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?
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 Next »
I think BHO is regretting ever mentioning the name of Rush.
jgapinoy on January 29, 2009 at 8:44 AM
…but I think he brought it up to drum up support for the unFairness Doctrine.
jgapinoy on January 29, 2009 at 8:45 AM
Palin/Limbaugh in 2012?
Hell, at this rate it will be Limbaugh/Palin.
Mr Purple on January 29, 2009 at 8:45 AM
Let’s see what the GOP does with this.
marklmail on January 29, 2009 at 8:45 AM
Rush knows his plan would never get passed. But his point is made – the Dems in congress are partisan hacks in the extreme.
pugwriter on January 29, 2009 at 8:46 AM
The only problem I can forsee in this approach is this: Do both at once, and one may be able to argue effectively that “my” side made the improvements, when it was really the other approach that worked. That assumes, however, that one actually cares about saying “I told you so.”
JamesLee on January 29, 2009 at 8:47 AM
Rush limbaugh is brilliant. Barry could do himself a big favor and make him an advisor.
anniekc on January 29, 2009 at 8:47 AM
I think BHO is regretting ever mentioning the name of Rush.
jgapinoy on January 29, 2009 at 8:44 AM
It serves Obama right.He went into that meeting the other day and mocked Republicans right to their face with his Limbaugh comment.
It he’s so damn smart then let him run everything.Republicans have nothing to lose for at least the next year. They should take advantage of it and be a thorn in Obama’s side.
NeoKong on January 29, 2009 at 8:48 AM
Rush’s plan, his economic plan that is, isn’t good for one main reason. The part about measuring the effects of both types of interventions is where the politics comes in. It’s an old debate–Keynesian stimulus (gov’t spending) vs. supply side (tax cuts). The facts are in, Keynes is discredited if your goal is to stimulate the economy. But what if your goal is to transfer wealth? Then Keynes is your boy.
I’m not sure what Rush has up his sleeve, but surely he knows that the Dems aren’t trying to restore the economy to the status quo ante.
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 8:49 AM
Obama defined hyper-partisan with his short stint in the senate.
locomotivebreath1901 on January 29, 2009 at 8:50 AM
We should hold some sort of election to see if the American people want congress to be run by democrats or by republicans. Then the winner should get to decide what kind of stimulus we get.
Or instead of that, we could just do what some radio host suggests. That’s always an option.
e-pirate on January 29, 2009 at 8:50 AM
If RINO’s and the VERY FEW real Conservatives in Congress really wanted to “stick it to” the Messiah, they would use Rush’s proposal in it’s true form and force the MSM to cover it, and debate it… It would put ALL the pressure on Obamby to counter… Call The Leader out… Make him look foolish…
Let’s pull a Reagan, go OVER HTE POINTY LIBERAL HEADS of the MSM and take this plan to AMERICA! Talk directly to the people… Show them the differences… Show them the money!
But we won’t…
Mark Garnett on January 29, 2009 at 8:51 AM
Yeah , it was a rush statement..
the_nile on January 29, 2009 at 8:51 AM
Agreed.
I think the Obamonkey knew what he was doing – but Rush is a whole lot smarter than Token….. and Rush isn’t going to be held responsible for his stances since he isn’t President.
If ANYTHING happens now – earthquake, hurricane, terrorist attack Rush can lay it at Token’s feet and Token has to answer.
Mr Purple on January 29, 2009 at 8:51 AM
What seems to be missing in this has to do with the propaganda machine that creates the notion of paying taxes being good and tax cuts only benefiting the rich. This idea that Republicans are all wealthy and out for themselves while the truly needy starve is real. Of course, all the rich, spoiled actors pledging to Obama to smile more and work harder to make this a better place get away with not pledging a dime to charity.
Republicans need a better face and some better publicists. Sarah Palin is being targeted because she is a true example of Republican values and freshness when it comes to making this nation work. More people need to step up to the spotlight so that slim margin of voters that elected this new reign of horror can compare shallow Hollywood pledges from people that make believe who they are and, those that struggle and succeed against ever worsening odds thanks to this nation’s current leadership.
