Did Obama flip-flop on Bush-era tax cuts?
December 7th, 2010
07:15 PM ET

Did Obama flip-flop on Bush-era tax cuts?

U.S. President Barack Obama is going along with a plan that will extend Bush-era tax cuts to wealthiest Americans in exchange for extending jobless benefits for 13 months and lowering the payroll tax by two percentage points for a year.



Do you think the President went back on one of his campaign promises, or was this flip-flop forced? Leave your comment below!

Post by:
Filed under: Barack Obama • Economy • Politics
soundoff (50 Responses)
  1. Sherri WW

    The one THING I AM real sure of: EVERYBODY has to VOTE/NOT SIT OUT AND THEN COMPLAIN WHEN ONLY THE THE FRIENDS OF THE RICH GET ELECTED

    December 8, 2010 at 1:00 am | Report abuse | Reply
  2. Fred Bartcowski

    Capitalism was just a short cut to conmunism.
    Soviets had Party bosses with black sea compounds.And Soviets had Siberian Gulags.
    We have a more perfect model.
    An upper income strata insulated from everyday low lifes by a political and corporate machine.
    The American worker is placed on a treadmill and told "you are free."
    "Now run a little faster."
    No education, No problem. You can make six figures working as a prison guard in our booming prison industry.

    December 8, 2010 at 5:15 am | Report abuse | Reply
  3. Fred Bartcowski

    Stock up on food, water, and vodka. Books are optional.

    December 8, 2010 at 5:17 am | Report abuse | Reply
  4. Jack Carlson

    I haven't seen a single broadcaster comment on how the joint tax cut plan will add $1.5 trillion to the national debt. The President had indicated previously that letting the top 2% tax bracket rise would add $700 billion in revenue. Now that is gone and instead we're presented with $800 billion in new costs. That $1.5 trillion, sound like real money to me.

    December 8, 2010 at 10:04 am | Report abuse | Reply
  5. nichole

    The rich keep getting richer and will do anything to keep getting their way. I am horrified to think I am raising my children in a country where the elected politicians would hold the livley hood of soo many americans hostage in order to keep the rich rich. My husband was laid off during the Bush bail outs, and because the companies that were bailed out then procceded to move their jobs out of the country, there is no work. To hold the unemployment benifits of so many hard working citizens hostage during the holidays is inexcusable. I aplaud President Obama for thinking of the "little people" and doing what he thinks is best for this country. Maybe if the Republicans thought about real americans instead of lining their own pockets, this country would have never gotten in this situation or been fighting in a 8 year war that costing more money than even my great-grandchildren will be able to pay off.

    December 8, 2010 at 10:55 am | Report abuse | Reply
  6. Richard in Texas

    Flip flop? No. Compromise? Yes.

    December 8, 2010 at 12:25 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  7. jcc

    As a right of center Democrat who is well aware of how politics work in DC, I am amazed of how Obama handled this situation. He didn't allow the Senate the time to debate the House bill. Hell the House hadn't even gone home and Obama was caving sending Geitner of all people to help broker a deal, the same guy who got all the bailout money for his friends on Wall Street. Did he really believe that Geitner would have delivered anything else!!!
    This was a moment that Obama could have used to expose the Republicans for what they are but instead he showed his hand before the last card was even dealt, and for that he FAILED!!!! I can assure you not one Republican Senator would have voted against party line- but dam it we have the majority and Obama should have strong armed those Democrats who were not on board with passing a similar bill as did the House.
    I have been a spectator of the sport of politics for many years and I have been able to understand many compromises that have happened against the will of the majority, but this one and its haste will puzzle me for a while because for the life of me I cannot understand what Obama stands to gain in this offering.

    December 8, 2010 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  8. CLARENCE SWINNEY

    2%

    own 50% total financial wealth
    get 30% total income
    got 75% income increase 2001-2007
    created lowest job number since Hoover in 8 of Bush
    Gave us two dumb wars
    Ran up 6000B of Debt or more than we had after 225 years
    Ran up 92% increase in spending

    Yes! Rich got ultra rich Others just got by
    Made America number one in "Inequality" in major nations...
    Do not need a Tax Cut
    Much of incoem 2001-2007 was gambling in Casino Derivative Of America,
    In 2009 all time Income record–4003 million -300million–2000 million–1000 million
    Each by ONE gambler in Casino Derivative
    comments welcome cswinney2@triad.rr.com
    olduglymeanhonest

    December 8, 2010 at 6:13 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  9. CLARENCE SWINNEY

    OBAMA WILL NOT SAY IT BUT I WILL

    Clinton left Bush Heaven On Earth
    Bush left Obama Hell on Earth
    Clinton left Bush an 1800B Budget and four balanced budgets
    Bush Left Obama a 3600 Budget
    Clinton left Bush a 5700B of Debt
    Bush left Obama 11,800B of Debt
    Clinton left Bush a 237,00 net new jobs created per month
    Bush left Obama a 31,000 lowest since Hoover.
    Clinton left Bush Peace on Earth
    Bush left Obama Hell on Earth Two disastrous wars
    Clinton left Bush a President most highly rated of any peacetime President in Asia, Africa, Europe.
    Bush left Obama the most hated President in history
    Bush left Obama an Housing Tsunami and Financial Volcano
    Bush left Obama, in 2008, an 8500B Bail out commitment
    Bush left Obama his Takeover of Fannie/Freddie, AIG, and first bailout of Chrysler
     clarence swinney political historian lifeaholics of america
    comments welcome at cswinney2@triad.rr.com

    December 8, 2010 at 6:17 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  10. Arthanyel

    Obama did not flip flop. He was, and is, passionately opposed to giving tax cuts to the wealthiest 2%. What he did was recognize that the Republicans were very willing to give everyone a tax increase on January 1 (and blame him for it) and then they would be submitting the same exact demands but even less willing to compromise.

    Obama made a better deal than I expected and was smart to do it in a way that will make this same debate front and center in 2012.

    December 17, 2010 at 1:53 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  11. LEHUTTY

    I may switch to the gop and vote for Palin in the primaries just to jerk them around. She won't win the general against Pres. Obama and he deserves it easy for a change!

    December 17, 2010 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse | Reply
  12. cursos a distancia gratis

    Hello my friend! I wish to say that this post is amazing, great written and include almost all important infos. I would like to look extra posts like this .

    April 1, 2012 at 5:48 pm | Report abuse | Reply
1 2 3

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.