December 9, 2010

"Defying President Obama, House Democrats vote not to bring up tax deal he negotiated with GOP in its current form."

CNN Breaking News.

Meade, immediately: "Oh, man! That's going to make bleeding-heart moderates like you like him even more."

Immediate Althouse: "Obama is being thrust into the arms of the onrushing GOP!"

Meade: "In the same way that H.W. befriended Bill Clinton, W is going to befriend Obama. You'll see them playing golf together. Maybe even mountain biking."

96 comments:

kent said...

"Bomb-throwers! TERRORISTS -- !!!"

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)

They Oppose Obama! Raaaaaacists! Hostage Takers!

edutcher said...

The dumbest Demo stunt since firing on Fort Sumter.

c3 said...

Well good. That answers my question in the previous thread.

1995-96 returns...

but isn't President Obama on the wrong side of the triangle?

Lincolntf said...

This is priceless, watching the Libs do to Obama what they've been trying to do to the rest of the country.
Make his life miserable.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Those darn Democrats, holding the middle class tax cut and extension of unemployment benefits hostage in order to insure a tax increase on the wealthy.

Fen said...

Good. It was a bad deal. It gave too much to the Dems.

But I wonder if the Dem controlled Congress is still going to extend lower tax rates for incomes up to $200k ?

The Crack Emcee said...

W is going to befriend Obama. You'll see them playing golf together. Maybe even mountain biking.

And W's gonna kick his ass.

garage mahal said...

Quick, let's screw this up!

pm317 said...

Oh boy! They will make him cry (of anger, frustration, disappointment, dejection).

Quayle said...

Kabuki theater?

Moose said...

Meade is a very wise man. You should be nice to him, Professor.

kent said...

You'll see them playing golf together. Maybe even mountain biking.

Presumably, Zero will be sporting his favorite pair of Mom Jeans for auspicious "casual" public outings such as these.

Fen said...

"We’ll debate this next year when there’s fewer [Democrats] with less voice," Graham said. "If they think that’s smart, be my guest, go for it. We’ll debate it next year and make this stuff retroactive."

Richard Dolan said...

A little temper tantrum can sometimes be useful for clearing the mind. With little children, it often uses up a lot of excess energy that, until it's used up, blocks them from doing what they have to do but don't want to do.

Kindergarten. It's where the House Dems are at. In three weeks, of course, they'll be in the wilderness, more comparable to Palin's stew-pot prey than unruly and ill behaved little kids. Not that the change will make much difference in terms of their effectiveness.

k*thy said...

Quick, let's screw this up!

No kidding.

Fen said...

So Obama capitulated to Republicans, pissed of his base, and then insulted everyone on both sides. For nothing.

"Smart Diplomacy"

I miss Bill Clinton.

kent said...

Quick, let's screw this up!

A quick preview of the Obama/Biden '12 campaign slogan.

Clyde said...

I think that W could probably take him at basketball, too. Zero wouldn't be the only one in stitches when that happened...

Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) said...

Memo to Demos: the best way to "spread the wealth around" is to have a product or service people with money are willing to pay for.

Congressional Donks are attempting to take money out of my customers' pockets and put in into the pockets of their political allies.

I'm not sure why the Dems are so cranked about this -- if they believe in their future. Mr. Obama just looked straight into the cameras and declared—nearly in so many words—that he hates this deal, and that if he wins in 2012 he is going to get back with his program of going after “the rich” and especially small and medium business people, whom he obviously detests.

That's me.

It is the Chicago-way to destroy the revenue stream of your political opponents. Of the 879 GM dealerships forced closed, 878 of them were owned by Republican donors, and the one exception was a big donor to Hillary’s campaign.

Does any clear-thinking person really believe that businesses will invest or expand or hire new employees until this angry Marxist idealogue and his enablers have passed from the scene?

The 1930s depression was far longer and deeper in America than would otherwise have been the case—of for that matter, WAS the case in most nations—directly as a result of the same sort of class-warfare attitudes and policies emanating from FDR and his allies.

Class-warfare politics is not about helping the poor. It is but a poorly disguised attempt on the part of the nobility to crush potential rivals to that privileged position. Obama, Pelosi, et al. fit that pattern perfectly.

Their response is consequently quite predictable. Democrats depend on misery -- "rub raw the sores of discontent" to quote Alinsky -- and conservative want everyone to have an equal chance at success.