Hening on January 29, 2009 at 8:52 AM
We’re sorry, we will shut up right now. Take down the site, no longer required.
Cindy Munford on January 29, 2009 at 8:56 AM
From every nutjob Dem pundit, I keep hearing Obama won a mandate. 54% is NOT a mandate. Liberals, especially the ego-in-chief “Hussein-Iwon”, need to get over themselves and realize they’re killing our country. The sad part is, I think they do realize it and they’re deliberately killing it to rebuild it in their own image…
Tuari on January 29, 2009 at 8:57 AM
… and gives both tax-cutting and public-works approaches a chance to compete …
COMPETE? The god-king has no competition! Remember, HE WON!
Tony737 on January 29, 2009 at 8:57 AM
I think it would be rather hard to tell which of the plans worked if you do them at the same time. Of course the media would do everything in their power to make it look like it was the Dem/Obama plan that worked if the economy did recover.
Bill Scrunty on January 29, 2009 at 8:59 AM
Rush is clearly earning every penny of his new contract. Clear Channel wasn’t stupid.
misslizzi on January 29, 2009 at 9:00 AM
Like it or not, Limbaugh is a powerful force to be dealt with. His plan makes perfect sense, but this administration doesn’t seem to be living in the real world and is incapable of seeing past their own special interests. This plan sounds like a payback to donors.
scalleywag on January 29, 2009 at 9:00 AM
A valiant attempt to be reasonable, but reason never works with Democrats. Democrats look at reason as weakness and pounce all over it. Have you already forgotten that this is the party that actually defended grand jury testimony to the effect of “That depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is.”?
And never, ever, ever let Democrats “measure” anything. They will just cheat, as they always do, usually with some linguistic argument that only a 5 year old could accept.
You cannot appease the left into acting like adults. It just won’t happen. The minute you treat them like adults, they start pissing in the corners and blaming it on the cat. That’s how they are.
progressoverpeace on January 29, 2009 at 9:00 AM
Rush Limbaugh is hated by Liberals to the point of absolute mental illness; just look at the Liberals media heads on TV when they speak the name Limbaugh. Liberals wonder why we refer to them as sicko’s so often, apparently they have not the ability to see their own behavior. These creatures are dominated by emotions; ego, selfishness,arrogance, & hatred dominate the likes of Olbermann and Matthews.
ar·ro·gance : an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions.
egotistical : conceited, egotistic, egotistical, self-conceited, swollen, swollen-headed, vain characteristic of false pride; having an exaggerated sense of self-importance; “a conceited fool”; “an attitude of self-conceited arrogance”; “an egotistical disregard of others”; “so swollen by victory that he was unfit for normal duty”; “growing ever mo.
ha·tred :Intense animosity or hostility.
self·ish :concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one’s own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for other.
Characteristics of a Liberal: all of the above.
Keemo on January 29, 2009 at 9:01 AM
Then allow Obama to own this POS bill. He’s the one groveling for GOP support because, without Bush, he’ll need someone else to blame when funding for the NEA and ACORN and family planning does nothing to stimulate the economy.
Get some stones and remove the nonsense and have a separate debate about it. This is supposed to be an economic stimulus bill and that alone.
BuckeyeSam on January 29, 2009 at 9:01 AM
We should hold some sort of election to see if the American people want congress to be run by democrats or by republicans. Then the winner should get to decide what kind of stimulus we get.
Or instead of that, we could just do what some radio host suggests. That’s always an option.
e-pirate on January 29, 2009 at 8:50 AM
Riiiiiight, and of course you had this attitude around 2003-2004, right?
Whatever happened to Pelosi’s “Minority Bill of Rights”, *guffaw* the document she was waving around during Bush’s tenure which demanded equal time for the party not in power?
Seriously, do you ever think before commenting?
Bishop on January 29, 2009 at 9:02 AM
The primary difference between Rush and George Bush in the world of public perception: the fierce Rush goes on the attack and had the guts to defy and upstage the MSM and Obama, while the acquiescent Bush sat still while the defiant MSM and Obama gutted him in the slaughterhouse of public opinion and served his head to the American people on a platter.
technopeasant on January 29, 2009 at 9:02 AM
Then we compare. We see which stimulus actually works.
