How can Dems extend Bush tax cuts while running against Bush?

posted at 11:36 am on August 30, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

The big strategy for Democrats in the midterms is to run against George W. Bush, even though he hasn’t been President for almost two years.  Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid hope to use a little misdirection away from their failed economic policies by claiming that Bush policies were so bad that Democrats couldn’t fix them.  However, the centerpiece of Bush’s economic policies were the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts that will expire at the end of the year, and now Democrats want to extend at least some of them, and perhaps all of them, in order to keep from making the economic stagnation into a depression.

If they do, how can they run on the Blame Bush banner?  Even Paul Begala wonders at the contortions that will take:

Democrats are undercutting their campaign message by condemning Republican economic policies while calling for the extension of Bush-era tax cuts.

“It’s hard to say the Republican economic policies were bad, [and] then continue them,” Paul Begala, Democratic strategist and former advisor to President Clinton, told The Hill. “That is a bit of a mixed message.” ….

[T]here’s growing momentum within the party to extend cuts on those with higher incomes too given the stubborn recession. Moody’s Analytics economist Mark Zandi, who has advised Democrats on the economy, this week said congressional leaders should extend all of the tax cuts to reduce the risk of a double-dip recession.

Even extending only the tax cuts for the middle class undercuts the Democratic argument a bit, said Democratic strategist Douglas Schoen, by making it difficult for liberal leaders to say Bush’s tax policies had a toxic affect on the economy.

“If the whole campaign is based on blasting Bush, and Bush for giving away too much to the rich, it’s pretty hard to say that Bush was right [about the middle-class tax cuts],” Schoen said.

The Bush tax cuts sparked the last recovery and rebound from unemployment, which hit full throttle in 2004.  Even before it had taken effect, though, unemployment never got out of the mid-6s.  The investor class knew that Bush had structured his economic policies for growth rather than massive expansion of regulation and uncertainty.

Allowing the tax cuts to expire would have the opposite effect, and even Democrats seem to realize that, albeit belatedly.  Socking the middle class with a tax hike through inaction wouldn’t actually hit until well after the election, but it might turn 2012 into something very much like the midterms this year, whereas Democrats hope that anger will have receded by the presidential election.  Even extending the middle-class tax cuts may not be enough to create any new jobs, though, as investors will simply avoid income-producing activities in the short run.  That means no growth, no expansion, and no massive creation of jobs.

And that means a lot fewer Democrats elected to office across the nation.

So Democrats have a conundrum.  If they agree to extend the Bush tax cuts — the heart of Bush’s economic policies, which only have an expiration date in the first place because Democrats threatened to filibuster them otherwise — they’re endorsing Bush’s economic policies.  If they don’t extend them, Barack Obama and the Democrats still left in Congress will almost certainly create a double-dip recession that will threaten to make their party radioactive for the next few election cycles.  Perhaps they should have thought their 2010 strategy of demonizing Bush through a little more.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Live presser of Hurricane Earl (in Puerto Rico), streaming live, so it’s in Spanish.

http://www.primerahora.com/earlseconvierteenhuracancategoria3-415329.html

ProudPalinFan on August 30, 2010 at 11:38 AM

They aren’t going to extend the tax cuts. They can’t. It would be like Dracula chugging Holy Water. Ain’t gonna happen. Period.

trapeze on August 30, 2010 at 11:39 AM

Do NOT extend the tax cuts. Make them permanent!

WashJeff on August 30, 2010 at 11:40 AM

Cognative Dissonance has never been a problem for the Dems.

WisRich on August 30, 2010 at 11:41 AM

This would hilarious, but for the fact that real people are affected by the decisions or non-decisions these “intellectuals” make.

30 pcs of silver on August 30, 2010 at 11:41 AM

All of the sudden they have to be consistent? Mr. Begala has probably gotten his “Shut up” note already. Democrats don’t think voters are smart enough to notice these things.

Cindy Munford on August 30, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Easy. we were wrong, Bush was right, we’ll extend the cuts.

/too easy

ted c on August 30, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Kill the Death Tax and extend the tax cuts the Dems don’t pay theirs anyway.

How many appointees of Pinnochio “Cousin Eddie” Obama had to withdrawl their name because they had tax problems and a few like Geithner and Rangel just told the taxpayers to STFU and like it!

dhunter on August 30, 2010 at 11:42 AM

How can Dems extend Bush tax cuts while running against Bush?