The Demo-Nobility's desire to derail that process of self-advancement arises quite simply because we'll not have to depend upon them.

Aux armes, les citoyens!

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)

NON-BINDING VOTE

Clyde said...

And if W. DID befriend Obama, here's the song he'd need to sing:

I Need Better Friends - Cracker

garage mahal said...

So Obama capitulated to Republicans, pissed of his base, and then insulted everyone on both sides. For nothing.

I think the vote is non-binding. Purely symbolic. If Democrats don't see this as a good deal for them they are morons. It's a 600 billion stimulus through a lame duck. Take the deal you idiots, do not screw this up.

shoutingthomas said...

The class-warfare rhetoric of Democrats isn't just stupid, it's devious.

Democrats are no more the party of the "little guy" than Republicans.

What a crock.

Sloanasaurus said...

It makes sense. The House liberals never wanted to extend any of the taxes anyway. Plus those remaining in power have already lost the independent vote, so what do they care at this point.

The bill will just be brought up in January. How sad.

Ultimately it shows that Obama is a tool and has little influence on his party.

c3 said...

I'd call the Dems voting for this measure
sanctimonious but someone beat me to it.

(They're bitter, clingers)

traditionalguy said...

A talking head on Parker-Spitzer last night said that Obama cut have cut a deal with Boehner 8 months ago to raise the 250K rate increase level to 1M. That is what is really needed here, but of course The Won refused all negotiations.

Ann Althouse said...

"Meade is a very wise man. You should be nice to him, Professor."

Around here, it's all about me(ade).

MB said...

Incredibly pathetic.

Rush is right again - the Democrats think compromise is when you only agree with them 100%. They had 2 years to pass their version, but wanted political points and a "crisis" with grandstanding public flagellation over unemployment benefits.

This will backfire like the Republicans "shutting down the government." Let them raise all income taxes, inheritance taxes and no extensions for unemployment. Next congress Republicans should go slow, since it is obviously not important, and renegotiate regarding off-setting spending cuts.

In the mean time, get the message out this is how Progressives say "Merry Christmas." Oh, almost forgot, Jesus not allowed or aloud - "Season Greetings."

SteveR said...

Oh this is turning out better than I could have hoped. No matter where I stand on any particular issue, this is always my preferred situation.

There's always the real possibility of some weak compromise where everyone goes home claiming victory for the American people, which in fact, means we lose.

kent said...

It's like watching a thalidomide baby pie fight.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
From HotAir
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said that “this means we will not bring this [agreement] to the floor as is. It has to be changed.”
Daly would not outline what revisions House Democrats specifically are seeking, but he did say that Pelosi would stand by today’s caucus resolution…
Asked whether Pelosi would bring up the package over the objections of her Democratic colleagues, Miller suggested that wouldn’t happen without further consultions with rank-and-file lawmakers.

Ok, more than Kabuki, and not just non-binding…or rather it’s not JUST symbolic. Not good, for Barry or the US. Or for that matter the IRS, which will now have to plan on:
1) Higher withholding rates;
2) Followed by LOWER withholding, retroactively.
It’s going to make it very difficult for them and your HR Department for a while. *SIGH*

GMay said...

"Meade, immediately: "Oh, man! That's going to make bleeding-heart moderates like you like him even more."

Is it possible for Meade to win the thread without even posting in it?

GMay said...

"It's like watching a thalidomide baby pie fight."

Holy shit dude, that's beyond fucked up. Perhaps we can go halvsies on a place in hell.

I'm gonna use that one.

GMay said...

But seriously, the Democrat party is in full self-immolation mode so that means we're going to get some stories in the media soon about Republican civil war.

kent said...

Holy shit dude, that's beyond fucked up. Perhaps we can go halvsies on a place in hell.

Yeah, yeah. You'd all be whistling and applauding like pedophiles at a Disney Bop! galleria concert if Lenny Bruce had said it. ;)

cubanbob said...

I do hope the democrats do go for this and let the cuts expire. Come January the republicans if they have any testicles can hand Obama a shit sandwich of historical proportions in exchange for merely to continue funding some entitlement programs and worthless social spending.

No permanent tax rate cuts? No filling in the blanks programs and agencies. This time no one will give a crap about shutting the government down other than those who live off other people's taxes.

donttread2010 said...

@garage mahal

"It's a 600 billion stimulus through a lame duck. Take the deal you idiots, do not screw this up."