Um, how would you suggest doing that?
This isn’t a real proposal. It’s something that “sounds” good, but doesn’t pass simple logic.
Tom_Shipley on January 29, 2009 at 9:02 AM
Yoo Hoo….Obama does not care AT ALL what Rush Limbaugh says or does…..to quote Obama, “I won”
He doesn’t care and never will.
bridgetown on January 29, 2009 at 9:04 AM
Rush knows all this. And he also knows that these two types of competing ways to “stimulate” the economy have been around for a long time, and are precisely what the Republicans have been trying to get Obama to do–drop the spending and increase the tax cutting. So why is he doing it?
My guess is that he didn’t think the public was sufficiently attuned to the economic argument raging, and that in any case, there was too much momentum for the few Republicans left to do much about it anyway. Rush is merely upping the volume of the argument that’s already afoot, not introducing a new one. Even so, great work.
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 9:04 AM
The maybe Obama should’nt have brought some radio host into the equation.
Johan Klaus on January 29, 2009 at 9:04 AM
To be fair, the libs didn’t get a 60-40 deal when they were they minority.
jgapinoy on January 29, 2009 at 9:04 AM
Speakin’ of Rush, when I was “Dain-Bramage” on Web-TV, I used to mess with libs by posting an article (in the Political Discussion Boards) whose title was “My favorite Rush qoute”. When you click the link, it says “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”. And the libs would go nuts! They’d reply “That is so stupid! Rush is a stupid fat ***hole! That is the dumbest qoute I ever heard! This makes no sense! I hate this fat idiot! etc etc …” Me and the other cons would crack up laughing at these lefty morons who had NO idea that I was qouting Rush the ROCK BAND! hahaha
Tony737 on January 29, 2009 at 9:05 AM
Then the winner should get to decide what kind of stimulus we get.
Or better yet, why even have the other party hang around? The losers go home until the next election since the winners get to make all the decisions.
Capital idea.
Bishop on January 29, 2009 at 9:05 AM
If nothing else, Rush set the tone. For every ridiculous proposal set forth by the Democrats, there will be a response and a solution. This is quite new for the Democrats and they are trying to figure out how to deal with it while the media runs damage control.
sherry on January 29, 2009 at 9:05 AM
Won’t take the paycut. I have to say though, that just the mention of him possibly running from Rush himself – would send the MSM and the Left into such an apoplectic state – imagine how much fun that would be?!?
Come on Rush, don’t do it to change Amerika, do it for the health scares on the Left that it would cause and just the fun of it! Now, THAT is a platform I could stand behind!
JeffinOrlando on January 29, 2009 at 9:06 AM
Translation: You all are questioning the One and his wonderful (read: asinine) stimulus bill. Therefore, y’all are RACISTS!!!!!!
I thought dissent was patriotic there, p-man. Or doesn’t it count when it’s us?
mjk on January 29, 2009 at 9:06 AM
In the spirit of James Polk in 1846 negotiating the boundary of the USA vs Canadian territory (54-40 or fight) let us adopt in 2009 54-46 or fight!
technopeasant on January 29, 2009 at 9:06 AM
Geez Tom, Rush explains exactly how this would be done. Libs take their 54 billion and spend it as their ideology dictates. Conservatives take their 46 billion and spend it as their ideology dictates. Let’s see once and for all which ideology actually works for a nation wide recession. As Rush has stated, maybe pieces of both ideologies work together, and if that is what we discover then we combine efforts with the only goal being solution for America.
Does simple logic escape you?
Keemo on January 29, 2009 at 9:07 AM
That’s hilarious
scalleywag on January 29, 2009 at 9:07 AM
One way to measure stimulus is to see when & how much business starts investing.
Is Widgets Inc. going to build/expand a plant & hire workers because in a couple of years Amtrak is going to have new railcars, Planned Parenthood has more money, and the NEA gives out more grants for bad art; or will Widgets Inc. start investing because it isn’t taxed so much.
rbj on January 29, 2009 at 9:08 AM
jgapinoy on January 29, 2009 at 9:04 AM
No they didn’t, they got a much larger slice of the pie.
