Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

[Geezah]

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has launched an online petition for readers to express their outrage at conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh for saying last week that he wanted President Barack Obama to fail.

The petition includes a 19-second sound byte of Limbaugh, saying, “If I wanted Obama to succeed, I’d be happy the Republicans have laid down. I don’t want this to work. So I’m thinking of replying to this guy, say ‘okay, I’ll send you a response, but I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.’”

Meanwhile, Obama advised Republicans last Friday to stop listening to Limbaugh if they wanted to get along with Democrats and the administration.

“You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” Obama said to Republican leaders who met with the president to talk about the stimulus package.

The Republican National Committee did not return calls requesting comment.


Link (http://cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=42616)

I guess this will be their reason to push the unFairness Doctrine.

After all ol Chuck Shumer compared Conservative talk radio to ****ography.

“The very same people who don’t want the Fairness Doctrine want the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] to limit ****ography on the air,” Schumer said.

“I am for that . . . But you can’t say government hands off in one area to a commercial enterprise but you are allowed to intervene in another. That’s not consistent.”
(http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/schumer_fairness_doctrine/2008/11/04/147565.html)

[Midav]

Not a fan of Limbaugh. All this does is give him more free PR.

[LineDoggie]

To ****ing bad, thats the thing with political speech, it cuts both ways

When Air America was bashing Bush for Years they had no Problem with it, remember "Dissent is Patriotic", but now that the Messiah has been dissed its Outrage, and bluster and threats of censorship are the Commandments from Sinai....


Here's a Clue, dont Mention Lardasses name and give him Free PR & Ratings, Act like you are the President instead of getting into "Oh Yeah, so's your mother" matches with Radio Commentators.

As for the DCCC, all they need is to add a P on the end and lose the D :p

[Hollis]

Probably the only people who listen to Rush are D's. After this they will be just listening harder.

[budgie]

A war of words is pointless. Making a formal complaint to Rush? He thrives on this kind of attention. Best just to ignore the dork and reduce his name to off-handed comments like the President made the other day. And even that gives Limbaugh too much credibility among the losers who follow his every word.

[c62]

I wonder if they'd be willing to expand the Fairness Doctrine to include print(NY Times, LA Times, Newsweek....) and TV(NBC, MSNBC, CNN, .....) As Linedoggie pointed out, the Dems only want this when it suits them.

[Henry's Fork]

Probably the only people who listen to Rush are D's. After this they will be just listening harder.

rofl True that Hollis, every last Rush listener i know of, sh1t canned him after he got caught popin hillbilly heroin.

[commanding]

I like Rush. Used to listen to him some. Finally I got wore out on politics in general. Politics day in and day out just wears me out. Don't care if ya lean left or right politically...just too much good stuff to mess with without all the politics.

[Winger]

I wonder if they'd be willing to expand the Fairness Doctrine to include print(NY Times, LA Times, Newsweek....) and TV(NBC, MSNBC, CNN, .....) As Linedoggie pointed out, the Dems only want this when it suits them.

Yeah, the fairness doctrine is pretty much BS. Essentially, conservative talkshows sprung up in in the AM band following Limbaugh's example. They didn't corner the AM market and ban liberals. The liberals just never cared. Conservative radio expanded on the AM band. They certainly couldn't of done so without a latent demand out there. They ignored this form of marketing and PR for too long and now they cry when their pitiful excuse of shows like Air America don't get good ratings.

Personally, I think Limbaugh is a bit too wack. But, it's apparent his intentions have worked. He's annoyed a lot of the opposition.

[commanding]

He's annoyed a lot of the opposition.

:lol: This is true. Fortunately, my radio has a do-hickey where I can channge the channel if I don't want to listen to someone. Maybe they will catch on an everyone can have one of those dials. p-)

[philbob]

:lol: This is true. Fortunately, my radio has a do-hickey where I can channge the channel if I don't want to listen to someone. Maybe they will catch on an everyone can have one of those dials. p-)

you still uses dials p-)

[wildcat]

I never like Rush, but this agenda to shut up free speech is more alarming, it seems that these dems don't like people to have opinions other than theirs, very worrying. Well Comrades get with the program "what obama and his administration say is the WORD, and if you want to work with them, bow down and submit, it is not a two way street, Obama bipartisan means do it my way and submit. So get with the program and submit. He won, we lost and democary is no more, it my way or the high way dicatorship."

For once I will agree with Budgie, I think we should ignore Rush, he is a loser, so glad he is not on my local talk radio.

[Walter Sobchak]

A war of words is pointless. Making a formal complaint to Rush? He thrives on this kind of attention. Best just to ignore the dork and reduce his name to off-handed comments like the President made the other day. And even that gives Limbaugh too much credibility among the losers who follow his every word.

I guess you're a Michael Moore fan yourself, right?

Yeah, when it's Dhimmis speaking out, it's patriotic dissent, but now that the shoe is on the other foot it's divisive and mean-spirited! It's now called hate-speech, where the continual eight-year drumbeat of Bush-Chimpy-McHitler is stupid, wasn't.

This petition is like most things the Dhimmis do. It's all about emotion and feeeeeelings, thinking with the heart and not the brain (go see the Wizard, fast!). If the Fairness Doctrine is applied to all media - and not just radio - it would maybe pass a Constitutional test. However, applied only to talk-radio, it doesn't stand a chance in hell, and that's even the opinion of the ACLU.

[budgie]

I guess you're a Michael Moore fan yourself, right?

Yeah, when it's Dhimmis speaking out, it's patriotic dissent, but now that the shoe is on the other foot it's divisive and mean-spirited! It's now called hate-speech, where the continual eight-year drumbeat of Bush-Chimpy-McHitler is stupid, wasn't.

This petition is like most things the Dhimmis do. It's all about emotion and feeeeeelings, thinking with the heart and not the brain (go see the Wizard, fast!). If the Fairness Doctrine is applied to all media - and not just radio - it would maybe pass a Constitutional test. However, applied only to talk-radio, it doesn't stand a chance in hell, and that's even the opinion of the ACLU.

This has nothing to do with me or Michael moore and I have no idea what this fairness thing you guys keep on about is. All I said was it's pointless to complain about Rush because he thrives on that kind of attention anyway.

[Createdeemcee]

About Time,

jaba talks out of his arse a little too much to be an oxy sailor. his credability is that of OJ's.