No, its not stimulus. Getting hit in the head is stimulus. Its a continuation of current tax rates. If it had true stimulative value, we'd have seen it the last 2 years.

ricpic said...

W. and Obama are both members of the club. What club? The statist club. Witness Babs dismissive gesture toward Sarah. Gives the game away. Yup, the most important thing is to be inside the buttercup and network with all the other buttercuppers. The People? Tant pis on them.

donttread2010 said...

More evidence of elitist derangement; witness, the eloquent and mature Anthony Weiner, democrat, NY:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/testy-combative-anthony-weiner-simply-cannot-shake-steely-cool-of-foxs-megyn-kelly/

Worst. Person. Evah.

Michael said...

donttread: How is it not a win for Obama when nothing changes on the tax front and yet he gets the "stimulus" of extended unemployment benefits and a raft of other shit no one is spending time talking about.

If the dems do not take this deal, and I personally hope they do not, every person who gets a pay check on January 15 is going to notice that it is smaller than the one they got on December 31st. They will then understand that the Dems had two years to deal with this matter and decided, on principle, to raise taxes for everyone rather than abstain from "punishing" the "rich." Nice. Reasonable. Party.

garage mahal said...

Yea I'm sure when the single mom in the 10% tax bracket busting her ass between two jobs sees her taxes go up by 50% on Jan 1, she will cheer on Democrats standing up for "principles". Idiots.

Original Mike said...

Meade: "In the same way that H.W. befriended Bill Clinton, W is going to befriend Obama. You'll see them playing golf together. Maybe even mountain biking."

Yeah, I don't think so. Did Clinton trash H.W.? (No) Was Clinton an ideological prick? (no).

donttread2010 said...

@Michael

"donttread: How is it not a win for Obama when nothing changes on the tax front and yet he gets the "stimulus" of extended unemployment benefits and a raft of other shit no one is spending time talking about."

It won't pass as constructed anyway. We should be talking about what would be a 'win' for all Americans rather than what is a 'win' for the 'Won'. True stimulus is jobs and job creation, not unemployment insurance ad infinitum.

Jay said...

bwaaaahahahahaha

Mahal & Olby are probably creaming their jeans...

Jay said...

Yea I'm sure when the single mom in the 10% tax bracket busting her ass between two jobs sees her taxes go up by 50% on Jan 1, she will cheer on Democrats standing up for "principles". Idiots.


And here I thought the Bush tax cuts were for the rich???

garage mahal said...

Jay
Did you read my last comment, idiot?

kent said...

Ace's (priceless!) take:

"Last year, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats gave you ObamaCare for Christmas. This year, they're giving you higher taxes. You're welcome, America!"

donttread2010 said...

@Jay

"And here I thought the Bush tax cuts were for the rich???"

If you understand, and I think you do, that the poorest Americans pay no federal income taxes, and the 'rich' pay most of the income taxes, then any tax cut will benefit the 'rich' because they are the ones actually paying the freight. It comes down to how you define 'rich', which is subjective for sure.

AllenS said...

garage,

I read your comment, but couldn't understand who you were calling an idiot.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Jay
Did you read my last comment, idiot?


@ Garage.

Jay was pointing out that the CURRENT tax rate of 10% for the poor single mother (sob sob sob) was actually a lowered rate provided by the original Bush Tax Cuts, which cut taxes for EVERYONE......even your sob sister 10% single mother example.

EVERYONE got a tax cut with Bush's program.

If you want to raise taxes and reverse the Bush tax program, then EVERYONE gets a tax hike.

The fair thing to do is to maintain the CURRENT level of taxes for EVERYONE and cut spending.

Keeping the same level of taxation is not a gimme to anyone since the rates remain the same.

In addition the money earned by people at ALL levels of income, including the higher earners, belongs to them, not to the government and not to you.

It is not coming out of anyone's pocket to keep paying the same level of taxation

OR to let people keep their own money.

Once again. It isn't YOUR money and it isn't the government's money.

garage mahal said...

Jay was pointing out that the CURRENT tax rate of 10% for the poor single mother (sob sob sob) was actually a lowered rate provided by the original Bush Tax Cuts, which cut taxes for EVERYONE......even your sob sister 10% single mother example.

Yea, no shit. And?

donttread2010 said...

@ Dust Bunny Queen

(bravo)(LOL) re: your last post

I am imagining you shouting this at a liberal, slowly and deliberately :)

kent said...

"[...] [I]t isn't the government's money."