If they can get a closeted Marxist with a racist preacher and no experience or college transcripts elected president because he is centrist, highly intelligent, post racial and competent then this should be a walk in the park.

Rocks on August 30, 2010 at 11:43 AM

It really doesn’t matter what the democrats do with the economy. Everyone is waiting them out; waiting for Obama to be voted out, and waiting for some sensible economic policies from the republicans. Until then, everyone is refusing to play the game.

Skandia Recluse on August 30, 2010 at 11:45 AM

ted c on August 30, 2010 at 11:42 AM

I think it’s more like “what tax cuts?”.

Cindy Munford on August 30, 2010 at 11:46 AM

How can Dems extend Bush tax cuts while running against Bush?

The same way they’re taking credit for the success in Iraq and the troop withdrawal, after voting against the surge and claiming that “the war is lost,” but then continuing the Bush war strategy because they knew it would ultimately be successful.

They just lie and hope that no one remembers the truth.

UltimateBob on August 30, 2010 at 11:46 AM

If anyone could pull it off it would be the democrats.

portlandon on August 30, 2010 at 11:47 AM

If the Democrats do extend the tax cuts, Republicans should refer to them LOUDLY and CLEARLY as “Republican” middle-class tax cuts which brought the country out of the “Clinton” recession. If the Democrats DON’T extend the tax cuts, Republicans should promise to do so.

Steve Z on August 30, 2010 at 11:47 AM

It’s really the same problem the Republicans have been wrestling wiht the last few elections: When given a choice between a Democrat and a Democrat, people will select the Democrat almost every time.

If they choose to behave more like Republicans, then they have to run on that against Republicans, then the Republicans will win. If they choose to run as Democrats, then the Republicans will win. Liberalism is a lot like cockroaches – it is most successful in the dark nasty places where no one can see all the crap and stink it leaves in its wake.

WashingtonsWake on August 30, 2010 at 11:47 AM

Rocks on August 30, 2010 at 11:43 AM

Don’t forget “pragmatic.”

If I hear another RINO tell me that Zero is a pragmatic leader, I’m going to give him a bloody nose.

UltimateBob on August 30, 2010 at 11:48 AM

I think what they do with the tax cuts depends on what the voters do in November. If they lose, no actions will be taken and a Republican majority will get blamed for taxes going up when they expire.

Cindy Munford on August 30, 2010 at 11:49 AM

All employers with the last name ending with A-M, gets the tax cuts in 2011, then N-Z gets them 2012.
Bush’s were to deep and sweeping, this way they are more controlled and………..
Or…if they can prove that the tax cuts will provide added employment…..please fill out forms 1289c and 1347d, any information left off will make forms ineligible.
Or…the Bush’s tax policy started the avalanche, and it has taken on a life of it’s own. You can’t stand in front of an avalanche, hold up your hand and stop it…you sometimes have to step back and let it die out on it’s own. Bush caused to large of a deficit, too large of a problem, and we don’t want to risk the delicate nature of the markets (since much are driven emotionally). His tax cuts started the problem, which became a much larger problem. It would be like a 100 car pile up, and removing the first car that started the wreck, it just wouldn’t do much good.
I think that last “song and dance” will be their only hope.

right2bright on August 30, 2010 at 11:49 AM

I suspect they will extend them except to the highest earners, as they cannot abandon their ‘soak the rich’ meme without offending their base.

This of course will throw all the CBO projections out of whack. While it may actually prove beneficial to the economy, the CBO stuff will have to show the deficit rising due to the rules they have to forecast with.

Hoist with their own petard.

GnuBreed on August 30, 2010 at 11:49 AM

If the Democrats do extend the tax cuts, Republicans should refer to them LOUDLY and CLEARLY as “Republican” middle-class tax cuts which brought the country out of the “Clinton” recession. If the Democrats DON’T extend the tax cuts, Republicans should promise to do so.

Steve Z on August 30, 2010 at 11:47 AM

If the Democrats allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, we need to refer to that action as the “Obama Tax Increases.”

Gotta lay the blame right where it belongs.

