Limbaugh’s bipartisan compromise

posted at 8:41 am on January 29, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

How badly have the Democrats bungled against Rush Limbaugh this past week?  They provided him an opening to look less partisan than themselves, and he’s taken it with both hands.  While Nancy Pelosi refused to negotiate with her Republican counterparts and stuffed the stimulus bill with Democratic power-building pork, Limbaugh offers a rather common-sense compromise that acknowledges Democratic gains and gives both tax-cutting and public-works approaches a chance to compete:

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. …

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.

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’m not sure I’d support this approach, either, but it’s a lot better than what Democrats rammed through Congress last night.  The problems with the stimulus are that it’s simply too much money to spend and that the vast majority of it does nothing to stimulate the economy in the short run, which is what a “stimulus” bill should do.  The recession will be over by the time the federal government can possibly spend most of this money, and the commitment will drag on the private sector for years to come.  We need to lop off about $700 billion as a start and focus only on spending and tax incentives for investment that can occur in 2009.

However, as a compromise, it’s actually a pretty good plan.  Why not try both?  I’d even call it 60/40, roughly the split between Democrats and Republicans in both chambers of Congress, just to make it a little easier to calculate.  We could then set up metrics to determine which approach gets capital flowing into the markets more quickly, which will create or salvage the jobs that Americans need to stabilize the economy.

That’s certainly a lot more reasonable than anything heard from Nancy Pelosi or Barack Obama during the stimulus bill debate.  Limbaugh offers compromise, where Pelosi offers silence and Obama sniffs, “I won!”  Remind me again — who are the hyperpartisans here?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Democrats hold all of the power, and have forced this bill through before the 600+ pages could be dissected by any pundits. Over the days-weeks to come, every detail of this scam will be dissected, and the media will do everything in it’s power to provide cover (lies) for the Democrats.

I expect an all out war on talk radio to begin within days. This had to be the Democrats plan. Allow our media heads to provide the propaganda, while we shut down opposing thought. We will control the message as soon as we shut down the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Keemo on January 29, 2009 at 10:00 AM

Well, considering what the Republicans have done so far……

Johan Klaus on January 29, 2009 at 9:37 AM

And especially considering what the dems are doing…you think Frank is a good “economic” leader? You like a tax evader as the point man on the Treasury?
Klaus, you don’t have much to stand on…the people voted for a change, I don’t think they voted for this kind of change…you have the beginning of CHANGE, you will soon have nothing but HOPE left.

right2bright on January 29, 2009 at 10:00 AM

We will control the message as soon as we shut down the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

Keemo on January 29, 2009 at 10:00 AM

The caveat is that this is so bad that I really think the MSM will have to report on much of it.
Even Obama has said this is congress’s bill, not his…he is distancing himself from fiasco…the little rat.

right2bright on January 29, 2009 at 10:02 AM

my take on this is Rush offered his plan to point out the hypocrisy of the party in power calling for bipartisanship…
he knows they won’t give his idea consideration because of how the new pres has been displaying his obvious lack of interest:”I won” + you can’t listen to Limbaugh.
If my memory is correct, Rush is not for bipartisanship either, he just wants the Dems to admit it too!
That his plan is economically sound and bipartisan just shows that he truly has “talent on loan from God”

FLKraKa on January 29, 2009 at 10:07 AM

Rush will be on CNBC today at 10:50 AM EST.

technopeasant on January 29, 2009 at 9:45 AM

Rush is a genius! No ifs ands or buts… He has done more interviews in the last week than his entire career. Hopefully, this will bring more people around to actually listen to what he says.

And that Rush the band thing is hilarious!

pannw on January 29, 2009 at 10:09 AM

I should say the conservative part of his plan is economically sound in at least it would partially counter the lopsided taking $ from the taxpayer dem plan

FLKraKa on January 29, 2009 at 10:10 AM

It has taken less than 10 days for the Dems to overreach.

southsideironworks on January 29, 2009 at 10:13 AM

Rush needs to keep pushing their buttons.

Is it all a ploy?