[wildcat]

This has nothing to do with me or Michael moore and I have no idea what this fairness thing you guys keep on about is. All I said was it's pointless to complain about Rush because he thrives on that kind of attention anyway.
Fairness doctrine is something the Dems have been wanting a long time, to reduce the right wing talk shows, What it will do is require equal air time for Right and left wing shows, funny it does not apply to TV, which is the opposite. This complaining is the dems trying to created a voice to get support for the fairness act which they have been talking during and since the election.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

If it passes it would not be the end of right wing radio, but they will have to opposing views as well to make it fair. I have noticed some talk show host have already implemented this in there shows, so people here all sides to an argument. I wished NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX and CNN would do this on TV. Oh wait, they don't need too, they just want tell you, and not report instead.

[CPLHUNTER]

I think Rush makes some good points and if ppl would listen to the entire interview, he wasn't just saying he wanted Obama to fail just because.

He said that he wants him to fail if he continues to try to enforce more government control over private sector.

[Expert Marksman 126]

I guess Premier obama feels that if any comerade needs an opinion they should be issued a democratic opinion.

How dare you oppose him! You sound like an American or something...

[Walter Sobchak]

This has nothing to do with me or Michael moore and I have no idea what this fairness thing you guys keep on about is. All I said was it's pointless to complain about Rush because he thrives on that kind of attention anyway.

Oh, I was just wondering about the use of the description of "losers" concerning those who listen to Rush Limbaugh. That's what Michael Moore stated in his book "Liars", so I just thought you were quoting ol' Mikey.

You're second point is right on the money. As Mae West (the actress, not the life jacket) once stated, "I don't care what the papers say about me as long as they spell my name right". Someone else once stated, "The thing that's worse than being talked about is not being talked about".

With this public flight between Congress, POTUS and DNC officials and a private American citizen, any attempt to pass the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" back into law will only have the effect of making it look like a punitive attempt at censorship... which is exactly what it is. Using the term "fairness" is just a cynical attempt to hide its true purpose.

[budgie]

Fairness doctrine is something the Dems have been wanting a long time, to reduce the right wing talk shows, What it will do is require equal air time for Right and left wing shows, funny it does not apply to TV, which is the opposite. This complaining is the dems trying to created a voice to get support for the fairness act which they have been talking during and since the election.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

If it passes it would not be the end of right wing radio, but they will have to opposing views as well to make it fair. I have noticed some talk show host have already implemented this in there shows, so people here all sides to an argument. I wished NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX and CNN would do this on TV. Oh wait, they don't need too, they just want tell you, and not report instead.

Yeah that looks like a silly idea. Probably why, according to the wiki page, so few ligislators have ever supported it and it gets shot down every time. Who said Obama is going to implement it? He probably couldn't get it to pass but with the Dems holding both houses who knows?

[Policía Loco]

Pfft, who needs Rush Limbaugh when you have The Savage Nation?

[Merfeller]

Rush is just fine the way he is. He gives his audience what they want and he makes money for his bosses, which is something his left leaning critics can't seem to figure out. If his show wasn't getting high ratings and generating ad revenue he wouldn't be on the air. He would be Air America, I guess. Anyway, those who don't like him should just turn off the radio or listen to something else. Aside from that, I dare say Congress has more pressing issues on the agenda than worrying about or taking action against a friggin' radio personality. Talk about thin skin...

[el borracho]

Obama has been president for only a week now. I have a feeling that when the US doesn't turn into a liberal utopia like many on the far left assume, they will be highly critical of Obama for not delivering their pipe dream (which he didn't really promise anyway). Give it time. The media is fickle and likes to be controversial just for controversy's sake to stir up ratings. It happened with Clinton, and the pendulum swung the other way with Bush. Obama will get his share of negative publicity, probably from the same outlets that are currently praising his every decision.

[helomech]

The Dims' will fail over this and ultimately it will make Rushie-boy even more stronger/popular than he is now;the public will see it as an attack on free speech and as it was already mentioned-you can't have it both ways especially when you don't like what's being said

And for those of you who have not heard:

I WON!!!!!!!

http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/5397/obamafirmfgralexbrandonrn6.jpg (http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/5397/obamafirmfgralexbrandonrn6.jpg)

And for those of you who may be worried:

http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/2036/obamachillly1.png (http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/2036/obamachillly1.png)

[Redguy]

Glad he's getting some more public attention.
I love seeing these liberals getting their panties in a bunch just because some pill popping radio host expresses himself. Screw the constitution anyways, you cannot speak against the messiah.

[philbob]

Everytime you speak ill of rush he gets more powerful

[Bro Jangles]

Pfft, who needs Rush Limbaugh when you have The Savage Nation?
Hahahaha true that.

[WarDancer]

Strange. I dont recall the Dems talking about passing a resolution to condemn Air America when they called Bush a traitor, idiot and warmonger.

[WarDancer]

Glad he's getting some more public attention.
I love seeing these liberals getting their panties in a bunch just because some pill popping radio host expresses himself. Screw the constitution anyways, you cannot speak against the messiah.

Careful how you decribe him or say his name. It can earn you banning or a two week vacation from this site! Personaly, I'd like to refer to him as "That one" like McCain did.

[WarDancer]

Obama has been president for only a week now. I have a feeling that when the US doesn't turn into a liberal utopia like many on the far left assume, they will be highly critical of Obama for not delivering their pipe dream (which he didn't really promise anyway). Give it time. The media is fickle and likes to be controversial just for controversy's sake to stir up ratings. It happened with Clinton, and the pendulum swung the other way with Bush. Obama will get his share of negative publicity, probably from the same outlets that are currently praising his every decision.

Doubt it. The media has a vested interest to see him succeed. Its the first time the media actually pushed for a candidate. If he fails they fail.

[helomech]

The media has a vested interest in him?What do you mean by vested?The media has a vested interest in itself only.
They openly supported Obama but that was for a ratings purpose.IIRC,they didn't exactly beat Reagan on his first go around,but then again,he knew how to handle the media machine too

[CMNot]

Limbaugh is living proof that you need neither intelligence nor ability to get on in life.

[I can't think of a name]

A war of words is pointless. Making a formal complaint to Rush? He thrives on this kind of attention. Best just to ignore the dork and reduce his name to off-handed comments like the President made the other day. And even that gives Limbaugh too much credibility among the losers who follow his every word.

I am pretty sure you have never listened to Rush.

[Ordie]

Rush is happy now because he has job security for the next four years.

[I can't think of a name]

If Rush is as stupid and irrelevant as everyone here acts like why is he being called out by the most powerful man in the world? Why does Obama not just ignore him? Rush is driving a lot of the opposition to this stimulus that the Democrats are afraid to pass without Republicans signing on to it.