UltimateBob on August 30, 2010 at 11:50 AM

The real fun begins when they decide that they can’t reenact the exact same Bush tax cuts, because that would be a vindication of Bush…..so they’re going to enact a similar, but different, set of tax cuts so they can go, “that’s how it’s supposed to be done.”

….which will, inevitably, end up as 2000+ pages of pork taking over 1 or more additional segments of the economy.

cthulhu on August 30, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Easy just call it the Obummer targeted tax cuts for the poor.

Kissmygrits on August 30, 2010 at 11:53 AM

How can Dems extend Bush tax cuts while running against Bush?

It’s easy. They’re dishonest.

zmdavid on August 30, 2010 at 11:54 AM

The ‘rats would rebrand the tax cuts as being an idea originated by themselves, something they had to drag Dubya to kicking and screaming, and that will be that.

The cuts won’t be extended though, their entire economic campaign to this point has been against such a move.

Bishop on August 30, 2010 at 11:54 AM

In our wisdom, which knows no bounds, we recognize the Bush tax cuts are expiring.

This could have negative impacts on the economy, so we will implement the new Obama tax cuts, which prevents the Republicans and Bush from raising your taxes.

I bet you guys thought being a politician was tough, eh?

BobMbx on August 30, 2010 at 11:55 AM

At the same time, the GOP should be shouting that they won’t follow the failed housing policies that got us into this in the first place.

Ask Barney Frank what he thinks about Fannie and Freddie now.

BuckeyeSam on August 30, 2010 at 11:55 AM

They blamed Bush for his tax cuts, and now they want to continue them, all the while blaming Bush for our current status as a nation?

I just don’t see it happening. Even if Pelosi begged, I don’t see Obama giving a crap. It’s his way, or the highway. The drilling moratorium tells us this. He probably knows it would be a good move, but he wants the credit, and glory for himself.

capejasmine on August 30, 2010 at 11:55 AM

They’ll extend them without mentioning Bush just like Obama did when he took credit for being able to withdraw “combat” troops from Iraq.

Dem playbook: Blame Bush for everything you’re making worse, take credit for the things Bush made right and possible for you take credit for.

Yakko77 on August 30, 2010 at 11:55 AM

Republicans could go a long way to winning back trust by promising to repeal 100 pages of law for every page they pass. They could also help a lot by requiring that every regulatory agency cut redundant rules and regs and help make everything more understandable to normal people running small businesses without lawyers on retainer.

WashingtonsWake on August 30, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Duh. I’ve been saying this for the last 2 years. The Dems constantly harp on the Bush tax cuts as the cause for all our economic ails. When they talk about the so-called “failed policies of the last 8 years”, that’s the centerpiece of what they’re complaining about. My response has always been, ok if the Bush tax cuts are what caused the economic crisis, then just repeal the damn things. Why even wait til 2011 for them to expire? Shouldn’t that immediately turn things around and lead us to recovery?

Of course, any thinking person understands why they never repealed the tax cuts. Because they know what that’ll do to the economy and unemployment. Unfortunately within the next 4 months, they’ll be forced to make a decision and it’ll likely seal Obama’s fate in 2012 if they let even some of the tax cuts expire.

Doughboy on August 30, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Do NOT extend the tax cuts. Make them permanent!

WashJeff on August 30, 2010 at 11:40 AM

Second that!

fourdeucer on August 30, 2010 at 11:57 AM

“That is a bit of a mixed message.” ….

Talk about an understatement. That’s weapons grade stuff right there.

Johnnyreb on August 30, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Skandia Recluse on August 30, 2010 at 11:45 AM

AMEN!

Yellowdog12 on August 30, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Wait a minute…how can they extend the tax cuts for the middle class when there never were any in the first place? All I heard for the last 8 years was that Bush gave tax cuts only to the rich?

I’m so confused.

Youngs98 on August 30, 2010 at 12:03 PM

They ave a simple solution, they let the tax cuts expire and write their own tax cut bill with a ton of extra “stimulus” “pork”. That way they can claim that the pork is the reason for a better economy and downplay the tax cuts in their bill.

jeffn21 on August 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM

They ave a simple solution, they let the tax cuts expire and write their own tax cut bill with a ton of extra “stimulus” “pork”. That way they can claim that the pork is the reason for a better economy and downplay the tax cuts in their bill.

jeffn21 on August 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM

Perhaps they should have thought their 2010 strategy of demonizing Bush through a little more.