Bush is gone, and soon BDS will fade. Sure the current POTUS will use it to deflect blame from time to time, but it will fade.

I think Rush is just stepping up to be the new host body for Constant Liberal Derangement Syndrome. BDS is now RDS, and I think everyone wins. The losers on the left need someone to blame, I mean Heaven forbid they look in the mirror, so it’s perfect.

Rush gets more publicity, the left can really unload.

Who knows, maybe the 3 or 4 Dems with a brain will distance themselves from the rest of their looney comrades if the attacks really sink into the gutter. Maybe that 3 or 4 will turn into 6 or 8, then 12…. You never know.

reaganaut on January 29, 2009 at 10:16 AM

“and 1% voted for wackos. Give that 1% to President Obama.”

What’s he REALLY saying here?

artist on January 29, 2009 at 9:20 AM

ha ha!! Rush proves once again how seriously funny he is…
I used to strongly dislike him (in my lib days, >says with shame<) he can be annoyingly obnoxious, but I have come to like that brand of humor!

FLKraKa on January 29, 2009 at 10:29 AM

oops, hit the quote button incorrectly

FLKraKa on January 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM

As much as I hate to say it, Obama is right. He won. We can thank all those who stayed home, not bothering to vote for McCain. We, the country, will reap the whirlwind of liberal policy because America voted these fools into the leadership position.

bilups on January 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM

If Osama Obama hadn’t shot off his mouth, good ol’ Rash Fatblob would have had to invent some opposition for himself.

He thrives on the “so-and-so attacked me” gag, playing sound-bites (or reading critical articles from newspapers) over and over on his show. He proclaims that he doesn’t like to talk about himself, and goes right on with his perennial case of “I” strain.

And it’s a smart strategy. His little empire thrives and his listeners show the same worshipful deference to him that the guy in the White House gets. He gets regular publicity from the “conservative” pundit-class (how many days go by at HA without some reference to him? He’s right up there with Sarah Palin as a comment-generator) and $400-million contracts.

It’s too bad, really. Many — if not most — of his ideas are sound. But his self-aggrandizing shtick has simply gotten to be too much. He was much better to listen to in his Sacramento days.

MrScribbler on January 29, 2009 at 10:36 AM

That Rush! What a goof. He thinks the stimulus is about the economy.

MikeA on January 29, 2009 at 10:43 AM

It’s too bad, really. Many — if not most — of his ideas are sound. But his self-aggrandizing shtick has simply gotten to be too much. He was much better to listen to in his Sacramento days.

MrScribbler on January 29, 2009 at 10:36 AM

His “self-aggrandizing” is obviously sarcasm, why else call himself “el rushbo”.

the_nile on January 29, 2009 at 10:44 AM

It’s too bad, really. Many — if not most — of his ideas are sound. But his self-aggrandizing shtick has simply gotten to be too much. He was much better to listen to in his Sacramento days.

MrScribbler on January 29, 2009 at 10:36 AM

I like Rush, a lot. But your argument is that you like his substance, but not his style. Obama, and all things lib, are style over substance. Equating them is silly. Is it really a difficult choice for you?

JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 10:46 AM

He proclaims that he doesn’t like to talk about himself, and goes right on with his perennial case of “I” strain.

I always heard that as obnoxious sarcasm, a brand of humor, and he is in the entertainment biz

his listeners show the same worshipful deference to him that the guy in the White House

no, not really. Lots of talk generated, lots of listeners, yes, again he is in the entertainment biz… but worshipful deference,aka the pres, NO!

Many — if not most — of his ideas are sound. But his self-aggrandizing shtick has simply gotten to be too much. He was much better to listen to in his Sacramento days.

Entertainment = bigger ratings = national syndication

His is a brand of humor that is not for everyone.

FLKraKa on January 29, 2009 at 10:50 AM

bilups on January 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM

As much as I hate to say it, if a President McCain were presented with this bill I think he’d be likely to knuckle under and sign it after some meaningless concessions.