I bet more people in this thread listen to him than are admitting to it. I don't have 3 hours to sit and listen but do during my 25 minute commute in the morning.

[walford]

The petition for and against any broadcast program is called tuning in or not. If you don't like Limbaugh, don't listen. Stop trying to make it so others who want to listen cannot.

[Geezah]

I have no idea what this fairness thing you guys keep on about is.

That's because you jump on the band wagon but have no idea what is gong on over here.

Before you respond to threads that have your messiah mentioned in them, you may want to read up on the subject at hand.

Here's a link for you!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

[Geezah]

I'll openly admit I listen to Rush, I prefer him over Hannity and Neal Boortz, but if int he car I will listen to Rush.

[INAT]

They need to launch some oxy 80s at him that wll take hm down in a second.

[helomech]

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission) (FCC) that required the holders of broadcast licenses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_license) both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was (in the Commission's view) honest, equitable, and balanced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

So for the Dem liberal elite who complain about Rushie-boy,he does not by any means control the airwaves by popping off like he does.The liberal MSM has more airtime than anyone else

[California Joe]

Legislating "common sense" is always stupid. You don't like Limbaugh? Don't listen to him. Real simple. I never liked the self important windbag so I don't listen to him.

But legitimizing his opinions by responding to them is beyond retarded. He's a private citizen looking to garner ratings and make more money for his advertisers.

Huge mistake to get into a pissing contest with a guy who will spend 4 hours a day doing nothing but taking shots at everything you do and increase his listening audience by doing it.

Unbelievable bush league mistake. And if Schumer and those other retards don't have anything better to do they should probably look at their emails...

[Father Torque]

Obama and the Dems will crush the 1st Amendment bringing back the Fairness Doctrine and after that they will go for the 2nd, just give em some time

[budgie]

That's because you jump on the band wagon but have no idea what is gong on over here.

Before you respond to threads that have your messiah mentioned in them, you may want to read up on the subject at hand.

Here's a link for you!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

Bit behind there, G, I've already seen it. :

"In June 2008, Barack Obama's press secretary wrote that Senator Obama (Democrat of Illinois, now President Obama) "does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters," but that he "considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible," adding, "That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets."

[toad]

The liberal media certainly does have more air time than anyone else...and they surely used it to help get our President elected.

I agree, give them time and they (todays elected officials) could erode the first amendment to suit themselves. But with the Rush thing...I think it is just a theatrical approach to try and silence someone who dinged thier too thin-skinned leadership.


... and it reminds us all that the Dems have never...ever, believed in a free and open exchange of ideas or speech.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

The last time the Democrats sent him a nasty letter, Rush put it up on eBay, it fetched $2.1 million and he then matched that price and gave all the money to the Marine Corps/Law Enforcement Foundation...so I'm sure he's quite looking forward to this.

I think Rush is a hoot - I really enjoy his show. Of course I don't always agree with the guy, but who cares - it's entertaining as all hell. He deserves each and every one of the $45 million a year he's paid out of his $400 million contract, even if he has "no talent or ability". p-)

[California Joe]

Hell, that's a lot of dough for taking shots at politicians. It ain't that hard. The jokes practically write themselves.

We do it around here for free. :)

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Heh, that's true enough, it almost seems unfair. Between the republicans and their antics in the bathroom stalls and the democrats...well just talking in open session in congress - it's a gold mine.

[vryhpyammoadded]

It must gall the faction in charge how close the ring is. They can just touch it but not quite grab. Violating the 1st is like biting off the ring finger. Sure they’ve got the precious but only for a moment till they’re shoved into the volcano. Best continue sharing the ring and playing the con but it sure is damn tempting to keep it seeing what one can do with ultimate power.

Personally, I want the ruling faction, to fail. They’ve all chosen the path of the corrupt, meddling, coercive collective and will eventually, or possibly their descendants, suffer the consequence. The problem is they can’t fail until the people do and they’ll never allow that always robbing from the ant to gift their pet grass hoppers, keeping them hooked on government, reelection guaranteeing, entitlement crack.

I withhold my judgment on Obama as he has begun to demonstrate his election platform was the standard dishonest bait at switch marketing spin most presidents practice, although, I expect the same old DC song and dance from him as all the previous shills.

[Geezah]

Bit behind there, G, I've already seen it. :



So you are now saying you are aware of the Fairness Doctrine?

Like I mentioned once before, you may want to keep an eye on the news, before jumping into threads.

[Albatross]

With everything going on in the country the moronic politicians are screwing around with this. GTFO. We are in the longest recession since the Great Depression, we are suffering job losses in the millions, and these guys are playing this game. Makes me ill.

[walford]

Those who are building this One Party State are fully aware that the policies they're getting ready to implement are going to tank the economy even worse -- much as FDR's policies did.

The last thing they're going to want is anyone exploring why. Talk radio has been traditionally populist and thus will be subject to being stifled by the Philosopher Kings who know best. I anticipate that they will try to find ways of attacking the Internet the way that China does.

If we do follow the same track as we did in the 1930s, the progression will be similar. We have already been hoodwinked that the cause of the current economic crisis is due to too much economic freedom, which is what was sold back then as well.

So the next steps will be a depression, a major war and a declaration of emergency powers.

[JKD]

I don't know what all the faux outrage is about. It's a comment box where you can write angry comments to a radio host...oh the horror. I don't think we're quite at a police state just yet. It's probably all just a way to get your email address so they can hit you up for donations later.

Limbaugh's loving this. He couldn't buy this much publicity and the Dems are idiots for giving it to him.

[commanding]

The last time the Democrats sent him a nasty letter, Rush put it up on eBay, it fetched $2.1 million and he then matched that price and gave all the money to the Marine Corps/Law Enforcement Foundation...so I'm sure he's quite looking forward to this.

I think Rush is a hoot - I really enjoy his show. Of course I don't always agree with the guy, but who cares - it's entertaining as all hell. He deserves each and every one of the $45 million a year he's paid out of his $400 million contract, even if he has "no talent or ability". p-)

I agree, he is definitely worth more than a lot of the over paid sports figures. You can listen to him for free, without having to shell out $XX a seat like in sports.

[California Joe]

I agree, he is definitely worth more than a lot of the over paid sports figures. You can listen to him for free, without having to shell out $XX a seat like in sports.

You left out the part about him being great in bed too. Polesmoker.










p-)

[LongShot]

Rush>Art Bell...

[matthew.manhorn]

There are much more important things than Limbaugh for the Democrats to care about, period.