Oh, they thought it through all right. They are going with it because they have absolutely nothing else they can possibly use.

Missy on August 30, 2010 at 12:12 PM

What do you get if you cross a GodFather and an economist?

An offer you can’t understand

J_Crater on August 30, 2010 at 12:12 PM

You know this is like driving a tractor while pulling a plow. If you are only watching what is going on behind you and concentrating on what the plow has done you will never have a straight row. It’s best to trust what you see in front of you, guide the tractor in the direction you know will help you achieve your goal and the plow follows.

milwife88 on August 30, 2010 at 12:13 PM

It’s quite simple. Those Bush Tax cuts were Racist before. Now….they’re not. They’re full of hope and change.

NickelAndDime on August 30, 2010 at 12:14 PM

I think that they could easily change the parameters of the tax cuts.

People understand that the truly wealthy can pay a higher rate.

It’s the 250,000 that bugs people.

AnninCA on August 30, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Honestly, the issue is the result of totally complicated tax laws.

That is what needs to be solved. And DON’T propose flat tax to me, anyway.

What makes sense. I’d like to hear that.

AnninCA on August 30, 2010 at 12:18 PM

Perhaps they should have thought their 2010 strategy of demonizing Bush through a little more.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA..OH OH OH !!! AAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Thinking? Democrats? Bush?????

You can’t THINK while your eyes are buldged out, froth foaming out your mouth and you’re clamping your teeth so hard in abject HATE to take time to THINK!!!

Thanks for the belly laugh though.

44Magnum on August 30, 2010 at 12:18 PM

This is what makes me mad at the GOP. the dems have tied the tax cuts of the Bush years to the RICH and to BUSH. Both hated groups in terms of moderates. They have allowed the tax cuts to be highjacked.

the GOP is not smart enough it appears to reclaim the middle. the GOp should never again mention the word “Bush tax cuts” or “capital gains tax cuts”.

they should instead use terms like “keep the child tax credit”. Stop the dems from “taxing your savings” stop the “death tax” Stop the “small business tax increase” “Protect workers by allowing small business tax cuts to survive so they can hire more workers” etc.

the GOP must connect with middle class and embrace the middle class or they will never sell their policies.

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:18 PM

And DON’T propose flat tax to me, anyway

Flat tx is the best, fairest, non-discriminating tax there is.

fourdeucer on August 30, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Ask Barney Frank what he thinks about Fannie and Freddie now.

BuckeyeSam on August 30, 2010 at 11:55 AM

I don’t know about Freddie, but I’m sure Barney is all for Fannie.

Aviator on August 30, 2010 at 12:22 PM

say the words “bush tax cuts” to the avg person on the street and they will think tax cuts for the rich.

say the words “child tax credit cut” and people with children will say don’t be raising MY taxes. yes the rich are important for economic activity but from a politcal point of view. Pointing out that the dems are getting ready to raise taxes $1000.00 for a family of four come Jan 1 will win you a lot more votes in NOv then saying the dems are going to let the “bush tax cuts” expire..

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:22 PM

And DON’T propose flat tax to me, anyway
Flat tx is the best, fairest, non-discriminating tax there is.

fourdeucer on August 30, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Yes it is. One big problem with it though from the Dem point of view, 48% of the population currently have no Federal tax liability, but with a flat tax they would suddenly have to pay tax and possibly pay attention when voting. That will never happen if the Dems can help it.

Johnnyreb on August 30, 2010 at 12:24 PM

If the Democrats allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, we need to refer to that action as the “Obama Tax Increases.”

just like Obamacare….

I agree.

(I think they wil extend “some”… not enough, and even that will be countered with some hidden something(s))

golfmann on August 30, 2010 at 12:29 PM

That will never happen if the Dems can help it.

Johnnyreb on August 30, 2010 at 12:24 PM

I think both parties love the IRS to much for such a simple system to be enacted, and then you also have the true bigots that love to punish the rich.

fourdeucer on August 30, 2010 at 12:37 PM

Just b/c I don’t think a flat tax likely to ever get passed, I suggest the following:

5% for everyone making less than $75k ($150k couples);

7.5 % for everyone making between $75k and $500k (again, $150k – $1 mill couples);

everyone over $500k pays 9%

No exemptions, no credits, no write-offs.