So damned simple and starkly self-evident, one genuinely must stand back and marvel, agog, at the sheer amount of time and effort requisite to willfully ignoring it. Perfect.

Jay said...

Yea, no shit. And?


And?

How about the fact that you and your silly, ignorant ilk have spent the last 6+ years saying the Bush tax cuts were "tax cuts for the rich"

Not once. Never. Ever, did you simpleton clowns admit that the rates went down for everyone.

That's the and, clown.

Jay said...

the poorest Americans pay no federal income taxes, and the 'rich' pay most of the income taxes,

Yes, 54% of income earners now have no federal income tax liability.

garage & Olby I guess think this should be 70% by simply making "the rich" pay more.

Original Mike said...

Garage got it from the beginning. He was calling the Dems idiots.

Original Mike said...

the poorest Americans pay no federal income taxes,

The number of "taxpayers" who pay no federal income tax is approaching 50%.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
If you understand, and I think you do, that the poorest Americans pay no federal income taxes

Yes and No, it’s the difference between the Long-term and Short-term. In the longer term true they pay no Income Tax, being eligible for a refund. But in the short-term, yes, they do. If you have a job that has withholding, you pay the Income Tax. So, yes, the single Mom WILL be seeing less money come 1 January, possibly. She WILL have to pay the 15% tax, and then get the refund….so for over a year, she won’t see that money.

So yes, she, too, can get to thank Progressives for their gift, to her.

donttread2010 said...

@Jay
@Original Mike

Correct. So, lets just all agree that we define 'rich' as anyone that actually pays federal income taxes. Period.

donttread2010 said...

@Joe

Sorry, I should have clarified by saying the poorest Americans also have to float an interest-free loan to the feds. It eventually comes out in the wash!

kent said...

Headline on Drudge, underneath a photo of "Stretch" Pelosi:

THE PARTY OF NO

Bwaaaaaaaaaah-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!

Original Mike said...

Pelosi won't bring this to the floor because there would be enough Democrats voting for it that it would pass.

Notice how CNN carries the Democrats water by not reporting the vote count.

garage mahal said...

garage & Olby I guess think this should be 70% by simply making "the rich" pay more.

I'm on the opposite side of Olbermann, if you couldn't tell. I don't give a shit if they are Bush tax cuts. I don't care if the payroll tax holiday is or isn't a Republican idea. I don't care whos feeling may have been hurt. Hurt mine every day if you want Obama, just get this fucking deal DONE.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
I should have clarified by saying the poorest Americans also have to float an interest-free loan to the feds. It eventually comes out in the wash!

It’s just one of those things, where details matter…almost everyone does PAY Income Tax, but then a large number get it back, as you say, an interest free loan, to Uncle Sugar. But I don’t like people implying, not saying YOU were, that the Poor, don’t pay, they DO pay, and so an increase in rates AFFECTS EVERYONE, in the short-term.

Original Mike said...

"So, lets just all agree that we define 'rich' as anyone that actually pays federal income taxes. Period."

That's about it.

Original Mike said...

The Republicans should make NO effort to move this forward. If the Dems come to their senses and pass it, so be it. If not, the Repubs can pass a better bill in January.

donttread2010 said...

@Joe

Agreed. I would add that tax increases, such as energy, food, etc., the ones that chip away at low(er) level transactions, actually hurt the poor more due to their low incomes. I love it when I hear someone spew 'democrats are the party of the poor'...riiiight.

kent said...

The Republicans should make NO effort to move this forward. If the Dems come to their senses and pass it, so be it. If not, the Repubs can pass a better bill in January.

Agreed. Vitally important NOT to reward legislative "hostage-taking," dammit!

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)

Why are you guys fighting Garage, READ THE POST AGAIN, I took his posting to be a criticism of the Democrats! He was saying the womon paying 10% is going to see a tax rate of 15%, a 50% increase!

Geez-a-Pete folks, just because Garage is often wrong, doesn’t mean s/he’s ALWAYS wrong….

The “Smart Money” is on passage tomorrow, even at HotAir.com. Steny Hoyer is in favour, this may, almost certainly IS, just a stunt to allow the Progressive Caucus to voice its displeasure. I don’t see the Democratic Conference voting this down, and making Obama look like an idiot. IF, it does happen, it’s going to be a very long two years at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I can’t see it, though. It hurts the Poor, the Middle Class, hurts Obama, hurts the Democratic Party, and plays into Republican hands…I just don’t see Barney Frank, or Sheila Jackson or Alcee Hastings NOT voting for this.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
I would add that tax increases, such as energy, food, etc., the ones that chip away at low(er) level transactions, actually hurt the poor more due to their low incomes. I love it when I hear someone spew 'democrats are the party of the poor'...riiiight.
I would agree. But they “sound” like they “care.”

donttread2010 said...

