Yesterday was our last chance. . .

[Gaspar]

I know, they can stop it from making it to the floor too.

Won't even be brought up.  If it is, we'll have to see how much stupid crap is attached to it.  Voting on these two small simple amendments yesterday would have done the job and kept the president's word.  They could have done that if they actually had any intension to, but that is not the case.

They are spending so fast now that any opportunity to grab more cash will not be ignored.

This administration and congress has become a giant tire fire.

[nathanm]

Won't even be brought up.  If it is, we'll have to see how much stupid crap is attached to it.  Voting on these two small simple amendments yesterday would have done the job and kept the president's word.  They could have done that if they actually had any intension to, but that is not the case.

Keep frothing. The Democrats have said all along they aren't going to extend the Bush tax cuts for people over their stated threshold. The amendments yesterday would have done that. They have stated they're going to take up the issue again after the recess. If they don't, you will have plenty of reason to complain at that time.

[Gaspar]

Keep frothing. The Democrats have said all along they aren't going to extend the Bush tax cuts for people over their stated threshold. The amendments yesterday would have done that. They have stated they're going to take up the issue again after the recess. If they don't, you will have plenty of reason to complain at that time.

Ok, so they could have struck amendment #1, but why vote this one down?

(2) a permanent extension of individual income tax rates for small businesses with instructions to offset as necessary through spending reductions.

[nathanm]

(2) a permanent extension of individual income tax rates for small businesses with instructions to offset as necessary through spending reductions.

I'd have to see the text of the amendment. I wouldn't be surprised if there was an asinine definition of "small business" or something similar involved. The small business thing is a bit of a canard, though. I don't have the stats at hand, but only a small proportion of the people in the top two tax brackets derive even half of their income from a pass-through tax entity. (S corp, LLC, etc.)

This is probably just the typical pre-election horse puckey. Write a flawed amendment/bill that you know will never pass but sounds good on the surface, then attack your opponent when they vote against it. It's the Washington way, dontchaknow?

If they don't get something done on this by the time tax time rolls around next year (and preferably before the election), I'll be upset. Until then, it's all just posturing.

Edited to add: Where were you last week when the Republicans filibustered a bill that would, among other things, have cut taxes on small businesses?

[buckeye]

It's a shame that you guys have chosen Chicago to represent everything you hate about liberals, Democrats, Obama, the Administration, and progressive politics in general.  After spending a decade living there, I have to say it's one of the friendliest, most diverse, opportunity-filled, and internationally-oriented cities in the US.  It's perhaps the quintessential American city. 

So it's a purely personal response when I say, you hating on Chicago is really very much like you hating on the things that make America great.  It's startling and troubling to hear how much of us you don't consider to be your countrymen.

Yeah, that goes beyond "stretch" into the land of isometric exercise (to mix metaphors a little).  This is rather obnoxiously disingenuous on your part, wevsus - clearly the references to Chicago refer to the notion of corrupt government, Blagojevich, crooked heavy-handed union thuggery, etc. not an attack on our fellow countrymen and the 'Murican way of life.  It's a sad commentary on how you view -your- countrymen that you'd make such an absurd assertion.

Sorry to threadjack, but I found this offensive and needlessly self-righteous.

[nathanm]

Yeah, that goes beyond "stretch" into the land of isometric exercise (to mix metaphors a little).  This is rather obnoxiously disingenuous on your part, wevsus - clearly the references to Chicago refer to the notion of corrupt government, Blagojevich, crooked heavy-handed union thuggery, etc. not an attack on our fellow countrymen and the 'Murican way of life.  It's a sad commentary on how you view -your- countrymen that you'd make such an absurd assertion.

Sorry to threadjack, but I found this offensive and needlessly self-righteous.

Yeah, that's not really a better interpretation, unless you have some evidence of Obama being involved in some sort of corruption.

[Conan71]

unless you have some evidence of Obama being involved in some sort of corruption.

Thanks Nathan, I needed a hearty laugh.

