-
Adieu, Adieu, Remember Me
March 25, 2011 | 38 comments
-
DeMint’s Defense of RomneyCare is Ignorant…And Dangerous
March 17, 2011 | 85 comments
-
McConnell Pushing Vote to Block the EPA from Regulating Carbon Emissions
March 17, 2011 | 9 comments
-
More Barbour on Afghanistan
March 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
House Passes Three Week Spending Bill
March 15, 2011 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
The House of Representatives just voted 234-188 to extend the Bush-era tax cuts to families earning under $250,000, denying Republicans a separate vote on extending all of the tax cuts, at least for now. Three Republicans — Reps. Ron Paul, Walter Jones and John Duncan — voted for the legislation.
The bill now moves to the Senate, where it faces certain defeat. The only reason they had the vote at all was so Democrats would be able to portray Republicans as being against middle class tax cuts, and to give Democrats a tax cut bill they could vote for, given that many of them will vote against any future bill to extend all of the tax cuts.
Here is the roll call on the bill.
View all comments (15) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Philip Klein
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/12/02/house-passes-partial-extension
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Al Adab| 12.2.10 @ 5:08PM
Sure, it is all about political advantage not about the financial condition of the nation. These people need a new hard lesson since apparently they learned nothing from the election.
WhiteBikerTrash| 12.2.10 @ 6:00PM
Let's see if I've got this right,
We are in rough economic times. Unemployment is just below 10% or by the U-6 measure 17%. The lame duck Democratic Congress wants to start taking more money from the richest 2%, who by the way employ the majority of the workers in our "Free Market" work force.
Their reasoning is that they "Need" to pay for extending the Unemployment benefits.
So the plan is to take money from people who could hire the unemployed, if they had that money, to create the wealth, to share with their new employees. Then give it to the unemployed who want to work, and could if the people who create wealth had the money to hire them?
They call this compassion?
manny| 12.2.10 @ 6:09PM
Nicely stated. Pithy!
OverPerezHilton | 12.3.10 @ 11:31AM
I would agree with you if the top 2% had been creating jobs all along. But they haven't, and these tax cuts for the wealthy have been around a while. Definition of insane? Doing the same thing expecting different results.
victor| 12.3.10 @ 1:42PM
"Definition of insane? Doing the same thing expecting different results."
Case in point, in New Jersey, Jon moneybags Corzine instituted just that sort of tax on the top 2% and the result was that 4000 taxpayers left and took 80 Billion dollars in revenue with them to other states.
Chris Christie is doing all he can to reverse that.
Raising taxes never raises revenues.
Case in point again, look at all of the revenue raised by raising taxes on cigarettes.
It worked so well in New York that black-market (is that racist?) cigarettes are booming!
Works every time, eh?
victor| 12.3.10 @ 2:28AM
Three Republicans, Walter Jones (N.C.), RON PAUL (Texas) and John Duncan (Tenn.), voted with Democrats to renew only the middle-class cuts.
A comment praising his and all the votes for this typical democrat bill:
"YEAH! The House did the right thing! The House, led by Nancy Pelosi and the democrats did the fiscally responsible thing!
The Senate republicans and President Obama will be wrong if they extend tax cuts for the RICH adding another $700 BILLION DOLLARS to the national debt!
Mr President… do the RIGHT thing and tell the republicans where to shove it! NO COMPROMISE FOR THE RICH! NO EXTRA TAX BREAKS FOR MILLIONAIRES!"
What could possibly explain his vote? Senility?
Oh yeah, that's right, Barry Goldwater went senile in his old age too.
Someone, anyone, please explain his vote for insanity.
Or does he really believe that when tax rates are reduced, the government is giving you money?
Clint| 12.3.10 @ 7:07AM
DUUUUHHHH !
Do Your Homework Imbecile Margie-Alias Victor.
Dr. Ron Paul's Vote was about his opposition to The Income Tax & The IRS.
Dr.Ron Paul Wants to Abolish Both.
victor| 12.3.10 @ 10:45AM
That's why he voted WITH the democrats?
Because they want the same thing?
To abolish the IRS and the Income Tax?
The Bible says:
"Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"
Amos 3:3
Why would you vote WITH the enemy unless you think the way they do?
PS, I see that you still cannot tell the difference between me and my wife.
Does it make you feel better to think of me that way, eh Clin(timmy*)?
Easier to beat up a woman, isn't it?
victor| 12.3.10 @ 1:37PM
clin(timmy*):
"Dr. Ron Paul's Vote was about his opposition to The Income Tax & The IRS.
Dr.Ron Paul Wants to Abolish Both."
Then let him propose LEGISLATION to do just that.
Then let's see his new found friends, the democrats, vote for it, eh?
Easier to be a yap-dog isn't it?
Traditional Conservative| 12.3.10 @ 12:55PM
Ron Paul voted for tax extensions for the middle class, because he would rather extend the tax cuts for 98% of Americans than for 0% of Americans.
http://paul.house.gov/index.ph.....statements
victor| 12.3.10 @ 1:34PM
How do you give people that do not pay income taxes a TAX CUT?
47% of those filing income taxes do not pay income taxes.
Those who earn less than the median income only account for 2.7% of the income tax revenues.
Everyone who pays income taxes should get an income tax rate reduction and therefore all of the income tax reductions should be extended.
PS at what income level does the "Middle Class" stop at?
What about the 65% of small business owners that earn more than $250,000 and file personal income taxes?
What are they? Chopped liver?
And they should be thrown to the wolves?
This is class warfare at is its most basest and you're defending it?
Traditional Conservative| 12.3.10 @ 3:30PM
I support making permanent the Bush tax cuts for all Americans, and so does Ron Paul. Ron Paul would vote for a bill that made the Bush tax cuts permanent for all Americans. However, given a choice between extending the tax cuts for 98% of Americans or extending them for nobody, I would rather extend the tax cuts for 98% of Americans. That's where Ron Paul is coming from as well. He's never voted for a tax increase, and he didn't want to vote for a tax increase on the middle class this time.
victor| 12.3.10 @ 3:40PM
My point still stands.
Why does he vote with democrats on any issue?
http://www.house.gov/frank/doc.....letter.pdf
The top 2% are the hiring class for the Middle Class.
Trad-Con:
"He's never voted for a tax increase, and he didn't want to vote for a tax increase on the middle class this time."
No, but he voted to increase taxes on the merchant and contractor class.
You need to address this:
"What about the 65% of small business owners that earn more than $250,000 and file personal income taxes?"
and why Ron Paul is voting to shaft them with onerous taxes.
Are you saying that these small businessmen are not Middle Class?
Traditional Conservative| 12.3.10 @ 4:05PM
Like I said before, Ron Paul supports extending all of the Bush tax cuts, and would vote to do so. The bill that he voted for extended the tax cuts for those under $250,000 a year. The bill did not include a tax increase on the rich. Had Ron Paul voted against this he would've voted for a large TAX INCREASE on the middle class. Ron Paul doesn't vote in terms of partisan politics. He votes in terms of liberty and the Constitution. He will always vote for bills that cut taxes, and that's what he did this time as well. Ron Paul has said numerous times that he supports ABOLISHING the IRS and replacing it with nothing.
Chris| 12.6.10 @ 6:12PM
Because even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while (apologies for the affront to pigs). His vote doesn't mean he supports a tax increase for the rich, but it does advance maintaining the current tax rates for the middle class. If memory serves, that is where the lion's share of the taxes come from anyway. I wouldn't get your undies in a bunch cuz it won't survive the Senate. This is just grandstanding and isn't done yet.