Keemo on January 29, 2009 at 9:08 AM
Let’s see once and for all which ideology actually works for a nation wide recession.
Again, how would you measure that? I mean, Obama’s plan is EXACTLY what Rush suggests, except tax cuts make up about 30% of the plan, not 46%.
But, if you implement both plans at the same time, and the economy takes off, how do credit one plan as working and one as not working?
Tom_Shipley on January 29, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Ha ha! Love it!
misslizzi on January 29, 2009 at 9:09 AM
“I have hijacked his (Obama) honeymoon.”
Rush Limbaugh
technopeasant on January 29, 2009 at 9:09 AM
I agree. And Rush knew that the Dems would just reject anything he said, out of hand – showing them for what they are. I just wanted to make sure that Ed didn’t get too carried away with the idea that the Dems can be reasoned with. It’s a nice hope, but the left are emotional basket cases (which really sucks, since their ideology is all emotionally driven) who cannot be reasoned with like normal people and cheat at every single opportunity.
progressoverpeace on January 29, 2009 at 9:09 AM
These best thing that the government can do to stimulate the economy, is to cut taxes and get the heck out of the way.
Johan Klaus on January 29, 2009 at 9:10 AM
Brilliant, Rush!
IDEAS DETERMINE FORM (Liszt), and Limbaugh has presented the most logical and BALANCED proposal. Cover the best ideals from contrasting economic dogmas to spread the common wealth from taxes as a balm from Gilead. Obama & Co. are intent to propagandize this President as the Prince of Peace, so earn the title.
Deus ex machina, TAX CUTS! Avoid blimping beyond proportion into self destructive oblivion.
From Rush’s genius, Obama has the opportunity to forge our nation’s economic recovery, spreading the wealth of employment and fiscal security as required for our survival. Has Obama the WILL to accept and work from the BALANCED PERSPECTIVE that Limbaugh extends as an olive branch? Or will Obama prove AGAIN the national ruin from partisanship, just another corrupt and opportunistic carpetbagger without sensibilities for OUR nation as a whole? Obama has the solution handed to him on a silver platter, and to accept it grants grace in the eyes of sensible opponents. To rebuff truth in order to persist in darkness does no good, to resist truth with contempt as if a Trojan Horse. Refusing a good cure at a crucial moment because you didn’t invent it yourself won’t help. Insisting upon re-inventing the wheel in order to get ahead is wasteful of precious time, energy and lives whose prosperity is depleted through the insistence of ignorance.
E PLURIBUS UNUM. I shudder at the revisionist intent to usurp our motto’s integrity, removing unification via liberty, supplanted with coercive tyranny to obey THE ONE.
maverick muse on January 29, 2009 at 9:10 AM
e-pirate on January 29, 2009 at 8:50 AM
Why aren’t you singing the “Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy” song this morning? The House passed the Porkalicious Bill. Oh, I know. It’s because the House Republicans grew a spine and rejected the b.s., and this bill has the potential to be a complete failure under full ownership of the Democratic Party.
And now Rush publishes a bi-partisan proposal in the WSJ that makes your elected officials look like a bunch of Partisan Hacks. The first 100 days of the new administration aren’t going very smoothly, are they?
kingsjester on January 29, 2009 at 9:11 AM
I agree with the difficulty you suggest. However, they don’t seem to bother Mr. Obama. Obama wants all spending, Rush wants all tax cuts. Obama gives in to get some Rep. cover, Rush gives in because Obama already has the votes. This is just an argument around the margins. Rush is using the power of his bully pulpit to adjust the percentages somewhat.
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 9:12 AM
All I know is that a tax cut would stimulate me a lot more than knowing government workers are going to get brand new shiny vehicles. And this may sound stupid, but how can there still be people out there who don’t know how STDs are transmitted? Do we need millions of dollars to tell them, or are we just going to buy them condoms?
scalleywag on January 29, 2009 at 9:13 AM
Rush is using the power of his bully pulpit to adjust the percentages somewhat.
Rush is using his bully pulpit to adjust the percentages somewhat and then act like reinvented the wheel, while making a ridiculous proposal that we can “judge” which portion actually worked if the economy got back on its feet.
