So whats with Obama and Hillary both voting for the Bush tax cuts yesterday?

[rch35]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080314/ap_on_go_co/congress_budget;_ylt=AvsXO3u3S1RJp2elOkexG8Ss0NUE

[Hoof Hearted]

1. awayastoopid.

meh. Nevermind.

[flor de jasmim]

2. Maybe I read it too quickly, but...

I got the impression that they voted to continue the tax cuts for the middle class and stop the cuts for the wealthy.

[MagickMuffin]

3. Did you even read the article?.?.? Budget would torpedo Bush's tax cuts

The Senate rejected calls from both parties' presidential candidates to take an election-year break from pork-barrel spending as a Democratic-run Congress passed budget plans that would torpedo hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts won by President Bush.

**snip**

It failed on a 71-29 vote. Only three Democrats joined with Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama in voting for it.
Democratic rivals Clinton of New York and Obama of Illinois both voted to extend only some of Bush's tax cuts while allowing cuts in income tax rates and investments expire. They joined other Democrats in a 52-47 vote against extending $376 billion of them.

**snip**

Budget plans are nonbinding, but they highlight the difficult choices on taxes and spending facing the next president and Congress. Binding votes on the expiring Bush tax cuts will be left to his successor and the Congress that's elected in November.

The underlying House and Senate Democratic federal budget plans for 2009, though nonbinding, drew blasts from Republicans for allowing some or all of Bush's tax cuts to die in about three years. The House passed its $3 trillion budget plan by a 212-207 vote. It would provide generous increases to domestic programs but bring the government's ledger back into the black, but only by letting all of Bush's tax cuts expire at the end of 2010 as scheduled.

The Senate passed a companion plan by a 51-44 vote. It endorsed extending $340 billion of Bush's tax cuts but balked at continuing all of them. The competing versions head to talks in which the House is all but certain to accept the Senate's position endorsing tax cuts for the working poor, married couples, people with children and for those inheriting large estates.

Your work here is done.

[ikojo]

4. Both are rich and are voting to support the

people who they truly represent. Forget us "little people" most politicians care only about the rich. Working people come into play only during election season. Once election season is over they'd prefer working people go away.

[cali]

6. The OP is completesly wrong

That is not what happened. And it is incumbent upon YOU to find out the truth- at least click the link. One more time: This was a vote that did the opposite of what the OP claims. It was 51-49 with all the dems voting to dump bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.

[FrenchieCat]

8. All of the candidates are rich....but some richer than others......

Some just got rich by writing a couple of books, while others got rich doing God knows what?

[cali]

5. not even close to what happened

this vote was strictly on party lines and the dems voted to jettison the bush tax cuts for the rich. That said it was non-binding. Posting completely erroneous shit does not reflect well on the poster doing it.

[rch35]

7. I'm very sorry, I posted that very very late and didn't comprehend it at all.

When I read it at 1:30 in the morning I just got it completely wrong, I was exhausted

so I'm sorry for that.

[MediaBabe]

9. Doncha hate it when that happens?

My sympathies, friend.

[rch35]

10. Thank you. I was just out of it and got the complete opposite meaning out of the article. nt