The brazen mercenary acts of the Republican party need massive opposition. The cowering
Democratic Party offers no significant opposition, so the people should act, 60s style, with mass
demonstrations against giving the entire wealth of the country to a few plutocrats.

It will indeed take direct action by the people to get things done to help the middle class and poor and to stop pandering to the rich. It has indeed come to this, as the Democrats have proven once again they are a worthless party.

Until massive direct action takes place, nothing will change.

The only way we should allow the tax cuts for the rich to continue is with the provision that for every $25,000. saved, they must create a full-time job.

Compromise? There will be NO compromise. The regressive Republi-WON'Ts will jam their agenda down everyone's throat or up everyone's nether end and the Democrats will say, " But gee, you didn't make me smile while you were screwing me". We are no longer a Democracy. We are now Of, By and For the Mega-wealthy. The President has folded on everything, agreeing to every demand, yet, STILL they ride rough-shod over him. Doesn't a President have ANY power? No matter. it won't be too long now until the "Great Un-washed" realize they've been HAD once again by the regressive Republi-WON'T rapists. Then, the Party WILL begin.

It seems to me we're being herded into positions where we are either/or, eg. rich/poor, Republican/Democrat, have/have not, etc. and not being treated as people whose values are not so easily categorized.

English has become a universal language not because it is any better as a language per se, but because of the "trade" system established during the past few hundred years at the point of a spear, arrow, gun, or by virtue of the clever uses of opium.

WE CITIZENS ARE NOT BEING TRULY REPRESENTED, hence are in a position, according to the Constitution, to replace our government with one that works for us. Problem with any revolution is that the new boss is pretty much the same as the old boss.

Look past the rhetoric to see the status quo these Congresspeople represent, and you will find some very basic and purposeful forces at work. It's all about crowd control.

"Compromise-there will be NO compromise" writes "The President has folded on everything, agreeing to every demand, yet, STILL they ride rough-shod over him. Doesn't a President have ANY power?"

Yes, a President has a lot of power. But he cannot be Mr. Nice Guy. Obviously once he has folded, agreed to every demand, what do you expect his adversaries to say? Orator, Scholar, Nice guy- doesn't make a leader. Obama is this century's Woodrow Wilson.

Screw the mega-rich and their lackeys in Congress, the Supreme Court and the media! They have perverted democracy in America. Viva WikiLeaks! Is this class warfare? YES!!!

Cathy Hinga made the obvious point and I endorse it: Had tax breaks for the very top brackets had a tonic effect on the economy, as was advertised at the time(s) they passed, those effects have had ample time to appear. Yet we see them not. As the old Fed. Chairman admitted, the model the neocons longed to try for decades was tried, and it failed. End of experiment. Let's try the other theory's idea now. The modest mixed economy model that did work. Let's try that again.

The Average was around $1,900 of extra payment if ALL cuts were to expire. Well, I will like to know what is the Medium, certainly way lower than that. Any way, count with whatever small portion of or up to $1,900 of mine, so the Koch Bros pay their share. For each dollar of mine, they will be paying hundred of thousands of our national budget and debt. And maybe we can extend unemployment benefits just out of their share.

it's interesting watching america implode - like the fall of the roman empire with the laurel leaf crown going to the highest bidder.

for all the talk it's obvious that democracy no longer exists, that the citizens no longer have any interest but self-interest, and that absolutely nothing is going to change...

A Progressive Party won't work until we get runoff elections requiring >50% for the winner.

Even though I'm on FB, I'm posting here. The division is a bit too weird for me, and it seems inappropriate for a site like this one.

Anyway, I'm interested in the question "Why did Feingold vote no?" I would love to see some good analysis somewhere. A google search just brought up some right wing pundit drooling about it.

Cynthia - thanks. I tried going to his website, but there was nothing new. I did find a letter to him (and the other Dems who voted "no") from a disgruntled progressive. It's curious.

Also, one of the FB posters (above) is also asking this question, in case you skipped reading that section.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell called the Saturday vote “a total waste” of time and dubbed Democrats’ effort “a vote to slam job creators with a massive tax increase.”

Forget Charles Rangel. McConnell is the one who should, and must, be censured for his party's total obstruction in the face of crisis. If there are ethical violations being committed in Congress, most assuredly Mitch McConnell is leading the pack in his instruction to his Republican charges to block all business in Congress. Americans unite and send this scourge away!