America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Wow, 2 talking points and an insult. Still haven't addressed the issue though. You are for higher taxes too I guess or wish tax cuts should be paid for. Good to know.

463 to 81. You already agree to the numbers now let it expire. Who gets hurt more?

You owe me two different copyright fees for that!

Fuzz is a moron for posting this.

Even he knows Obummer only wants a 2 month extension so they can use the issue in the election,,

So the Ds are throwing a tissie fit cuz they want a two month deal so that they can name call again at a later date instead of compromising now with a deal both sides can agree on.....shame on them.


Why so they hate the middle class?

Thanks.

I say it is time for all working folk to pay their fair share...

And for all those that live on the government teat to stop suckling...permanently

Maybe they don't want to deal with it again in 60 days. It all makes for great soundbites for the left, ya know with it about to be an election year.

Yes there is.


Piss off Fuzzy.

A 2 month extension is laughable at best. How long are we going to let both the Dtards and the Rtards continue to kick the can down the road? If I have to hear about 1 more "looming govt shutdown" I'm just going to snap.

INCUMBENTS ARE THE CANCER...........TERM LIMITS ARE THE ANSWER!

Nice to see someone actually who sees things like they actually are.

When the WSJ opinion page says Republicans blew it, you got a major problem.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204791104577110573867064702.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

Bravo!

I doubt that.

Some thin- skinned neurotic once said, the unexamined life is not worth living.
What that has to do with anything, I don't know.

...but I'm all for higher taxes (especially of the cheap botl) so that we can all share in the booty.
Piece on earth and Goodwill for all.

Grats! A problem free life must be awesome.

You should get under the Obama Cone of Protection! It is awesome.

I love how the news outlets are repeating over and over how this 2% tax increase is going to cost the average American $40 per week. The average American makes $104k per year? When did this happen?

Well, a couple people are drinking republican Kool-aid.

The last budget was for fiscal year 2010, put forth the year before by a Democratic controlled Congress.

The next budget that was supposed to have been finished was for fiscal year 2011, the House is controlled by Republicans with a huge tea party contingent. These are the same people holding up this payroll tax thing, the thing we're talking about here.

So both of you are incorrect, and badly so.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2011/may/24/george-lemieux/george-lemieux-rips-sen-bill-nelson-senates-budget/

For background on what "passing a budget" means, we turned to explanations offered previously by our PolitiFact National colleagues. Congress today follows a budget process based on the 1974 Congressional Budget Act.

That process calls for a budget resolution, passed first by the Senate Budget Committee, then by the full Senate. The resolution, says Jason Peuquet, staff analyst at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan public policy think tank, is "an internally binding document that defines for a period of at least five fiscal years totals of appropriation levels and outlays, federal revenues, and the resulting surplus or deficit in the budget."

The House and Senate usually approve budget resolutions in the spring. If the chambers disagree, they work out a compromise. It's not a show-stopper if they don't approve a budget resolution, because the actual appropriation of money to all the departments and agencies in the government is a separate process.

If no resolution is approved, it becomes a talking point for the minority party -- in this case, for the Republicans. (In fact, Florida Senate President Mike Haridopolos, also a Senate candidate in 2012, also tweeted May 19 about the 750 days.) The inability to pass the resolution illustrates the discord in Congress and reflects poorly on the majority party.


We should add two points. First, the budget resolution is not a bill. It outlines Congress' intent, but it doesn't go to the president or require his signature. Second, the past two years are not the first time we’ve had trouble getting a budget approved.

Since 1983, the two chambers have failed to pass a joint budget bill on four occasions. For fiscal year 2003, the Senate, under Democratic control in 2002, failed to pass a budget resolution of any kind. On three other occasions (fiscal years 1999, 2005 and 2007), the House and Senate failed to reconcile their different bills and pass a compromise measure. In these latter three cases, the Republicans were in the majority in both chambers of Congress.

Budgets for 2010 and 2011

We turn next to what has happened in the past two years. The Senate passed a budget resolution in 2009 for the 2010 fiscal year. The final action was April 29, 2009, according to a report on the budget process by the Congressional Research Service. That vote was 53-43, with all the Republicans and three Democrats voting against it.

That was the last budget resolution the Senate approved. Fast-forward to May 19, 2011, and that's exactly 750 days later. That’s the time-frame LeMieux is referencing.

From the Democrats’ viewpoint, the 2009 resolution covered the budget for the year ending Sept. 30, 2010. So Adam Jentleson, deputy communications director for Majority Leader Harry Reid, R-Nev., calls the 750-days figure "tremendously misleading" because it’s been only 231 days from the start of the fiscal year to LeMieux’s tweet. Remember, though, what LeMieux said was 750 days since the Senate "passed a budget," not "since we had a budget."


You're welcome.

Ha! For a promise by the Dems to extend it. lmao That was a hard fought battle. WTG Boehner. You got them to promise to do what they wanted to do in the first damn place.

and it's not 'mute', unless you were referring to the fact that we read and write on the thread and the only noise is keystrokes and a few of you reading out loud so you can understand more better, n stuff. ;)

OP implies he's talking about Bush tax cuts then a few lines down he cites an extension of the payroll tax reduction which is not a tax but funds Social Security.
Do i really notice the $40, no happily I do not but I am sure many do. I want and will need SS so this way of de-funding it does not sit well with me.
How can I be paying more back into SS benefits fund be a tax?
Anyway it a mute point since the House gave into a two month political extension so we can fight about it again next year and make it an election issue.

Ate too much, but I'm back. Daughter and I went out, had the porterhouse medium rare with mashed potatoes.



The details are that the Republican house tried a political move and it backfired. They wanted to have this open when Obama went to Hawaii so they could say, 'look at us. we're here working but the president is on vacation'. Instead they look like what they are, a party that doesn't want tax cuts for working people but will fight to political death for tax cuts for the 'job creators'.

Right but ss tax is in theory something that is in turn coming back to the taxpayer no?

Watching Boehner's press conference now, (tivo'd it). He looked like he was ready to cry, again.

I stand by my post, SS contributions which come back to me is not a tax.
It really sounds like you need to get out of NJ, in fact this country and search for a taxless and contributionless society that supports everyone equally. Think Harrison Bergeron and a world of the future where we are all equal in everyway.