[we vs us]

Yeah, that goes beyond "stretch" into the land of isometric exercise (to mix metaphors a little).  This is rather obnoxiously disingenuous on your part, wevsus - clearly the references to Chicago refer to the notion of corrupt government, Blagojevich, crooked heavy-handed union thuggery, etc. not an attack on our fellow countrymen and the 'Murican way of life.  It's a sad commentary on how you view -your- countrymen that you'd make such an absurd assertion.

Sorry to threadjack, but I found this offensive and needlessly self-righteous.

Fair enough.  Obviously, as I said, I wrote that as a personal response. 

But it's clear that my intent didn't make it into the response.  Seems to be par for the course for most of my posts last week.   

I've been listening to certain media, certain posters, certain people around me in Tulsa all continue to build this dirty snowball of "unamerican" ideas and themes and objects and places in the world, and slapping "chicago" onto that snowball just tipped me over into too-much land. 

I don't argue that Chicago isn't corrupt -- of course it is -- but it's the idea that it's one more thing tossed cavalierly onto the pile of things in the US that are "killing america," along with liberals, and Congress, and the President, and Jeremiah Wright and undocumented immigrants and Biden and taxes and Social Security and Medicare, Obamacare, sanctuary cities, teachers unions, automakers unions, ALL unions, and American automakers.   

I'm sick, essentially, of being on the "despised" list all the time.  I'm not killing the country, but there's a sizable portion of our citizenry who believe wholeheartedly that I am.  They alternately believe I am either destroying the country on purpose or am so blinded by my hunger for more government nannying that I've been misled into supporting socialism/marxism/fascism/the dark side of the Force.   

And yeah yeah, whine whine whine.  Welcome to politics, right?  And 90% of the time I can deal.  What's bothering me about it, though, is the underlying message, and that led to my use of the word "countrymen."  To me, the underlying message is "get out."  It has nothing to do with a fair disagreement about ideas.  It actually has nothing to do about ideas at all, or governance, or democracy, or "bipartisanship."  It has to do with tribalism, fear, and increasing and not decreasing internal conflict.   

So anyway, it worries me to no end that in some ways the Right would purge the country the same way it's purging its own ranks, and ya rly that's what I think a considerable element of the Right is talking about these days. In veiled and not-so-veiled ways. 

All of this was in my response to "chicago."  And as I look back at it, almost none of it got in the comment.  So, I apologize for the lack of explanation, but can't really take back the gist of it.  Which still seems salient to me after a weekend off.

[rwarn17588]

Fair enough.  Obviously, as I said, I wrote that as a personal response. 

But it's clear that my intent didn't make it into the response.  Seems to be par for the course for most of my posts last week.   

I've been listening to certain media, certain posters, certain people around me in Tulsa all continue to build this dirty snowball of "unamerican" ideas and themes and objects and places in the world, and slapping "chicago" onto that snowball just tipped me over into too-much land. 

I don't argue that Chicago isn't corrupt -- of course it is -- but it's the idea that it's one more thing tossed cavalierly onto the pile of things in the US that are "killing america," along with liberals, and Congress, and the President, and Jeremiah Wright and undocumented immigrants and Biden and taxes and Social Security and Medicare, Obamacare, sanctuary cities, teachers unions, automakers unions, ALL unions, and American automakers.   

I'm sick, essentially, of being on the "despised" list all the time.  I'm not killing the country, but there's a sizable portion of our citizenry who believe wholeheartedly that I am.  They alternately believe I am either destroying the country on purpose or am so blinded by my hunger for more government nannying that I've been misled into supporting socialism/marxism/fascism/the dark side of the Force.   

And yeah yeah, whine whine whine.  Welcome to politics, right?  And 90% of the time I can deal.  What's bothering me about it, though, is the underlying message, and that led to my use of the word "countrymen."  To me, the underlying message is "get out."  It has nothing to do with a fair disagreement about ideas.  It actually has nothing to do about ideas at all, or governance, or democracy, or "bipartisanship."  It has to do with tribalism, fear, and increasing and not decreasing internal conflict.   

So anyway, it worries me to no end that in some ways the Right would purge the country the same way it's purging its own ranks, and ya rly that's what I think a considerable element of the Right is talking about these days. In veiled and not-so-veiled ways. 