Also, lower capital gains to 10%.

The economy would take-off.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 12:39 PM

People understand that the truly wealthy can pay a higher rate.

It’s the 250,000 that bugs people.

AnninCA on August 30, 2010 at 12:16 PM

But why should they pay a higher rate?

And DON’T propose flat tax to me, anyway.

What makes sense. I’d like to hear that.

AnninCA on August 30, 2010 at 12:18 PM

How about this: Rich people pay all the taxes, and poor people don’t have to pay any. Sounds fair and sensible to me.

Lets establish the National Wage, where if you make more than the wage, the overage is confiscated. If you make less than the National Wage, the government gives you the difference. This way, the taxing and wealth of the country is both equal and fair.

And it doesn’t matter if you make millions or billions, or are unemployed. The American dream will finally be realized!

BobMbx on August 30, 2010 at 12:40 PM

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Why make the rate higher for the rich? The progressive income tax sucks don’t bring the bad things from the old system into a new system.

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:41 PM

when the left says the rich are greedy the GOP should respond that most people in 3rd world countires would consider our poor greedy. greed is a matter of preception.

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:43 PM

or the GOP could say the 250,000 level is more about envy then greed

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:44 PM

Why make the rate higher for the rich? The progressive income tax sucks don’t bring the bad things from the old system into a new system.

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:41 PM

If you read what I wrote, I said “only because I don’t think the flat tax will ever be passed”.

So, if we take the flat tax off the table, then the rates have to be different, or else you have a flat tax. If I believed we could get a flat tax passed any-time soon, I would be for it. Absent being able to get that, I am suggesting something close to a flat tax but that is just “progressive” enough for the no-knowledge independents to stomach.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 12:45 PM

Perhaps they should have thought their 2010 strategy of demonizing Bush through a little more.

Liberals have a hard time thinking anything through.

There Goes The Neighborhood on August 30, 2010 at 12:46 PM

First 20k of untaxed. 10% on all income after that. Capital gains or otherwise. All the same, for everyone.

WashingtonsWake on August 30, 2010 at 12:47 PM

So, if we take the flat tax off the table, then the rates have to be different, or else you have a flat tax. If I believed we could get a flat tax passed any-time soon, I would be for it. Absent being able to get that, I am suggesting something close to a flat tax but that is just “progressive” enough for the no-knowledge independents to stomach.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 12:45 PM

I think property taxes and taxes on income should be off the table. We should not be renters to the government. and our labor should not be taxes.

the rev can be made up from tarrifs and sales taxes as well as direct taxes for services.

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:51 PM

Why make the rate higher for the rich? The progressive income tax sucks don’t bring the bad things from the old system into a new system.

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:41 PM
If you read what I wrote, I said “only because I don’t think the flat tax will ever be passed”.

So, if we take the flat tax off the table, then the rates have to be different, or else you have a flat tax. If I believed we could get a flat tax passed any-time soon, I would be for it. Absent being able to get that, I am suggesting something close to a flat tax but that is just “progressive” enough for the no-knowledge independents to stomach.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 12:45 PM

The current tax structure is income based, and that is by design. The design being the ability to cast the have’s against the have nots, in a class war for political power. In order to increase your share of the “class”, all one needs to do is move the line that demarcs poor from not poor. You then claim to champion one side or the other.

Federal taxes should be based on consumption, vis a vis, a national sales tax that replaces the current tax system, not in addition to it.

BobMbx on August 30, 2010 at 12:53 PM

I think property taxes and taxes on income should be off the table. We should not be renters to the government. and our labor should not be taxes.

the rev can be made up from tarrifs and sales taxes as well as direct taxes for services.

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:51 PM

I would have no problem with that. but, again, I doubt it is politically feasible.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Federal taxes should be based on consumption, vis a vis, a national sales tax that replaces the current tax system, not in addition to it.

BobMbx on August 30, 2010 at 12:53 PM

I would love it if it could happen.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 12:54 PM

Even extending only the tax cuts for the middle class undercuts the Democratic argument a bit, said Democratic strategist Douglas Schoen, by making it difficult for liberal leaders to say Bush’s tax policies had a toxic affect on the economy.