Tom_Shipley on January 29, 2009 at 9:14 AM
Yeah, Rush is a smart cookie. As for reasoning with Dems, it only works if you don’t employ logic, and agree at the start to agree. Then they’re pussycats.
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 9:14 AM
Congressman Gingrey goes to Canossa and apologizes for what he said about Rush, Eric Cantor later in the same day goes on Rush’s program and basically gets the lowdown on the ‘schizophrenic’ Obama (audio clips proving Obama speaks out of the both sides of his mouth)and what American conservatives think of The Messiah’s ‘stimulus package’ and later in the day not one Republican House member is brave enought to hitch their wagon to The Messiah’s coattails. Rush has spoken and delivered; Ronald Reagan would have been so proud. Bring on Sarah Palin!
technopeasant on January 29, 2009 at 9:15 AM
I’m stealing that.
Johan Klaus on January 29, 2009 at 9:15 AM
Palin/Limbaugh in 2012?
Hell, at this rate it will be Limbaugh/Palin.
He can’t afford the pay cut.
I R A Darth Aggie on January 29, 2009 at 9:16 AM
But if we/Rush can’t “judge” which produced what results, why is Obama employing both? He won’t be able to tell either. Seems like a lack of courage of his convictions.
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 9:16 AM
But if we/Rush can’t “judge” which produced what results, why is Obama employing both?
Because he feels a combination of the two will work. He’s not suggesting that one will work while the other won’t. Rush obviously doesn’t think putting federal money into the private sector will help boost the economy. He’s proposing we do both so that we can see which will actually work. Which is just plain dumb.
Tom_Shipley on January 29, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Chess match.
Johan Klaus on January 29, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Hey, Republicans…. you know that vote for the head of the RNC? I suggest 168 votes for Rush…. Landslide victories would then occur for the “Conservative” Republican Party.
suzyk on January 29, 2009 at 9:20 AM
“and 1% voted for wackos. Give that 1% to President Obama.”
What’s he REALLY saying here?
heh
artist on January 29, 2009 at 9:20 AM
Obama can’t compete with 4 hours everyday…Rush has been in “office” for decades, Obama, weeks.
Actually Rush’s idea (modified to the 60/40) is so good, except for him to choose. If he would have said a “panel” of republicans it would have more legs.
Obama will just say his plan incorporates incentives also…but Obama can’t afford dialog with Rush.
right2bright on January 29, 2009 at 9:20 AM
By golly, you are right, sort of!
The election decided which party would comprise the majority… however, since there is actually a strong statistical number of opposition party representation (remember, this is the important part, they REPRESENT us) … those Americans should have some consideration…. YES or NO??
Since Rush is an American, should expect some representation in the Federal govt (remember the revolutionary war in the 1770′s, the lack of representation is what kind of started that) AND has an idea…
Why should he not be taken seriously?
How does his job as a successful business man (as a radio host) disqualify consideration of his idea?
FLKraKa on January 29, 2009 at 9:21 AM
Tom Shipley on January 29, 2009 at 9:18 AM
technopeasant on January 29, 2009 at 9:22 AM
What you call dumb is how scientific research should be conducted and how progress in medicine is attained. Have you ever heard of giving patients a placebo vs giving patients the ‘real goods’ to determine if something works or not?
Yes, but they don’t give both the placebo and “real goods” to the same patient.
Tom_Shipley on January 29, 2009 at 9:23 AM
They both won’t work together to accomplish one goal. What is being unsaid here is that the goals are not the same. Perhaps Rush needs to make more clear to his audience what the consequences of Keynesian stimulus are–to grow government and government control over the economy, both indirectly and as employer of last resort. There’s a philosophical argument here, socialism vs. capitalism. Keynes is the socialist’s best friend. The only thing that we can guarantee will happen if both “stimuli” are applied is that the US economy will become more socialistic.
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 9:23 AM
You’re just plain stupid to think Obama would accept a plan with Rush. Rush is just pointing out the empty suit Obama.