[LineDoggie]

There are much more important things than Limbaugh for the Democrats to care about, period.

Guess you missed the first post then

You know where the President gets into a pissing match with lardass and the Dems follow along

Tell it to them.

[Gleipnir]

This petition is like most things the Dhimmis do. It's all about emotion and feeeeeelings, thinking with the heart and not the brain (go see the Wizard, fast!).

Wait a second, didn't Bush say God talked to him?

[commanding]

You left out the part about him being great in bed too. Polesmoker.


p-)


how did you make the jump from listening to him for free to polesmoker?
Anyway, Rush makes tons of money, and has the network by the shorthairs. Hell I would get up there and talk trash about my momma for the kind of dough he makes! Haven't listened to him in a few years, as it is all politics now...he used to have some funny stuff on there, the songs sung by guys who sounded like Bill Clinton, etc. That was funny sh1t.
But, like I say, my radio has a dial that I can go listen to other stations, or even turn it off. No one has a gun to anyones head to listen to him.

[commanding]

Rush>Art Bell...

Al Franken=Tiny Tim

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8/clovisfirst/MILITARY/al_franken_looking_drunk.jpg

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8/clovisfirst/MILITARY/tinytim.jpg

[California Joe]

how did you make the jump from listening to him for free to polesmoker?
Anyway, Rush makes tons of money, and has the network by the shorthairs. Hell I would get up there and talk trash about my momma for the kind of dough he makes! Haven't listened to him in a few years, as it is all politics now...he used to have some funny stuff on there, the songs sung by guys who sounded like Bill Clinton, etc. That was funny sh1t.
But, like I say, my radio has a dial that I can go listen to other stations, or even turn it off. No one has a gun to anyones head to listen to him.

It was a joke. Peter puffer.

He's a fat Howard Stern without the naked Lesbians.

[LineDoggie]

Wait a second, didn't Bush say God talked to him? So did FDR, & Truman, Carter..............

[budgie]

I am pretty sure you have never listened to Rush.

Have actually. Watched his TV show for a few months on early morning spots in NZ about 1996. Since then only heard clips and snippets and read articles but he sounds like the same old bastard.


So you are now saying you are aware of the Fairness Doctrine?

Like I mentioned once before, you may want to keep an eye on the news, before jumping into threads.


I didn't see the relevance of the Fairness Doctrine to this case. In the original CNS article it isn't mentioned at all. So since everyone was screaming about it I told one of the more gentlemanly members I didn't know what it was and he pointed me to the wiki page. Guess what? After looking into it, I still don't see the relevance, particularly everyone's attempt to tie it directly to President Obama. What I saw on the wiki - as conveniently removed from my above quote as the timeline of this thread from selective memory:



"In June 2008, Barack Obama's press secretary wrote that Senator Obama (Democrat of Illinois, now President Obama) "does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters," but that he "considers this debate to be a distraction

So was this thread about Budgie or Rush? I'm getting confused...

[Hot Lips]

Regardless of who is in office or which party they are affiliated with, our goal as a nation should always be to come together, support and work with each other to find ways to prosper and improve our way of life. Anyone that wishes the opposite on us because of a party affiliation is an ass. Period.

[Geezah]

Regardless of who is in office or which party they are affiliated with, our goal as a nation should always be to come together and find ways to prosper and improve our way of life. Anyone that wishes the opposite on us because of a party affiliation is an ass. Period.


I'll remember that next go around...........

[Hot Lips]

Please do. You'll not find me saying "I hope our President is a failure".

He/she fails - we fail. We're experiencing the results of our leaders failures now.

I want all our Presidents to succeed for us.

Forecasting a potential failure based on facts or trends and wishing for failure are two different things.

[LongShot]

Al Franken=Tiny Tim






Touche .....

[commanding]

Please do. You'll not find me saying "I hope our President is a failure".

He/she fails - we fail. We're experiencing the results of our leaders failures now.

I want all our Presidents to succeed for us.

Forecasting a potential failure based on facts or trends and wishing for failure are two different things.

When you say we are experiencing the results of our leaders failures now, are you referring to the economic downturn, or international relations, or what?
I have to disagree a little bit on the statement that when our leaders fail, then we fail. Look at history. We have had some of the worst "leaders" (and by that I mean they were inept at leading or deciding things), and the country still made good progress. Many times the country (usa) does quite well despite having an empty suit in the white house (not talking about Bush here, rather older historic presidents).
Look at Taft, look at Woodrow Wilson, Coolige, Chester Arthur, Harding, etc. We have been thru tough economic times before, Andrew Jackson was one of the most divisive presidents ever, and there was a big economic downturn in his time. Bitter fights in politics over goofy issues for decades. When Bryan ran agains McKinley, the big fight then was over if we should back money with silver. It almost tore the country apart! Maybe what caused the guy to shoot McKinley.
anyway...keep the faith. Rush is just a radio jock, people tend to give HIM too much credit too.

[philbob]

My Bipartisan Stimulus

Let's cut taxes, as I want, and spend more, as Obama would like.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318906638926749.html
There's a serious debate in this country as to how best to end the recession. The average recession will last five to 11 months; the average recovery will last six years. Recessions will end on their own if they're left alone. What can make the recession worse is the wrong kind of government intervention.
I believe the wrong kind is precisely what President Barack Obama has proposed. I don't believe his is a "stimulus plan" at all -- I don't think it stimulates anything but the Democratic Party. This "porkulus" bill is designed to repair the Democratic Party's power losses from the 1990s forward, and to cement the party's majority power for decades.
The Opinion Journal Widget (http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/opinion-journal?newBlidget=true&__fsk=1491914529)

Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page. (http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/opinion-journal?newBlidget=true&__fsk=1491914529)


