Why are the Democrats fighting tooth and nail FOR the Bush tax cuts they fought AGAINST?

The just want it for the top 2%

The April 1, 2009 tax cuts that were part of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act ("stimulus package") are set to expire at the end of the year along with the budget-busting deficit-exploding Bush/Cheney tax cuts for the wealthiest 1.5%. The expiration date for the ill-conceived nation-destroying Bush/Cheney tax cuts for billionaires and multi-billionaire corporations was built into the 2001 and 2003 tax cut bills, but was extended for one year by President Obama in exchange for getting 68 Senators to ratify the vital New START [Nuclear Nonproliferaton] Treaty (see whitehouse.gov) and also to get the uncooperative rightwing GOPers to okay an extension of unemployment insurance for the many workers displaced by the horrific financial system meltdown that followed the devastating housing and credit markets' collapse.

Consumer spending is the answer to your question, although the Democrats are NOT "fighting tooth and nail" for the wealthiest 1.5%'s tax cuts---they realize this is needed revenue if we are ever going to balance our budget books. By excluding the middle-class workers' tax cuts from expiration, the recovery will be strengthened because these working Americans will have more SPENDING $$ that will help add some momentum. What President Obama has proposed and the Democrat-controlled Senate has already passed is letting the first $250,000 earned be left as-is and then taxing anything above the $250,000/year incomes at the Bill Clinton-era 39%. The obstinate fiscally illiterate extremists in the House are trying once again to hold this nation hostage for their temper-tantrum pout, but if our bond rating is lowered again, all of us will suffer and our slow-but-steady recovery will be harmed.

Uh...many Democrats voted for the first round of cuts. Supportive of the middle-class tax cuts. The 2nd round, they weren’t so keen on those cuts. Just more to the rich and ending up in the Caymans.

We need to support the middle-class after all we’ve been through. The rich are getting much richer and at a faster rate while everyone else is stagnating.

Consider this: Give Romney another tax cut and how does that change his spending in this country? It doesn’t. It just makes him richer with more to stash in the Caymans. Give some cash to a poor person or a middle-class person and that money is spent in the economy, generating growth.

There is ZERO EVIDENCE that tax cuts for the rich create jobs. Zero.

Earmarks are spending in unique districts.. Republicans hate spending cash on the United States, they simply vote for earmarks for Iraq- so Halliburton can fake to rebuild something and honestly steal the cash

They are not against the "middle class" tax cuts. Just the additional tax cuts for the "rich" which have already wasted nearly a trillion dollars with nothing to show for it but a huge defecit/debt.

The only reason the middle class got tax cuts under Bush is because Pelosi and house Dems demanded them before they would sign off on Bush's top tier and capital gains (largely for the rich too) cuts.

Because they like the Republicans serve the economic system of Neo-Liberalism.

Why are you asking dishonest questions and pretending you don't know the answer? What, really, is the point of this?

The Democrats want the cuts for the middle class to continue, but the rate to be raised to its historical norm for the wealthy.

I didn't get any $2,500 cut in taxes?

let me guess, you're talking about the people making $249,000?

they're "so middle class"

EDIT: other middle class folks... did you get a $2,500 cut in taxes?

is this some kind of average that was heavily skewed by the "upper middle class tax cuts" or something?

First requirement of being a libtard: Be a two faced liar.