Obama stepped into this trap , all by himself.
the_nile on January 29, 2009 at 9:25 AM
You’re describing a party-oriented, Euro-style parliamentary system – you know, the cr@ppy kind of government. We have a totally different form of government, thanks to our Founders. Get a clue. Read the Constitution some day.
progressoverpeace on January 29, 2009 at 9:26 AM
First of all, Tom, that “federal” money is actually taxpayer money, it is us workers’ money. If the government at all levels takes less of my money, that I have worked for, then I have more of my own money to 1) spend, which immediately stimulates the economy or 2) save, allowing banks to lend it out for investments.
Rush is dong the 54-46 split because “elections have consequences,” the Dems won and so they get to spend the bigger share their way. But as most of the spending is going to be down the road, 2010, 2011 and beyond, how does that stimulate the economy today.
Rush would prefer to cut government spending and cut taxes.
rbj on January 29, 2009 at 9:28 AM
Oh for God sake, shut the hell up! Rush is right, his plan WOULD get America back on track, The Messiahs won’t!
He was making a point that was lost on idiots like you. Obama’s plan will KILL America for years, it must be countered. Period… Rush is right, you are a moron.
Real Conservatism works EVERY SINGLE TIME IT’S FULLY TRIED!
Mark Garnett on January 29, 2009 at 9:29 AM
They are interviewing Rush on CNBC within the next hour. (so they say)
genso on January 29, 2009 at 9:30 AM
You’re describing a party-oriented, Euro-style parliamentary system – you know, the cr@ppy kind of government. – Prog
The kind that always fails, falls and needs to be replaced. Lucky for us The Founders had already seen that movie and didn’t wanna live the sequel.
Tony737 on January 29, 2009 at 9:30 AM
HEY RUSH–GO STEELERS!!
(YOU FREE NEXT WEEKEND? I AM.)
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 9:32 AM
Look folks, 2009 is going to suck financially and we will see deflation this year and in 2010, followed by hyperinflation then another mini recession…thanks BO and the marxist dems in control.
Just wait till a loaf of bread costs 5-10 dollars, and it will all happen under BO’s watch. We are looking at a one term president here and possibly will see another “Reagan” type revolution. True, it will suck while we are going through it, but intestinal fortitude is required.
When you boil it all down, people vote with their wallets, and I think that there are going to be some very disillusioned BO accolites in the near future. Maybe some will learn from the experience, and some won’t, however, being sadder but wiser isn’t a bad thing.
Pulchritudinous Patriot on January 29, 2009 at 9:34 AM
Yep. But Democrats dream of us changing to the Euro system. In fact, many of them are dumb enough to think that we do have the same sort of system. That’s why the Dems had those “no-confidence” votes against Bush, which cracked me up. They were playing at “bringing down a government”, when that has no meaning in our system, at all. But it the idiot left happy and allowed them to really sympathize with Europe. Someone needs to explain to Dems the differences in our systems, though it will almost surely go over their heads.
progressoverpeace on January 29, 2009 at 9:34 AM
More charts less chatter and the public can decide when they see the facts.
MSGTAS on January 29, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Well, considering what the Republicans have done so far……
Johan Klaus on January 29, 2009 at 9:37 AM
The “tax cuts” in Obama’s package are not directed to those who actually pay the bulk of the taxes. He’s fond of throwing out the *tax cuts for 95% of families* crap, but when a sizeable portion of that 95% has a zero tax burden, and a majority of what’s left has a minimal tax burden as compared to the top 5%, the actual cuts are statistically meaningless.
What would have put the economic blender on puree is a year-long payroll tax holiday, not some illusory tax credits masquerading as cuts.
JohnTant on January 29, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Now, come on, the HA powers that be love these posts because they count on us to make reasoned arguments, with logical statements that help educate those who have somehow been less fortunate in their educational upbringing.
Otherwise, Ed would have to do it or his posts would take up an entire web page.
FLKraKa on January 29, 2009 at 9:38 AM
What’s a 7 letter word starting with “W” and ending in “e” that means giving “refunds” to non-tax payers?
JiangxiDad on January 29, 2009 at 9:40 AM
If we really learned, Mr. Obama would still be a senator.