Keynesian economists believe government spending on "shovel-ready" infrastructure projects -- schools, roads, bridges -- is the best way to stimulate our staggering economy. Supply-side economists make an equally persuasive case that tax cuts are the surest and quickest way to create permanent jobs and cause an economy to rebound. That happened under JFK, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. We know that when tax rates are cut in a recession, it brings an economy back.
Recent polling indicates that the American people are in favor of both approaches.
Notwithstanding the media blitz in support of the Obama stimulus plan, most Americans, according to a new Rasmussen poll, are skeptical. Rasmussen finds that 59% fear that Congress and the president will increase government spending too much. Only 17% worry they will cut taxes too much. Since the American people are not certain that the Obama stimulus plan is the way to go, it seems to me there's an opportunity for genuine compromise. At the same time, we can garner evidence on how to deal with future recessions, so every occurrence will no longer become a matter of partisan debate.
Congress is currently haggling over how to spend $900 billion generated by American taxpayers in the private sector. (It's important to remember that it's the people's money, not Washington's.) In a Jan. 23 meeting between President Obama and Republican leaders, Rep. Eric Cantor (R., Va.) proposed a moderate tax cut plan. President Obama responded, "I won. I'm going to trump you on that."
Yes, elections have consequences. But where's the bipartisanship, Mr. Obama? This does not have to be a divisive issue. My proposal is a genuine compromise.
Fifty-three percent of American voters voted for Barack Obama; 46% voted for John McCain, and 1% voted for wackos. Give that 1% to President Obama. Let's say the vote was 54% to 46%. As a way to bring the country together and at the same time determine the most effective way to deal with recessions, under the Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan of 2009: 54% of the $900 billion -- $486 billion -- will be spent on infrastructure and pork as defined by Mr. Obama and the Democrats; 46% -- $414 billion -- will be directed toward tax cuts, as determined by me.
In Today's Opinion Journal



REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Fan and Fred's Lunch Tab (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318925593626697.html)
The Entitlement Stimulus (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318915075926757.html)
Return to Pyongyang (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318920435726765.html)
TODAY'S COLUMNIST

Wonder Land: The Geithner Exception
– Daniel Henninger (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318805587026591.html)
COMMENTARY

Obama Made a Rash Decision on Gitmo
– John Yoo (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318955345726797.html)
The Obama White House May Be a Crowded Mess
– Karl Rove (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318823268126605.html)
How About a Payroll Tax Stimulus?
– Lawrence B. Lindsey (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318933384726785.html)

Then we compare. We see which stimulus actually works. This is bipartisanship! It would satisfy the American people's wishes, as polls currently note; and it would also serve as a measurable test as to which approach best stimulates job growth.
I say, cut the U.S. corporate tax rate -- at 35%, among the highest of all industrialized nations -- in half. Suspend the capital gains tax for a year to incentivize new investment, after which it would be reimposed at 10%. Then get out of the way! Once Wall Street starts ticking up 500 points a day, the rest of the private sector will follow. There's no reason to tell the American people their future is bleak. There's no reason, as the administration is doing, to depress their hopes. There's no reason to insist that recovery can't happen quickly, because it can.
In this new era of responsibility, let's use both Keynesians and supply-siders to responsibly determine which theory best stimulates our economy -- and if elements of both work, so much the better. The American people are made up of Republicans, Democrats, independents and moderates, but our economy doesn't know the difference. This is about jobs now.
The economic crisis is an opportunity to unify people, if we set aside the politics. The leader of the Democrats and the leader of the Republicans (me, according to Mr. Obama) can get it done. This will have the overwhelming support of the American people. Let's stop the acrimony. Let's start solving our problems, together. Why wait one more day?
Mr. Limbaugh is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host.



Wether you like him or hate him this seems pretty reasonable to me


added: before the Obama drone start to screach (Budgie, Bia....) Rush alone should not control how the 46% is spent but Republican leadership.

[Jobu]

Please do. You'll not find me saying "I hope our President is a failure".

He/she fails - we fail. We're experiencing the results of our leaders failures now.

I want all our Presidents to succeed for us.

Forecasting a potential failure based on facts or trends and wishing for failure are two different things.




I think Obama's policies are bad for the country and I believe he has poor judgement on most matters (defense, economy, energy, environment, etc.)

So yes, I hope he fails because I hope his agenda fails. It's bad for the country. And I hope it fails very quickly before his stupid decisions grow into much larger problems with time.

[11 Bravo]

Regardless of who is in office or which party they are affiliated with, our goal as a nation should always be to come together, support and work with each other to find ways to prosper and improve our way of life. Anyone that wishes the opposite on us because of a party affiliation is an ass. Period.

More hot air lips ?. You sound like arosey cheeked oblahmaton. You already forgot the bile spewed by the demoslobik party these past 8 years already , and the fact that they have yet to stop.You must live under a rock to not see how American politics has ALWAYS worked. So now with your guy in the whitehouse you demand it all rosey and take things out of context to make a silly talking point. The more things change the more they remain the same.
There is good reasoning why there is not nor will not be anything like a left nutter Rush , and if that needs explaining than someone's got their head in the sand.

[commanding]

Rush is happy now because he has job security for the next four years.

the above is a very true statement. Nothing could make the guys like Rush happier, than having a big democrat in the white house, the bigger fool the democrat president/congress is, the more stuff he has to work with. I mean Rush was in "high cotton" (as we say in the south) when Clinton was getting jiz on Monica Lewinskis blue dress. Nothing in the world could have given him more talking time. As California Joe or someone said, the jokes darn near write themselves.
If McCain would have been elected, Rush would have had to talk about baseball for four years.

[DetailedEntrails]

Rush is a douche but this seems like a rather unproductive way to use time.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Anyone that wishes the opposite on us because of a party affiliation is an ass. Period.

Mmm well, he's not opposing the plans because of party affiliation, he's opposing them due to philosophical differences. Is he - and are we - supposed to check our brains at the door ...pretend that 1+1=3 for the sake of...what? To make Obama happy? If we think something will fail, why would we vote for it?


If McCain would have been elected, Rush would have had to talk about baseball for four years.

He's always had plenty negative to say about McCain's policies. And hell, he landed a $400 million contract in the middle of a Republican administration even farther to the right than McCain.

Bottom line here for me- the democrats had the votes for the bill and did not even need republican votes. There's nothing "bipartisan" about a bill that goes through with not a single Republican "yes" vote. The democrats were only attempting political damage control, so that when it doesn't work, and the sh*t hits the fan, they aren't the only ones on the hook for having voted for it.

Now if we were truly interested in this new era of bipartisanship, then Republicans would have been included to help draft the legislation, and maybe some of them would have actually voted for it. But I guess we're all supposed to be content with something that looks like bipartisanship but isn't?

[JKD]

Rush is a douche but this seems like a rather unproductive way to use time.

Actually it's probably very productive, for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Congressional_Campaign_Committee) at least. They're job is "recruiting candidates, raising funds, and organizing races in districts that are expected to yield politically notable or close elections" and through this little Limbaugh thing they're probably collecting plenty of email adresses and zip codes to do that.

http://www.dccc.org/page/petition/rush

[vryhpyammoadded]

I’m sorry, but I do want them to fail seeing our parties have incrementally edged our culture up to totally converting to a new level of big government invasiveness in our lives. They’ve insinuated into the minds of citizens the perception that the parties are too big and important to fail therefore catastrophe is risked by not supporting them.