Oh come on Doug!!!!!! Everybody knows that Bush only gave tax cuts to the RICH!!! How can Dems extend Bush tax cuts to the middle class when he didn’t give them any tax cuts!!

THAT should be the push back from the blogosphere and it ought to be loud and persistent.

Texas Gal on August 30, 2010 at 12:56 PM

When the Dems named them the “Bush Tax Cuts” it was a pejorative term. Now it’s become a millstone around their necks. Talk about irony.

Herb on August 30, 2010 at 12:56 PM

I don’t think they will extend them. The demtards will try to convince people that the government can’t afford it. (Which is total horse manure since it ain’t the government’s money in the first place.)

All you have to do is look at Kalifornia to see what will happen and understand that the libtards live so much in their own heads and not in reality they just won’t believe they’re creating a disaster or HAVE created one. They just run around with their hands over their ears singing “La La La La La! I can’t hear you!”

dogsoldier on August 30, 2010 at 1:06 PM

When the Dems named them the “Bush Tax Cuts” it was a pejorative term. Now it’s become a millstone around their necks. Talk about irony.

Herb on August 30, 2010 at 12:56 PM

The evil, sulphor-smelling, war-mongering Bush lowered taxes for everybody and that crashed the economy. Later this month, we’re going to do the same thing.

~Dem strategy meeting minutes

BobMbx on August 30, 2010 at 1:07 PM

It’s brand new flexible pretzel mix they use.

tarpon on August 30, 2010 at 1:12 PM

think property taxes and taxes on income should be off the table. We should not be renters to the government. and our labor should not be taxes.

the rev can be made up from tarrifs and sales taxes as well as direct taxes for services.

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 12:51 PM
I would have no problem with that. but, again, I doubt it is politically feasible.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 12:53 PM

I think a candidate running on abolishing property traxes would win 98% of the vote. One running on abolishing the income tax and property taxes might get 99% of the vote

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 1:18 PM

If they do, how can they run on the Blame Bush banner?

I don’t see what’s so tough about it. I mean just look, after hammering Bush for 6 long years over Iraq in general and the surge in particular they had no problem turning a 180. Now, Iraq is one of the One’s “greatest accomplishments” after all.

It simply comes down to this, any good news (even short term seemingly good news that turns sour later such as GDP before it is revised or a blip up in jobs caused by the census) is due to Dear Leader’s brilliant policies. Any bad news is Bush’s fault, of course. What’s the problem?

MJBrutus on August 30, 2010 at 1:45 PM

I think a candidate running on abolishing property traxes would win 98% of the vote. One running on abolishing the income tax and property taxes might get 99% of the vote

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 1:18 PM

We should abolish of the home mortgage interest deduction along with property taxes! That deduction drives up the cost of housing and leads to the kind of speculation and bubble that we’re now trying to recover from.

Unfortunately none of this will happen. Property taxes are state imposed, so the Feds cannot kill them. And neither party will find the cajones to kill the popular mortgage credit.

MJBrutus on August 30, 2010 at 1:50 PM

The libs are hiding their voting records, hiding Obama, Nancy and Harry, hiding their last names.

They even claim to be the most conservative among conservatives when it comes to spending and the deficit.

The media are still busy humping Obama’s leg, like puppies in heat, or sucking on his gummy snake.

Good people of the U.S. of America, do not be fooled, again.

Otherwise, you deserve the exploitation, fully.

Schadenfreude on August 30, 2010 at 1:51 PM

How can Dems extend Bush tax cuts while running against Bush?

They know the Republicans don’t have a clue as to how to take advantage of it.

Vince on August 30, 2010 at 1:54 PM

Well.. the electorate is pretty darned stupid actually, so all the democrat party has to do is say that Obama came up with the idea to cut taxes on all Americans that work and pay taxes. Then they can say that he increased the child credit to 1000,00 up from 500.00.. The ignorant will go for that no problem….OR they just have to tell the ignorant that the republican controlled congress for all of nasty Bush’s terms, always voted NO when it came to making the tax cuts permanent because.. Either way it is a win win for them… I mean we are the only ones that no that the democrat party does not tell the truth.

shar61 on August 30, 2010 at 2:05 PM

Bush, he’s a demon de mon!

Fixed!