@Joe

"I would agree. But they “sound” like they “care.”"

Dems rely on the incurious to further their cause. If you set out to really peel the onion, you find its more 'sound' than 'care'.

garage mahal said...

I took his posting to be a criticism of the Democrats! He was saying the womon paying 10% is going to see a tax rate of 15%, a 50% increase!

Correct.

Original Mike said...

But they “sound” like they “care.”

The poor are dumb?

Jay said...

Correct.


Sorry, I did not know you actually were correct on an issue garage.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
Sorry, I did not know you actually were correct on an issue garage.
It’s why a gentle humour and close reading of one another’s postings is important…a lesson I could take more to heart, possibly more than most.

c3 said...

And as for some potential new found understanding between BO and Republicans I can only think of this

BJM said...

I'm not buying it...if nothing else we've learned to watch Obama's other hand, to follow the ball, when he's running a play.

Obama's not triangulating, he's running a fumblerooski.

The tell? "...no victories for the American people."

The deal falls apart, the Pelosi salves the base and Obama dances away, bipartisan cred intact; hands clean.

Unemployment insurance and the Bush tax cuts grandfather, the economy worsens and Voila! The 2011 media narrative:

The evil, rich, racist Republicans stalled the Obama recovery and they get tagged for the coming double dip.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)

Yeah, BJM, you must listen to Glenn Beck a lot…watch the other hand, sure. Because government and politics is RIFE with conspiracy. Life is like War, and as Clausewitz says, “In War everything is simple, but even the simple is difficult.” Doing things in Life is Difficult. There’s no “other hand” here…and I don’t think Obama is going to come out well, IF this deal fails. When the slow Recovery continues into 2012, let’s say, the votes won’t blame Bush or the Boehner, they’ll blame Obama…And they’ll blame Democrats, for backing out of a deal their POTUS brokered…

Mutaman said...

Meade better watch his mouth or Anne will drop him from her health insurance.

jr565 said...

Garage Mahal wrote:
Yea I'm sure when the single mom in the 10% tax bracket busting her ass between two jobs sees her taxes go up by 50% on Jan 1, she will cheer on Democrats standing up for "principles". Idiots.


Hey, as Biden said, it's patriotic to pay more in taxes. So don't think of it as socking it to the little guy think of it as the little guy contributing his fair share.

Paul said...

Mountian Biking?

Obama uses a girl's bike.. can you see Bush on his bike besides THAT?

I say nooooo, it won't happen.

jr565 said...

Now that Obama has become the pragrmatic Obama and thrown the dems under the bus, er, engaged in pragramit compromises, can we say that the House Democrats not bringing up the tax deal the president negotiated want the president to fail?
I think it's racism, straight up. And I guess Obama is now the teabagger, but the house democrats are simply rednecks.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Yes and No, it’s the difference between the Long-term and Short-term. In the longer term true they pay no Income Tax, being eligible for a refund. But in the short-term, yes, they do. If you have a job that has withholding, you pay the Income Tax. So, yes, the single Mom WILL be seeing less money come 1 January, possibly. She WILL have to pay the 15% tax, and then get the refund….so for over a year, she won’t see that money.

Give me an effing break!!!

1. If you get a 100% refund of withholding....you are NOT paying any income tax.

2. If you are witholding too much, that is your own stupid fault. DUH!!! Make more dependent declarations or declare yourself exempt.

3. If you are not paying income tax...see option 1 (one), then you are most likely getting a tax credit or tax rebate and are actuall GETTING money from the government. Money that OTHER people actually paid in and didn't get back.

Point number one again. If you get all the money back....you didn't pay squat.

You were just stupid and let the government borrow your money with no interest.

Trooper York said...

Why all this Meade hate?

The dude has a heavy enough load to carry, cut him some slack for crying out loud.

kent said...

Conservative Dems: Progressives are holding tax deal “hostage”

... and this, mind you, is precisely the same gaggle of smug, perpetually preening yip-yops who routinely refer to Sarah Palin, sneeringly, as being "stupid."

Heh.

Heh.

Trooper York said...