I call bullsh*t and say instead that catastrophe lay ahead in following the managerial elites ever more efficient pied piping fallacious demagoguery claiming more of their meddling in our lives will give us utopia.

The hype and same marketing spin of more control equals a better country is actually a distraction from the real issue driving their insane OCD loop mentality. What’s really going on is a need between two co-dependent, symbiotic, factions of our population to foist the oldest scam in human history, how to attain the easy life spending other peoples money.

Now before you misunderstand me, let me point out a little detail many people miss. The entitlement culture is not to be blamed on the poor only, the wealthy also share a heap of blame for it as they make as much or more in entitlements. You ever hear of corporate welfare or kept track of the news lately with the bailouts?

I actually place greater blame on the wealthier entitlement culture than the poor and find nothing wrong with shaking their money tree now and then. What I differ on is the methodology with taxation or nationalization being the absolute worst tools to use as they shift blame and give power to the real culprit in this crime, the US Government.

What I’m getting at are the byzantine body of regulations and laws that were lobbied by interest groups institutionalizing the forceful taking of other people’s money to make life easier for them. Think monopolies, rent seeking, price fixing, all manner of techniques to game the system and wheedle a few more dollars out of the consumer.

When you institutionalize this methodology into the government as the managerial elite regularly say they desire to do, you end up with a government more and more tyrannical with its attitude being of the government, by the government, for the government than Lincolns famous address so well said the opposite of. Look to the recent bank and auto bailouts. It's only natural that if one gives or loans money to another, they want to have some say in how that money is spent. The same goes for the government.

Right this moment there are about 70 million of these types cheering on the people they put in office, having about a 85% chance of incrementally institutionalizing more of this tyranny. The charity of the community has been usurped and morphed into product to self perpetuate increasingly more of this sham dipping into the largess and thats very bad for Republics, they die from this process.

Now for my Stranglovian moment. Of those 70 million, roughly 40 are the needy and 30 the megalomaniacs and narcissists who feed on the fear gaining power. Of the 30 million around 18 million are the ones who keep the worst of the poor nanny state crack addiction cycle up and running to stay in power but they too share a fundamental flaw with their constituents in that they live high on the debt hog over extending themselves to the hilt and screaming, I’m too important to fail, hand outstretched, when the bubble bursts.

Hell yes I want America to suffer a bad economy, the so called failure of Obama, so that these vampires get burned away, exposed to the sun when their homes are foreclosed on. Meanwhile, I’d hope their crack addict constituency will wise up and learn fiscal responsibility but if they don’t, well call me Ebenezer, I don’t believe in Christmas spirits nor do I believe in chains bothering me later either. The surplus can go away.

Call me an ass for thinking this way but I'm certain my philosophy, the antithesis of the current one both parties preach, works and did serve this nation well for dozens of its political cycles since it was founded. But to call this system asinine also calls the founding fathers asses along with a whole lot of prominent and well respected western enlightenment philosophers. But thats ok. I don't mind. My skin is thick.

Then again I think Marx and his brood but, especially his socialist dimwit utopian hybrids are all pretty much asses too being the facillitators of the misguided, distracted feeling other people owe them something because they are opressed or whatever excuse they choose.

[commanding]

......the oldest scam in human history, how to attain the easy life spending other peoples money.



Kind of remind me of the TV preachers don't ya think? Good post.

[helomech]

Kind of remind me of the TV preachers don't ya think? Good post.
X2!
I think those smooth talking self proclaimed men-of-the-cloth are the ultimate con artists

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Saw this on CNN today. The democrats are actually running ads, trying to make hay from this:



"Every Republican voted with Limbaugh and against creating four million new American jobs," a narrator says in the ad. "We can understand why a extreme partisan like Rush Limbaugh wants President Obama's jobs program to fail, but the members of Congress elected to represent the citizens in their districts? That's another matter."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/


Why do they care? The measure passed, even without Republican votes. If they really believed the bill was going to be a success, shouldn't they be proud of the fact that they did it alone, rather than terrified that nobody else wants to share the blame?

[California Joe]

You're right. You'd expect at least a few of them to say, "F*ck it, we're doing what we think is necessary for the economy to survive. We don't care if Republicans are butthurt and partisan. They can all sit around and bitch while the country goes down the toilet or they can get on the bandwagon" Or something to that effect...

Trouble is, nobody really believes this is going to be a magic cure all for what ails us and the Dems in Congress are also playing partisan games with all of our money. They're all so scared of what'll happen if they f*ck up that it's easier to snipe at the opposition. Fiddling while Rome burns...

[Walter Sobchak]

Why do they care? The measure passed, even without Republican votes. If they really believed the bill was going to be a success, shouldn't they be proud of the fact that they did it alone, rather than terrified that nobody else wants to share the blame?

It's the old straw man argument. The Democrats have no "jobs" bill... if so, each one of 3.5 million alleged jobs will cost us something in the neighborhood of 170K! So, they are trying to deflect from the real issue - the so-called stimulus plan - to a person they can demonize. The fact is, more and more Americans from all political persuasions are seeing this as a huge payoff to Democratic constituencies and interest groups. If this is about "jobs", why money for ACORN, or Planned Parenthood, or STD prevention, a water park, ATV trails, an ice rink... Also, these so-called "infrastructure" jobs are spread out through 2011.

So, in order to keep people from looking too closely at this pig, they are instead trying to deflect attention onto someone who is highly visible and can easily be turned into the enemy. It's an old trick. Read Machiavelli. Hell, read Saul Alinsky, one of those who influenced Obama.

[vryhpyammoadded]

It’s really quite simple why they care so much. McMonkey McBean wants as many Sneetches with no stars upon thar’s as possible to believe in riding the Star On machines at $3 each’s so that those with stars upon thar’s will ride the Star Off at $10. If played right, and his work is 100% guaranteed, by not killing this cash cow, he can enjoy an endless conveyor belt of money filling his strangest of cars. Thank You!

[walford]

It's the old straw man argument. The Democrats have no "jobs" bill... if so, each one of 3.5 million alleged jobs will cost us something in the neighborhood of 170K! So, they are trying to deflect from the real issue - the so-called stimulus plan - to a person they can demonize. The fact is, more and more Americans from all political persuasions are seeing this as a huge payoff to Democratic constituencies and interest groups. If this is about "jobs", why money for ACORN, or Planned Parenthood, or STD prevention, a water park, ATV trails, an ice rink... Also, these so-called "infrastructure" jobs are spread out through 2011.