Dr. Charles G. Waugh on August 30, 2010 at 2:10 PM

cthulhu on August 30, 2010 at 11:52 AM

All of you above found a possible strategy — just tweak it a little and pass something different!

NINE HUNDRED POUND GORILLA:

Nobody mentioned it but the feds need more revenue or the deficits look awful.

The Chinese are getting nervous. I’m not kidding.

IlikedAUH2O on August 30, 2010 at 2:16 PM

Basically out here in the disfunctional socialist state of california, if the tax cuts aren’t extended the current depression will last for years.

jbh45 on August 30, 2010 at 2:31 PM

When the Dems named them the “Bush Tax Cuts” it was a pejorative term. Now it’s become a millstone around their necks. Talk about irony.

Herb on August 30, 2010 at 12:56 PM

So true. If the package had some innocuous name like ‘Blunt-Nickles Tax Reform Package’, they could keep it. They have also told us for years that the package ‘only favors the rich’. A whole lot of not-rich folks are about to learn that lie.

slickwillie2001 on August 30, 2010 at 3:27 PM

Democrats are all about campaigning, so here’s predicting they’ll torpedo the economy in favor of a clear message for the ads.

Then they’ll just try to blame Bush even more in 2012.

It’s all they got.

NoDonkey on August 30, 2010 at 3:39 PM

I think a candidate running on abolishing property traxes would win 98% of the vote. One running on abolishing the income tax and property taxes might get 99% of the vote

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 1:18 PM

If I’m not mistaken Steve Forbes ran in the Republican primary some time ago on the flat tax and didn’t even come close to winning – and that’s the republican primary.

If candidates could run and win on abolishing income or property taxes with such huge margins they would have done so long ago. The fact that none do, means it is not a very viable political agenda. Look at all the other lies candidates tell to get elected – if it were as simple as being for abolishing taxes, it would’ve happened.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 3:41 PM

I think a candidate running on abolishing property traxes would win 98% of the vote. One running on abolishing the income tax and property taxes might get 99% of the vote

unseen on August 30, 2010 at 1:18 PM

You have the 30% of voters who are hard-core leftists that would never support abolishing either tax. Then you have the entitlement crowd who would never vote to eliminate these taxes b/c they would lose out on their gov’t largess.

Then you have the mushy middle who would think such ideas are too extreme.

That leaves you with about 35% of solid conservatives that would vote for these things – not even close to a majority.

Monkeytoe on August 30, 2010 at 3:43 PM

It’s ironic that the democraps have only Bush to run on.

My that Bush was a powerful man, but as my taxi driver said to me, “Man he ain’t even president!”

Dhuka on August 30, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Obama has already spent the money. Backing up on tax increases would be the hugest mea culpa in the history of politics.

mike_NC9 on August 30, 2010 at 4:34 PM

Bush’s tax cuts were across the board, more for the rich who were paying a much higer percentage of the taxes

the thing the democrats do not understand and republicans have done a poor job of showing is that tax cuts actually increase tax revenues
Obambi was told this in an interview during the democratic primaries and his final answer was “it’s only fair to tax the rich”

audiotom on August 30, 2010 at 5:10 PM

to add to this

Kennedy recognized less taxes more tax revenues

“rising tide lifts all boats”
Reagan, Kennegy,Bush I and II, and republican rule during CLinton years all proved this economic lesson

audiotom on August 30, 2010 at 5:13 PM

The Republicans need to be working on some campaign ads that compare what the Dems did to what they promised to do, and the curious fact that they have followed the “Chimperor’s” lead in almost everything they have done that is not a fiasco!

And yes, go ahead and use the “Chimperor” insult – rub the Dems faces in how they are they ones who are so fond of denigrating people, while fatuously posing as defenders of civility.

The Democratic Party is a criminal enterprise, devoted to keeping America divided and lining the pockets of race-hustlers and demagogues, aided and abetted by an utterly corrupted media.

drunyan8315 on August 30, 2010 at 5:54 PM

It would all be a lot simpler if all the Democrats would just resign.

GarandFan on August 30, 2010 at 5:59 PM

When your entire philosophy is based on the belief that resources are running out and business is bad then you will inevitably have shortages and business contraction. Just ask Jimmy Carter.

LifeTrek on August 30, 2010 at 6:41 PM