Help me, help me please.
Help me Obi-Wan!
Gary, I can vouch for Ave. She’s good people. Dropped on her head a few too many times as a child, perhaps, but good people none the less.
Ave, I believe Gary’s ‘you’ was more the generic ‘you’ as in ‘us’ as in the general theory is that folks with more money spend/invest it and this growth allows us/you to work.
Trickling down, as it were
Bingley (the Masterful Statesman) for Senate!
I’m working on that, Ave 😉
Bings, you just need the right boost. I keep singing your praises to Palin… maybe we can spin the restraining order into an endorsement?