JohnTant on January 29, 2009 at 10:52 AM

MrScribbler on January 29, 2009 at 10:36 AM

Rush exhibits something that’s foreign to many and a lot of people find offensive, too: personality.

HarneyPeak on January 29, 2009 at 11:05 AM

bilups on January 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Yes, he did win the election, but it doesn’t mean we should roll over and play dead, or that Rush should stop using his position to try to rally, educate, or even rile people over the mess that we’ve gotten ourselves into. I think you agree.

pannw on January 29, 2009 at 11:14 AM

Oh, my. Another thread about Rush. Rush is certainly the object of hate and revulsion lately on HA and the MSM. Rush has been called pompus, self-agrandizing and similar adjectives for so many years by people who say they listen to him. If you have been listening that long, then you know he is pulling your leg. Get over this supposed flaw in his personality. Let’s get down to the good stuff.
This bi-partisian stimulus bill of his is brilliant. It is bi-partisian and once and for all it would shut up the Dems forever. Their plan would fail and Rush’s would have us back on track in a year or so. And with less money up front. We all know that. It’s just simple economics.
We would see once and for all who has America’s best interests at heart. Republicans or Democrats. Rush or Obama. We know the answer to that, too.
The beauty of Rush’s plan is that when economic downturns occur then everyone would recognize how to keep the economy going without “sacrifice”. The Great Debate would be over for the time being and everyone could point to the plan as an answer to economic problems. In my lifetime I have seen it work 3 times. That’s pretty much tried and true in my book. Obama’s plan fails every time it is tried. They can tweak it all they want in the Senate, but it is still going to fail. Start all over again and let Rush’s plan go to work.
BTW, I am all sacrificed out. I am retired and half my money is gone. When I get a letter from my state’s pension plan saying that they are going to have to cut back my check and ditto from Soc. Security I am not going to be happy. Neither are most Americans. They aren’t used to all this sacrifice. Especially when the cause came straight from the Democrats.

BetseyRoss on January 29, 2009 at 11:16 AM

I tune into Rush sometimes. Tune into Dennis Prager, too. And NPR. Not all of his listeners are drones.

Rush is a smart man.

Obama has been goofin’ pretty hard these first few days. Seems thin-skinned and kind of girlie. Hope he grows up soon. Maybe he’ll toughen up when the press get harder on him.

John the Libertarian on January 29, 2009 at 11:19 AM

Dems already know tax cuts will work, that’s not the object of the exercise, a permanent 88cents per dollar, liberalism, is.

Speakup on January 29, 2009 at 11:37 AM

Obama has been goofin’ pretty hard these first few days. Seems thin-skinned and kind of girlie. Hope he grows up soon. Maybe he’ll toughen up when the press get harder on him.

John the Libertarian on January 29, 2009 at 11:19 AM

Oh John, I don’t think the press could possibly get any “harder” over his sun-glistened chiseled pectorals, his suave speaking, his intelligent, articulate, clean manner, his unending brilliance… *vomit*.

BKennedy on January 29, 2009 at 12:15 PM

“That Rush! What a goof. He thinks the stimulus is about the economy”

Actually, he doesn’t think that.

He clearly states the Depression Stimulus Plot is about consolidating Democrat power, just as FDR’s Perpetual Depression strategy was about the same thing.

notagool on January 29, 2009 at 12:43 PM

“Nouriel Roubini, the NYU economics professor and analyst who in 2006 essentially predicted this catastrophe. Since then, his analysis has continued to seem prescient — time after time, Roubini predictions initially scoffed at by other economists have come true six months later.

The two biggest “takeaways” from the interview:

The Obama stimulus package may create or save some 3 million jobs. But that will only cut this year’s projected job loss from 6 million to roughly 3 million. It’s still going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

More stunning still, the $700 billion in TARP funds won’t be close to enough to solve the banking industry’s problems. In effect, the U.S. banking system is already insolvent, and bringing it back to life will require another $1.4 trillion, a lot of it from the feds. In effect, we’ll have to nationalize the banks for the short term. Roubini believes we have no choice but to take that route, even as he acknowledges the long-term dangers.”