So, in order to keep people from looking too closely at this pig, they are instead trying to deflect attention onto someone who is highly visible and can easily be turned into the enemy. It's an old trick. Read Machiavelli. Hell, read Saul Alinsky, one of those who influenced Obama.I think that you're on to something here. There is already concern that there will be a bait and switch (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/29/dc-sees-stimulus-as-a-way-to-divert-funding/) with the funds in which localities will shift their internal funds that were otherwise going to be spent on infrastructure to other budgets and then use the difference to play at shoveling a bit of gravel.

But even if all of the funds were faithfully devoted to the intended destination, they will do nothing to “create more jobs” or “stimulate the economy”

It is hard to imagine that a Democrat will require that these shovel-slinging jobs be reserved for US citizens or legal residents, so this may in fact magnetize a new flood of illegal aliens who will send back remittances of taxpayer's money to their homelands.

I and other Republicans don't want this plan to fail -- because the American people will suffer greatly if it does -- but know that it won't work.

FDR tried these make-work projects and they only deepened the Depression. Obama is already telling us things are going to get worse before they get better and this is why. If we get out of this recession, it will be in SPITE of, not because of, this massive pork project that will deepen the national debt and nothing more.

But the problem is, being subjectivists, Leftists hold that a plan that cannot theoretically work and has no historical evidence of working will succeed if everyone 'believes' in it. So they must silence critics much as religious fanatics must silence the Infidel.

If you don't believe in my God, he dies.

[California Joe]

But would you also agree that there would have been more positive Republican cooperation if more of their favorite pork was being subsidized as well? Maybe the Dems just didn't offer quite as much as they wanted?

To suddenly equate grasping, self important, power hungry politicians with only one party is a bit disingenuous.

[walford]

But would you also agree that there would have been more positive Republican cooperation if more of their favorite pork was being subsidized as well? Maybe the Dems just didn't offer quite as much as they wanted?

To suddenly equate grasping, self important, power hungry politicians with only one party is a bit disingenuous.There is no question that Republicans have their share of earmark hunger, but in this case, they managed to show party discipline [at least in the House] and put that aside so that the bill that passes will be a nearly 100% Democratic Party boondoggle.

[philbob]

and the ten brave democrats who know this is f'd up

[Geezah]

President Obama and a key outside ally are stepping up efforts to ensure passage of the massive economic stimulus package, reaching out to Congress with both carrots and sticks.

While the president and his top aides are using all the trappings of the office, courting members through phone calls, cocktail parties, West Wing sit-downs and even a politically mixed Super Bowl party, liberal groups are dispensing with the niceties and seeking to drive a wedge between Republicans and one of the right’s most influential leaders.

Politico has learned that tomorrow Americans United for Change, a liberal group, will begin airing radio ads in three states Obama won — Ohio, Pennsylvania and Nevada — with a tough question aimed at the GOP senators there:Will you side with Obama or Rush Limbaugh?

“Every Republican member of the House chose to take Rush Limbaugh’s advice,” says the narrator after playing the conservative talk radio giant’s declaration that he hopes Obama “fails.”

“Every Republican voted with Limbaugh — and against creating 4 million new American jobs. We can understand why a extreme partisan like Rush Limbaugh wants President Obama’s Jobs program to fail — but the members of Congress elected to represent the citizens in their districts? That’s another matter. Now the Obama plan goes to the Senate, and the question is: Will our Senator"—here the ad is tailored by state to name George Voinovich in Ohio, Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania, and John Ensign in Nevada—"side with Rush Limbaugh too?”

Asked to respond, Limbaugh had a message for his party.

“Senate Republicans need to understand this is not about me,” he wrote in an email. “It is about them, about intimidating them, especially after the show of unity in House. It is about the 2010 and 2012 elections. This is an opportunity for Republicans to redefine themselves after a few years of wandering aimlessly looking for a ‘brand’ and identity.”

Brad Woodhouse, the Democratic strategist who is overseeing the ad campaign, said: “The House Republicans put their Senate colleagues in the crosshairs because they decided to play politics rather than do the right thing.”

The radio buy comes on the heels of TV campaign by Americans United for Change and other liberal groups that began Thursday and targets GOP senators in Maine, New Hampshire, Alaska and Iowa, and another by the Laborers Union aimed at Senators in Iowa, Kentucky, Nevada and Tennessee; both designed to rally support for the stimulus package.

As their allies take to the airwaves, Obama and his top aides are conducting their own internal inside-outside lobbying effort.

The president devoted hours to closed-door meetings with House and Senate Republicans Tuesday, had leaders of both parties over to the White House for cocktails on Wednesday and hosted yet more members of Congress for a bill-signing in the East Room Thursday.

All the while, he’s been dialing individual members on the phone and his top aides, including Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and National Economic Council chief Larry Summers, are conducting what one Senate Democratic leadership aide described as near-constant diplomacy on the Hill via both phone calls and personal meetings.

A few chosen members of Congress of both parties will receive the ultimate in White House wooing this weekend when they join Obama Sunday night in the residence to watch the Super Bowl. The list is an ideologically diverse one. Politico has learned it will include, among other opposites, conservative Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) and liberal Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).

More publicly, Obama is making his case for the bill through a series of events that this week included a high-profile White House meeting and speech before a group of the nation’s top CEOs. Friday, Obama along with Vice President Joe Biden will deliver remarks sure to touch on the economy at an East Room event focused on middle class and working families.

From the briefing room podium, press secretary Robert Gibbs has been underscoring the need for the stimulus with a series of sobering statistics. Wednesday it was some state unemployment rates and Thursday he noted that more Americans are on unemployment since records began being kept in 1967. Friday, he’ll surely turn to what is expected to be a dismal economic growth report from the quarter of 2008.

Senate Republicans acknowledge that they’ll lose some of their members on the first vote.

“We’re in a little different spot than the House in that we have a handful of Republicans who have all but committed to supporting the package,” said a Senate GOP aide.

The aide declined to say who, but speculation on both sides of the aisle is centered on a group of northeasterners -- Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Sen. Judd Gregg (NH) and Specter.

Link (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/18194.html)

..........................

[California Joe]

There is no question that Republicans have their share of earmark hunger, but in this case, they managed to show party discipline [at least in the House] and put that aside so that the bill that passes will be a nearly 100% Democratic Party boondoggle.