I mean they don't give Bruce Jenner or that sorta Chinese guy with all the kids on TLC all this shit.

I mean he deserves at least as much respect as we gave David Gest. Seriously.

Joe said...

(The Crypto Jew)
Point number one again. If you get all the money back....you didn't pay squat.

You were just stupid and let the government borrow your money with no interest.

In the longer term you are certainly correct…in the short-term, no, you DO PAY…IF my pay packet has a line Federal Income Tax…and money has been taken from my pay packet…I’VE PAID FEDERAL INCOME TAX. Sure, sometime, the next year I’ll see it back, but for that pay period, I don’t have the money.
And so, this 1 January, should the House Democrats fail to act on the compromise bill, that hypothetical single mom WILL see that line increase by 50% and she will have LESS money, in her pocket then, than she might otherwise have had.
I honestly don’t see what is so difficult to acknowledge here…Garage is right, that person sees an INCREASE in taxes, in the short term. I do not believe she will thank Nancy Pelosi for that. Neither do I believe she or her credit card company, or mortgage holder/landlord, utility, or any other business will “understand” that come February to June of 2012, she will have the money back in her pocket….Yes, it’s true that EVENTUALLY she will, but until then, she’s out the cash.

No one, Garage or myself is arguing it isn’t an “interest free loan” or that, in the long-term she pays Income Tax, in fact, I freely acknowledge that with EITC and the Making Work Pay Credit, she pays NEGATIVE Income Tax, i.e., Welfare. But that is in the following Calendar year, but in the current year, no, she’s paying….and IF her rate goes up, she pays more, this year.

Trooper York said...

I mean attacking Meade when you are really mad at the blogger lady is kinda low rent. You don't attack the spouse when you don't like the other person in a marriage.

That would be like attacking Elizabeth Edwards if you hated John Edwarda and that would be....err....ahhhh...errr....
Nevermind.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

And so, this 1 January, should the House Democrats fail to act on the compromise bill, that hypothetical single mom WILL see that line increase by 50% and she will have LESS money, in her pocket then, than she might otherwise have had.

Yes, in theory you are having more withheld from your paycheck.

But you ARE NOT PAYING more if you still get it all back.

You can try and change the definition of words and the reality of accounting. But....paying for something indicates and exchage, whereby you GIVE UP something in return for something.

I honestly don’t see what is so difficult to acknowledge here…Garage is right, that person sees an INCREASE in taxes, in the short term.


No. If that person is getting a 100% refund, which is the case with over 50% of the population, they are seeing an increase in WITHHOLDING. Not an increase in taxes PAID.

Because......wait for it.....she isn't paying any flipping taxes.

I freely acknowledge that with EITC and the Making Work Pay Credit, she pays NEGATIVE Income Tax, i.e., Welfare.

There is no such thing as "negative income taxes". It is just what you say....welfare.

And I'm sick of paying it.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

If you don't want to see your paycheck decrease when withholding goes up and you routinely get a refund.....

you are a moron if you don't increase your withholding exemptions or declare yourself exempt from withholding.

No excuses.

kent said...

In today's White House briefing, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs addressed the Democratic resolution and Pelosi not bringing the deal to a floor for a vote as its currently written: "This is a long and winding process, but I think that at the end of the day, members are not going to want to be in their districts...when their constituents find out on the first of January that their taxes have gone up by several hundred thousands of dollars. ..."

Most fun I've ever had without having to shower and towel off afterwards. Swear to god.

Kirk Parker said...

GMay,

I don't have the slightest idea what a "thalidomide baby pie fight" could even be. . . . . . and I still laughed.

Better look for somewhere with room for three...

JAL said...

I first saw

Deifying President Obama, House Democrats vote ...

Then I read the rest.

haha!

The seas aren't falling and the diety is dead.

dick said...

DBQ,

You have to be careful raising the number of exemptions. When I was running the payrolls for various companies I found from the payroll and HR departments that occasionally the IRS will question the number of exemptions someone claims and you have to provide someone valid for each exemption. If you can't then the company can be fined for allowing you to take too many exemptions. Happened to one of the companies where I consulted.

kent said...

GMay, Kirk:

Cannot believe that "thalidomide baby pie fight" hasn't been tapped for coveted directly-under-the-Althouse-name status, re: this site's logo.

Now I'm just going to have to go with back-up Plan "B," and pimp it out to Jello Biafra as a potential band name for his latest comeback bid. Dammit.