Have a nice day.

getalife on January 29, 2009 at 1:08 PM

Funny how the hope of the GOP is a loudmouth entertainer. Does he remind you all of Bonzo’s sidekick?

Vernon Hardapple on January 29, 2009 at 1:15 PM

Funny how the hope of the GOP is a loudmouth entertainer. Does he remind you all of Bonzo’s sidekick?

Vernon Hardapple on January 29, 2009 at 1:15 PM

Bonzo? Isn’t that the guy in the Oval Office?

Oh wait, that’s Bozo. Never mind.

BKennedy on January 29, 2009 at 1:17 PM

Tax cuts as economic stimulus are the reverse side of the Keynesian coin, tarted up as “supply-side” economics. Recessions exist for a reason–to clear out the deadweight in the economy, freeing up capital and labor so that useful enterprises can be expanded. A stimulus of any sort, whether it is achieved by tax cuts, interest rate cuts, “rebate” checks, or government spending, serves only to retard economic progress.

For a take, written for the intelligent layman, on this central fallacy of Keynesianism, please see chapter two of Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson.

hicsuget on January 29, 2009 at 1:20 PM

the vast majority of it does nothing to stimulate the economy in the short run, which is what a “stimulus” bill should do. The recession will be over by the time the federal government can possibly spend most of this money

I could swear that there have been studies showing that most ‘stimulus’ packages take effect too late to affect the recession — in many/most cases, kicking in after the recession ended.

How about it, Hot Air gurus — can you do some detective work? I’ve come up dry.

Paul_in_NJ on January 29, 2009 at 2:04 PM

I could swear that there have been studies showing that most ’stimulus’ packages take effect too late to affect the recession — in many/most cases, kicking in after the recession ended.

How about it, Hot Air gurus — can you do some detective work? I’ve come up dry.

Paul_in_NJ on January 29, 2009 at 2:04 PM

They already covered that: http://hotair.com/archives/2009/01/21/cbo-stimulus-package-too-much-too-late/?print=1

hicsuget on January 29, 2009 at 2:13 PM

Who knows, maybe the 3 or 4 Dems with a brain will distance themselves from the rest of their looney comrades if the attacks really sink into the gutter. Maybe that 3 or 4 will turn into 6 or 8, then 12…. You never know.

reaganaut on January 29, 2009 at 10:16 AM

We’re already at 18.

It’s a start.

Chaz706 on January 29, 2009 at 2:23 PM

“If you think corporations are competent and ethical, and government is an unwelcome intrusion, have yourself a peanut butter sandwich for lunch.”

getalife on January 29, 2009 at 2:46 PM

Me and the other cons would crack up laughing at these lefty morons who had NO idea that I was quoting Rush the ROCK BAND! hahaha

Tony737 on January 29, 2009 at 9:05 AM

Lefties prolly hate Rush the band too, since they’re Randians. They dedicated 2112 to Ayn’s Anthem and wrote a song in its name.

Live for yourself — there’s no one else
More worth living for
Begging hands and bleeding hearts will
Only cry out for more

Rae on January 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Let’s make Rush the RNC Chairman.

Cr4sh Dummy on January 29, 2009 at 4:29 PM

Oh John, I

don’t think the press could possibly get any “harder” over his sun-glistened chiseled pectorals, his suave speaking, his intelligent, articulate, clean manner, his unending brilliance… *vomit*.

BKennedy on January 29, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Well, I’ll be! There is a Kennedy with a functioning brain afterall.

rmel80 on January 29, 2009 at 11:28 PM

THANK GOD FOR RUSH, without him we would have NO VOICE at all for anything Conservative… Our party has NO BALLS!!!

Forget the FAUX-guts they showed on ONE vote… Just wait till the MSM, the radical left at Daily Kos and MMA, ect , gets reved up… They are ALREADY running ads against Republicans… Our guys will melt and wilt and drop thier panties like an ugly girl on Prom Night…

We better get on the phones and e-mails to counter the left.

Mark Garnett on January 30, 2009 at 7:45 AM

Comment pages: 1 2