Democrats Will Have Upper Hand in Lame Duck Session of Congress

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Rep. Chris Van Hollen is one of the proud members of the New Democratic Progressive Union Socialist Communist Party. If you want to see a list of the mottle pond scum in Congress google the progressive caucus. Van Hollen should be run out of Congress with some tar and feathers to help him on his way.

Pete of CA 7:08PM May 11, 2012

it's truly a sad commentary,that the only way Romney can be made to look good,by his supporters,is to nit pick about the president.
Perhaps it ;s because Romney had very little in the way of acomplishments during his time in public office.

bruce b of NV 10:28PM May 09, 2012

brucetee
1. Take another look at Bush tax cuts. Applied across the tax base. Still approximately 40 % pay no federal taxes at all
Actually burden of tax fell upon the rich MORE because of the tax cuts. As I have pointed out yesterday and many times in the past:
“According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Bush tax cuts actually shifted the total tax burden farther toward the rich so that in 2000-2004, total income tax paid by the top 40% of income-earners grew by 4.6% to 99.1% of the total.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html
2. brucetee writes “Romney is little more than a flip-flopping empty suit.the more he says,the more this becomes evident”.
Do believe there are plenty of bum-bum flip flops. Have pulled out a few links with many in past to answer liberals complaining like you that we were changing our mind. One I recall had a hundred made by bum.
So glad GITMO is closed down. Enjoy the terrorist trial in NY. bum was for then against oil drilling. Etc...
Brad my man (joke) mentioned Ronald Reagan. Hear on this site heard that Ronald Reagan increased taxes. Which is true. I ALWAYS POINTED OUT for every $ 1.00 increase $2.00 was cut. Is that a flip flop ? I think circumstance dictate. There was a time when at each whistle stop different promises was made. Of course it still happens. But also even politicians can change their view. New information. Change of heart. All sorts of valid reasons.
Flip flopping is good or maybe bad, depends on circumstances. Long ago owning a slave was acceptable. Glad Republicans battled to right the wrong. Later, Democrats joined us after flip flopping...

Bill Hedges of MO 5:16PM May 09, 2012

It would be a pleasant change if these water carriers for the upper income earners(supporters of the Bush tax cuts ) showed some concern for the lower and middle class workers.these folks have taken it on the chin due to these policies.
In a supreme case of chuptzpah.Mitt Romney is now trying to take credit for the auto bailout.this after numerous comments to the contrary made by him.
Romney is little more than a flip-flopping empty suit.the more he says,the more this becomes evident.

bruce b of NV 8:41AM May 09, 2012

brucetee _ Facts and figured never changed your ideas...
We need a telethon for liberals. To teach them reading and comprehension skills:
THE LIBERAL LIE (being repeated a lot lately):
"if the Bush tax cuts expire, for example—it would automatically mean around a $5 trillion tax increase over 10 years"
1. “According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Bush tax cuts actually shifted the total tax burden farther toward the rich so that in 2000-2004, total income tax paid by the top 40% of income-earners grew by 4.6% to 99.1% of the total.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html
2. "In every case over the last 60 years, major tax cuts have more than paid for themselves. In fact, every major tax cut since JFK has been followed by substantial increases in revenue, not to mention solid economic growth. Moreover, total federal revenue rose at a faster rate after each of those tax cuts than it did before them. Anyone can confirm these basic facts for themselves by checking federal budget data and economic indicators before and after major tax cuts (see, for example, Federal Budget Data, Data 360 Unemployment U.S., and Total Economy Database). Let’s take a closer look at the results of the last four major tax cuts (and then for good measure we’ll examine the Mellon tax cuts of the 1920s)."
"Bush Tax Cuts: President George W. Bush’s 2003 tax cuts generated a massive increase in federal tax revenue and were followed by 52 consecutive months of economic growth. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenue increased by $780 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. Total federal revenue from 2003 to 2007":
"2003 -- $1.78 trillion
2004 -- $1.88 trillion
2005 -- $2.15 trillion
2006 -- $2.40 trillion
2007 -- $2.56 trillion"
"Total federal revenue for 2008 dropped slightly, down to $2.52 trillion, because a recession started that year, but revenue was still substantially higher than it was in 2003 or 2004. During the same period, income tax revenue rose dramatically, going from $925 billion in 2003 to $1.53 trillion in 2007. As with other types of federal revenue, income tax revenue dropped slightly in 2008, down to $1.45 trillion, due to the fact that a recession began that year."
http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/taxcutfacts.htm

Bill Hedges of MO 11:30PM May 08, 2012

Like many republican's in the congress,the Bush tax cuts should fade into sunset.they;ve done nothing but add to the deficit.any claim that they have help job creation is utter nonsense.
These tax cuts ,for the weathy,are something the country can no longer afford!

bruce b of NV 10:24PM May 08, 2012

THE LIBERAL LIE (being repeated a lot lately):
"if the Bush tax cuts expire, for example—it would automatically mean around a $5 trillion tax increase over 10 years"
1. “According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Bush tax cuts actually shifted the total tax burden farther toward the rich so that in 2000-2004, total income tax paid by the top 40% of income-earners grew by 4.6% to 99.1% of the total.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html
2. "In every case over the last 60 years, major tax cuts have more than paid for themselves. In fact, every major tax cut since JFK has been followed by substantial increases in revenue, not to mention solid economic growth. Moreover, total federal revenue rose at a faster rate after each of those tax cuts than it did before them. Anyone can confirm these basic facts for themselves by checking federal budget data and economic indicators before and after major tax cuts (see, for example, Federal Budget Data, Data 360 Unemployment U.S., and Total Economy Database). Let’s take a closer look at the results of the last four major tax cuts (and then for good measure we’ll examine the Mellon tax cuts of the 1920s)."
"Bush Tax Cuts: President George W. Bush’s 2003 tax cuts generated a massive increase in federal tax revenue and were followed by 52 consecutive months of economic growth. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenue increased by $780 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. Total federal revenue from 2003 to 2007":
"2003 -- $1.78 trillion
2004 -- $1.88 trillion
2005 -- $2.15 trillion
2006 -- $2.40 trillion
2007 -- $2.56 trillion"
"Total federal revenue for 2008 dropped slightly, down to $2.52 trillion, because a recession started that year, but revenue was still substantially higher than it was in 2003 or 2004. During the same period, income tax revenue rose dramatically, going from $925 billion in 2003 to $1.53 trillion in 2007. As with other types of federal revenue, income tax revenue dropped slightly in 2008, down to $1.45 trillion, due to the fact that a recession began that year."
http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/taxcutfacts.htm

Bill Hedges of MO 6:57PM May 08, 2012