All of this was in my response to "chicago."  And as I look back at it, almost none of it got in the comment.  So, I apologize for the lack of explanation, but can't really take back the gist of it.  Which still seems salient to me after a weekend off.

+1

And I've never understood this weird demonization of Chicago. Does it have corruption problems? Of course. But many municipalities have problems with this. It shouldn't be tolerated, but it is hardly unique.

That doesn't change the fact that Chicago is a wonderful city, has been for many decades, and demonizing it will have a sizable chunk of the U.S. populace scratching their heads.

It's the same sort of sourpuss silliness where people rip San Francisco for no other reason than it doesn't match their myopic worldview. I have to wonder whether these so-called critics have been in any of these cities at all. I guess all my traveling has me wondering what all of the hatred, paranoia and sullenness is about.

[Gaspar]

+1

And I've never understood this weird demonization of Chicago. Does it have corruption problems? Of course. But many municipalities have problems with this. It shouldn't be tolerated, but it is hardly unique.

That doesn't change the fact that Chicago is a wonderful city, has been for many decades, and demonizing it will have a sizable chunk of the U.S. populace scratching their heads.

It's the same sort of sourpuss silliness where people rip San Francisco for no other reason than it doesn't match their myopic worldview. I have to wonder whether these so-called critics have been in any of these cities at all. I guess all my traveling has me wondering what all of the hatred, paranoia and sullenness is about.

Again. . .I like the city and people of Chicago, but I've done business there, I've had to hire people, quote jobs and contract labor.  I used to visit on a weekly basis back in the late 90's to monitor projects we had under construction.  I've had to deal with the politicians and the unions (same thing).

Chicago is completely run by labor unions.  "Bribery" is considered the norm.  You grease palms to get anything done.  Doing anything yourself without paying the "local" will get you hurt.

[rwarn17588]

Again. . .I like the city and people of Chicago, but I've done business there, I've had to hire people, quote jobs and contract labor.  I used to visit on a weekly basis back in the late 90's to monitor projects we had under construction.  I've had to deal with the politicians and the unions (same thing).

Chicago is completely run by labor unions.  "Bribery" is considered the norm.  You grease palms to get anything done.  Doing anything yourself without paying the "local" will get you hurt.

But ... so what?

Obviously, people still flock to Chicago and do business there. People want to move there and live there and start businesses there, and do. Whether unions run the place or not obviously is irrelevant in the overall scheme of things there.

Just because you don't like it and it doesn't fit your business notions doesn't mean it's not vibrant and desirable. So demonizing it seems downright silly in that light.

If folks don't like doing business there, then they shouldn't. It's not like they're forced to. I just don't get the hostility. It's like they're threatened by Chicago or San Francisco or something.

[guido911]

+1

And I've never understood this weird demonization of Chicago. Does it have corruption problems? Of course. But many municipalities have problems with this.

Are you freakin serious? Are you comparing the notorious history of corrupt Chicago politics to other "municipalities"' corruption? Good grief, does Blago ring any bells to you?

[Conan71]

Gaspar, nevermind.

You can't say things like this anymore it's against the 28th Amendment.  You know, the new amendment where offending others is strictly prohibited.

Lighten up guys. The "Chicago Way" has been acknowleged for years as an example of corrupt government, it's in no way meant to disparage the vibrant, thriving metropolis which is Chicago. 

Do we need to chug on down to mamby pamby land?

[rwarn17588]

Are you freakin serious? Are you comparing the notorious history of corrupt Chicago politics to other "municipalities"' corruption? Good grief, does Blago ring any bells to you?

Dozens, if not hundreds, of municipalities have long histories of corruption.

Chicago is not new, nor is it unique.

[Gaspar]

Dozens, if not hundreds, of municipalities have long histories of corruption.

Chicago is not new, nor is it unique.

I'm sorry to have offended.  Chicago is a mighty beacon of Progressive politics, and is the guiding light for much of the new Washington machine.  I can see how this is a delicate subject for some.