I agree with you. My problem is in the grey areas. Like how much different the actual Republican proposal would have been. Or what changes would it have taken to the Democrats proposal to make it more palatable. Frankly, I don't blame the Republicans. No one really knows how bad the economy is going to get and this way they can claim no responsibility.

[Walter Sobchak]

To suddenly equate grasping, self important, power hungry politicians with only one party is a bit disingenuous.

The problem is that this was originally offered by the House Leadership (ie: PeloSSi as "free of earmarks"). I heard her defending it just this morning on C-SPAN. In her mind, this is all "stimulus" for the economy. The new MoveOn ad campaign is calling this a "jobs bill". That's like calling the Spanish Inquisition missionary work!

What the Republican Leadership did offer was to take the two lowest tax brackets: 10 and 15 percent and immediately lower them by 5% each. That would be an immediate effect, right to the people who need it. However, the Democrats never think that letting people keep their money is as effective as letting the government give it to someone else to use it on something as nefarious as "job creation" or "economic stimulus", which of course means the middle-man gets a huge cut before it gets to its final use.

[Expert Marksman 126]

It's the old straw man argument. The Democrats have no "jobs" bill... if so, each one of 3.5 million alleged jobs will cost us something in the neighborhood of 170K! So, they are trying to deflect from the real issue - the so-called stimulus plan - to a person they can demonize. The fact is, more and more Americans from all political persuasions are seeing this as a huge payoff to Democratic constituencies and interest groups. If this is about "jobs", why money for ACORN, or Planned Parenthood, or STD prevention, a water park, ATV trails, an ice rink... Also, these so-called "infrastructure" jobs are spread out through 2011.

So, in order to keep people from looking too closely at this pig, they are instead trying to deflect attention onto someone who is highly visible and can easily be turned into the enemy. It's an old trick. Read Machiavelli. Hell, read Saul Alinsky, one of those who influenced Obama.

I heard that with interest each job will cost 290K

[California Joe]

The problem is that this was originally offered by the House Leadership (ie: PeloSSi as "free of earmarks"). I heard her defending it just this morning on C-SPAN. In her mind, this is all "stimulus" for the economy. The new MoveOn ad campaign is calling this a "jobs bill". That's like calling the Spanish Inquisition missionary work!

What the Republican Leadership did offer was to take the two lowest tax brackets: 10 and 15 percent and immediately lower them by 5% each. That would be an immediate effect, right to the people who need it. However, the Democrats never think that letting people keep their money is as effective as letting the government give it to someone else to use it on something as nefarious as "job creation" or "economic stimulus", which of course means the middle-man gets a huge cut before it gets to its final use.

I am in complete agreement with you that any attempt by anyone to attach earmarks to this should be horsewhipped. Regardless of party or philosophical leanings. The President is smart enough to speak out, excoriating the companies giving out bonuses while on corporate welfare, and Cruella DeVille Pelosi is playing "payback". To me that seems like an incredibly short sighted view.

[walford]

I agree with you. My problem is in the grey areas. Like how much different the actual Republican proposal would have been. Or what changes would it have taken to the Democrats proposal to make it more palatable. Frankly, I don't blame the Republicans. No one really knows how bad the economy is going to get and this way they can claim no responsibility.Actually there was a Republican counter-proposal (http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/29/critical-review-missing/), but it was largely ignored by the media so they could then merely be portrayed as obstructionist. Here are some of the things they proposed [from the above link]:
- Cut the two lowest tax rates from 15 percent to 10 percent and from 10 percent to 5 percent. That would raise incomes for every taxpaying family through the tax withholding system by an average of $500 for those in the 10 percent bracket and $1,200 for those in the 15 percent bracket. Married couples could save as much as $3,200 a year.

- Small businesses employ half of all working Americans. The GOP's proposals would allow any business employing fewer than 500 workers to cut its taxes by 20 percent. That would improve its bottom line and encourage future hiring.

- Both parties call for extending unemployment benefits, but the GOP amendments would make those jobless benefits tax-free.

- The Democrats' massive $500 billion infrastructure spending plan will balloon the budget deficit to nearly $2 trillion this year, but plan on cutting the deficit by raising taxes when the economy recovers.

Republicans also sought to put language in the stimulus bill that would preclude "any tax increases now or in the future to pay for this new spending." Instead of raising taxes, they think "any stimulus spending should be paid for by reducing other government spending, not raising taxes."

- Instead of raising capital gains and dividends as Mr. Obama proposed in his campaign, Republicans want to make both rates permanent and then index capgains for inflation to boost capital investment in the economy.

This is the message Republicans are selling: Cut taxes to unleash the power of free enterprise and American productivity to create jobs, and cut federal spending to slow the growth of government, which has weakened the economy.

All this is good as far as it goes, but supply-side conservatives over at the House Republican Study Committee, now chaired by hard-charging Rep. Tom Price of Georgia, think their plan can do even better. Mr. Price's hardy band of tax-cutters want a permanent 5 percent across-the-board income tax cut.

They also want to boost the $1,000 per child tax credit to $5,000 starting in 2008 that would "provide a substantial, immediate tax cut for middle-class families."

They are call for the repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax on Individuals (AMT), and making all withdrawals from individual retirement accounts tax-and-penalty-free in 2009 to allow hard-pressed taxpayers during the recession free access to their savings.

Plus, allow businesses to take full and immediate expensing deductions on their tax returns, cut the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, make the research-and-development tax credit permanent.

This is the kind of tax cut-driven, capital-growth economic recovery plan that is needed to get this $14 trillion economy back on track and lift the global economy along with it.

It's time the network news shows gave the GOP's tax cuts the attention they and the American people deserve. Barack Obama and his economic advisers might even learn a thing of two about economics if they did.If they want the economy to improve rather than just stop sliding downward, I would add that all taxes on income, savings and investment be ELIMINATED and shifted to consumption.

[California Joe]

Is it just me, or do politicians seem to come up with better ideas when they have no power to implement them? I'm serious, it's as if having nothing to lose frees them up to think.

[philbob]

Saw this on CNN today. The democrats are actually running ads, trying to make hay from this:



Why do they care? The measure passed, even without Republican votes. If they really believed the bill was going to be a success, shouldn't they be proud of the fact that they did it alone, rather than terrified that nobody else wants to share the blame?

They are forgetting that the people in there disctric are also telling them NOT to vote for it.

[Expert Marksman 126]

They dont care. They assume that people have short memories and will forget before the next election. The sad thing is that they're probably right.

[Geezah]

I sent a note to Senator Voinovich asking him not to back it, but as RINO as he is, there is a chance he will buckle.