my responsibility to let you know about it is over and done.

In other words, "you are not going to get in the middle of it" anymore...

Where have I heard THAT before?? :eyeroll:

If you don't want to get in the middle of it anymore, then STOP GETTING IN THE MIDDLE OF IT!!

Geeesh…. It's not rocket science, eh?? :eyeroll:

Senator Booker made a pretty historic speech. perhaps an audition for leadership?

Except for the fact that he used a "tool of Jim Crow" to do his speech..

And you people APPLAUDE him for that?? For using a "tool of Jim Crow"...???

Now we know that ya'all Democrats have not fallen far from your KKK/Jim Crow roots, eh?? :eyeroll:

I'm just sayin'....

Senator Booker made a pretty historic speech. perhaps an audition for leadership?

Exactly what I was thinking. Step aside, Chuck and Dick.

Are you sure about that? The TCJA cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, which does not sunset. That corporate tax rate was actually made a permanent cut. While on the campaign trail, Trump promised repeatedly to reduce the corporate rate from 21% to 15% for companies that make their products in the United States. So how are Republicans going to pay for even further tax cuts for corporations and the deeper resultant loss of revenue and also keep the repeatedly proposed cuts to the individual taxpayers whose tax rates actually do sunset in 2025, you know the promises?

Republicans are also going to have to struggle with several other deficit-exploding proposals from Trump, such as making tip income, Social Security income, and overtime pay all tax-free. That's going to cost even more money, on top of extending the earlier tax cuts.

Right... those are the ones.

So "fantasy math" is the only way to enact all the fantasy promises, and I'll give you one guess who gets the short end of the entire delusion.

Why? Because I read Neal's piece twice, before I even began to understand how the GOP's so-called 'fantasy math' actually worked in relation to their plan to extend the upper-class tax cuts from the first Trump administration. Got it - if you compare the future impact of the proposed new tax cuts to a future in which the old tax cuts (the same thing, in other words) would have continued into the future, then there is no ("zero") difference in the future impact on the budget. BS, because the hypothetical has no relation to reality: the tax cuts are going to expire this year, not continue into the future.

Boy, that's pretty complex. I didn't get it at first or almost second reading. And I am a pretty well-educated voter and political reader.

I think the Dems better find a simpler - much simpler, really - message to get their people lined up against this bill.