Johan Klaus on January 29, 2009 at 9:42 AM
The market is down today. On CNBC, some are saying it is due to the disappointment that this stimulus package was passed. More fuel for Rush’s isea.
genso on January 29, 2009 at 9:42 AM
idea
genso on January 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Rush on CNBC at 10:50
genso on January 29, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Good morning Mr. Shipley,
Rush is not alone with this premise. The problem is this government is broke. There is NO FEDERAL MONEY to give that is not foreign backed paper that adds to our national debt. While I do agree that the ability to measure which plan worked is questionable, how many trillions in fake money will it take for Obama’s plan to work? If the intention was for this “stimulus” to save and create jobs, the House Democrats and Obama have failed miserably and they know it. No nation can incur this debt level and recover.
Rovin on January 29, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Someone needs to explain to Dems the differences in our systems … – Prog
We used to have something in this country called “Civics Class” but the liberal teachers unions got rid of that for three reasons: 1)To dumb down our citizens and make them easier to control 2)To ensure a future socialist president 3)To make room for Diversity 101.
Tony737 on January 29, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Rush will be on CNBC today at 10:50 AM EST.
technopeasant on January 29, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Genius.
batterup on January 29, 2009 at 9:46 AM
I love Rushbo and I agree with his call for slashed corporate tax rates, but his 54/46 plan is intended to be provocative and is laughably wrong as policy. The left is deceitfully raiding the treasury with
taxbankrupt and spend patronage that does nothing for our growing unemployed ranks. The right needs to disassociate from new spending and devote the next 2 years to condemning the deceit and promoting growth via tax incentives. If the GOP participates in the spending, why would the electorate turn to them as a better alternative?Mark30339 on January 29, 2009 at 9:47 AM
We could always do like Mexico did, and move the decimal point over a few places.
Johan Klaus on January 29, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Shipley,
Face it, Obama owns this pork package and it’s going to hurt for decades to come. Obama’s only motive for this crime of a scam is to feed the very organizations that contributed to his campaign, and buy what he believes will be an unbeatable amount of dependent voters. Your party will be exposed once again for exactly what they are.
Another loser as a result of this pork package will be the MSM for it’s failure to report the details contained.
Keemo on January 29, 2009 at 9:49 AM
I’m STILL under the impression the the plan Rush outlined was simply to point out to wavering RINO’s, Repugs and “moderates” that REAGAN CONSERVATISM WORKS EVERY TIME IT’S TRIED and socilism has FAILED every single time it’s tried. He was giving cover to Republicans to vote NO, he hepled them “grow a set” and “butch up Sally”. He made points that they can use in the MSM, he turned around the discussion in the MSM. He has put Queen Nancy and King Harry along with The Messiah on the defensive ALREADY! A mere eight days and The One, the True Leader is spanking Nancy and telling her to take crap out of the bill, using up so called “political capitol” on this socilist bill of pork… Rush got people talking AND looking at the prok, at the numbers… But it’s NOT ENOUGH to point out the idiots on the left, you need a BETTER answer… Rush is and was that answer… HIS plan WOULD help and Americans and the Messiah know it, and it SCARES THEM TO DEATH!
Mark Garnett on January 29, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Boy King called out Da Man and he gonna get Bi… Slapped for it!
dhunter on January 29, 2009 at 9:56 AM
No Limbaugh/whoever 2012.
He’s better off right where he’s at. He does a lot more for small govt than anyone else right now.
Let’s do the split! Then conservatives will have something to wave in the Left’s face the next go round of stupidity.
Badger40 on January 29, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Its a political compromise to an economic situation and a pretty bad one at that.
Cutting taxes and increasing spending is exactly what George W Bush was doing the entire time he was in office.
Not a good idea.
bingsha on January 29, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Right on!
rplat on January 29, 2009 at 9:58 AM
Ahh…creative accounting. Isn’t that one of the things that got us into this?
Badger40 on January 29, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Improving on Rush
I like the idea, but his numbers need a minor tweak. Specifically, Obama et al only got about 33% of the total eligible vote – and once we adjust for that we get:
1 – 33% pork spending
2 – 28% in corporate tax cuts applicable only to American earnings;
3 – and a 38% reduction in total “spending.”
Meaning that the nominal total falls to $550E9 and overall damage is minimized.
Paul Murphy on January 29, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »