Limbaugh calling out Republicans?

[witness23]

Listening to him right now going off on the Tea Party and Republicans right now about the omnibus bill. I must say I'm impressed. It is not often you hear him call out his cohorts. Before anyone comes in claiming that he does it all the time, he doesn't, I listen to him almost everyday, so save your breath.

What this says loud and clear is that Limbaugh knows this will stop any momentum the Republicans had after the elections.

 

[witness23]

Oh well, back to reality. Limbaugh is telling a 51 year old unemployed man that President Obama is the one who wrecked our economy and why he is still unemployed.

 

[davekc]

It is good to see Limbaugh going after the Republicans on these goofy earmarks. As far as the economy, Bush's record isn't bad until you look at the last two years. So yes, Bush trashed the economy and Obama continues to make it worse.

 

[muttly]

Oh well, back to reality. Limbaugh is telling a 51 year old unemployed man that President Obama is the one who wrecked our economy and why he is still unemployed.

So Rush is speaking factually right?

 

[muttly]

It is good to see Limbaugh going after the Republicans on these goofy earmarks. As far as the economy, Bush's record isn't bad until you look at the last two years. So yes, Bush trashed the economy and Obama continues to make it worse.

Yes the last two years of Bush weren't great,although the democrats controlled the house and senate for those two .

 

[davekc]

Yes the last two years of Bush weren't great,although the democrats controlled the house and senate for those two .

It was pretty much gridlock on everything.

 

[witness23]

It is good to see Limbaugh going after the Republicans on these goofy earmarks.

I just don't get it. The Republicans could've shown the American people that they are serious about earmark reform and being deficit conscious and listening to us. I really thought the pendulum was going to swing back towards the center and actually see some reform. In my opinion, these Republicans are no different than they were during the Bush years.

If it was me, I would let the tax cuts expire, cut spending, crack down on corruption, and make it so you could only vote on individual bills, one at a time.

As far as the economy, Bush's record isn't bad until you look at the last two years. So yes, Bush trashed the economy and Obama continues to make it worse.

C'mon......last two years? hmmmm....are you saying that because it was a Democratic Congress? Bush had the majority in Congress until 2007 and a split(50/50) in the Senate. I wouldn't agree with you on your assesment of his record prior to 2007. I have a problem with Bush's economic policies because he lowered taxes and didn't change Washingtons spending habits and crack down a corruption.

I don't think President Obama has made it worse, but he hasn't done anything different than Bush either. He hasn't even been in office for 2 years, I'm still crossing my fingers that he is able to do some of things he's promised.

 

[davekc]

I just don't get it. The Republicans could've shown the American people that they are serious about earmark reform and being deficit conscious and listening to us. I really thought the pendulum was going to swing back towards the center and actually see some reform. In my opinion, these Republicans are no different than they were during the Bush years.

If it was me, I would let the tax cuts expire, cut spending, crack down on corruption, and make it so you could only vote on individual bills, one at a time.



C'mon......last two years? hmmmm....are you saying that because it was a Democratic Congress? Bush had the majority in Congress until 2007 and a split(50/50) in the Senate. I wouldn't agree with you on your assesment of his record prior to 2007. I have a problem with Bush's economic policies because he lowered taxes and didn't change Washingtons spending habits and crack down a corruption.

I don't think President Obama has made it worse, but he hasn't done anything different than Bush either. He hasn't even been in office for 2 years, I'm still crossing my fingers that he is able to do some of things he's promised.

There is always hope, but up to this point he hasn't delivered on anything as far as I am concerned except outspending any past president in history.

 

[Turtle]

As far as the economy, Bush's record isn't bad until you look at the last two years.

I first read that and thought you were talking about the two most recent years, this one and last year. You know, the two years Obama has been in charge, well, since Obama has blamed Bush for everything as it is.

 

[Pilgrim]

If it was me, I would let the tax cuts expire, cut spending, crack down on corruption, and make it so you could only vote on individual bills, one at a time.

Why would you want to impose a huge increase in taxes on the American public with the economy still in recession and unemployment hovering just below 10%? Cut spending - agreed, we need a big dose of that. Crack down on corruption - with politicians - good luck. Getting the Congress to only vote on one bill at a time - they have to decide to do that to themselves, and I don't see this bunch doing it.

I don't think President Obama has made it worse, but he hasn't done anything different than Bush either. He hasn't even been in office for 2 years, I'm still crossing my fingers that he is able to do some of things he's promised.

He's done a LOT of things different than Bush, not the least of which is his promotion of the obscene level of spending that is way beyond that of the Bush years, alienating nearly every traditional ally we have on the planet and cramming a socialized health care plan down the collective throats of the American people. Unfortunately, he's delivered on a fair amount of his campaign promises - but there's still hope a lot of it can be repealed.

 

[davekc]

I first read that and thought you were talking about the two most recent years, this one and last year. You know, the two years Obama has been in charge, well, since Obama has blamed Bush for everything as it is.

Yes.....collectively four years of total madness.

 

[witness23]

Why would you want to impose a huge increase in taxes on the American public with the economy still in recession and unemployment hovering just below 10%?

Because that's what they were supposed to do, that's why the thax cuts were able to pass in the first place, because they weren't paid for and still aren't paid for. Extending them will only add more to the deficit. Bush's tax cuts were set to expire on Jan.1st. and that is what should happen. The experiment is over, we had 8 years of taxes were they are, and we have had one of the worst economies in our history. Who knows how things would be today if Bush would've cut spending along with the tax cuts, but he didn't, so here we aren doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. I am not convinced that letting the tax cuts expire for those making over $200 & $250,000 will make a bit of difference in the economy or for new hires. You see, corporations are making record profits in the last few years. With all the cutbacks, lay-offs and firings, guess what, these companies are still functioning and functioning at great efficiency with less personal. You see, people have tightened their belts, made sacrifices, got rid of people that shouldn't have been there in the first place(cut out the fat if you will), saved money; all the things a responsible person or company should do, right? I feel as if we are going thru a correction period if you will. We have a hang-over, but all hang-over's go away as long as you don't go back to doing the very thing that gave you the hang-over in the first place.

Let's look at the money part. Every time you turn around you here politicians, media, financial experts and talking heads saying that people aren't spending money! We need people to spend, spend, spend......wtf!!


Oh know, heaven's too Betsy! People just might be saving there money and being responsible and going back to basics. What got us in this mess in the first place? Spending and borrowing money on things we couldn't afford or pay back. What are we wanting our Government to stop doing? Spending and borrowing money. What happens when you save money for something you want? Guess what, you spend it on that item you saved for when you have the money . It's called being responsible. And in my opinion, that is what most Americans and companies are doing right now.

Let's look at the jobs. Corporations are sitting on piles of cash right now. Banks aren't lending to people that shouldn't be getting money (as it should be). So recovery is going to be slow. On top of that, we do not manufacture anything anymore, which used to be one of your biggest job creator's we had. Unless we start manufactoring more things, then we need to find different area's in the job market to put people back to work. Without manufactoring, creating jobs will be difficult and slow.

Crack down on corruption - with politicians - good luck.

Let's not just include the politicians here. To cut down on corruption, it starts with us, the American people. It starts at the local level. It starts with big business and the men and women who run those organizations. Government and big business is a direct reflection of the American people as a whole. It might not reflect you personally but as a whole, like it or not, it does.

He's done a LOT of things different than Bush, not the least of which is his promotion of the obscene level of spending that is way beyond that of the Bush years

I do not see Obama much different than Bush when it comes to spending. They both have spent money we do not have. Bush spent it on the War. Obama is spending it on health care. Obama is just adding to the deficit and not paying for it just as Bush and other's that proceeded him. Business as usual in Washington.

alienating nearly every traditional ally we have on the planet and cramming a socialized health care plan down the collective throats of the American people.

Dude, turn off FoxNews, it's hampering your ability to think for yourself.

In order for things to change in Washington, our culture as a society has to change. The hard part is trying to convince people of that.

Maybe the way I am thinking is just too simplistic, but a lot of times making the simple changes are the hardest, but give you the best returns in the long run. Patience and Wisdom is the key.

 

[greg334]

Paid for?

Tax cuts don't get paid for.

This is really the problem, words are twisted to mean something they are not.

Taxes are the revenue source, not the spending outlet. If revenue is cut, then it is followed by a spending cut, not made up by taking away from somewhere else.

The proven fact seems to be the case that when taxes are cut, revenue goes up. In the case of the original tax adjustment from the Bush administration/congress, we were heading into a recession and needed to boast the economy - they worked to a point. What else happened was a massive spending increase that ended up needing more revenue to sustain it.

SO here comes Obama and the democrats, they are screaming that these tax cuts favor the rich, "we are giving the rich more money" and all that BS. They are trying to blame on class for the countries problems and it comes all down to spending.

So back to paying for the tax provision renewal

It is simpler to cut spending than it is to try to raise taxes. We need to do what England has done but take it a step further. We need to cut across the entire board except the military 10% out of the budget. Then we need to revoke a lot of the laws that allow collective bargaining with federal employment and then take a 10% cut in federal employees out of the system.

 

[witness23]

Paid for?

Tax cuts don't get paid for.

This is really the problem, words are twisted to mean something they are not.

Taxes are the revenue source, not the spending outlet. If revenue is cut, then it is followed by a spending cut, not made up by taking away from somewhere else.

You are correct, but you must make the cuts in spending. They haven't done that, nothing has been cut from our spending budget. Where do you start?

The proven fact seems to be the case that when taxes are cut, revenue goes up.

Huh? Then what happened to the last 8 years? You can say the war and the mortgage crisis hampered any benefits that might have been seen, but I would respectfully disagree. You are a proponent of the "trickle down" theory I take it? Well, you got another 2 years to see if that fact is proven.

Here are some things to ponder:

Link: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/01/ten-myths-about-the-bush-tax-cuts

In the case of the original tax adjustment from the Bush administration/congress, we were heading into a recession and needed to boast the economy -

Care to share where you got that infromation?

they worked to a point. What else happened was a massive spending increase that ended up needing more revenue to sustain it.

There in lies the problem. What do you do when that happens? You raise taxes to pay for the spending increase. What you do is not spend more than what you are budgeted for. If you do, it better be for a good reason and you better have a plan to pay back the money.

SO here comes Obama and the democrats, they are screaming that these tax cuts favor the rich, "we are giving the rich more money" and all that BS. They are trying to blame on class for the countries problems and it comes all down to spending.

I don't know if I would catergorize the argument such as you did. I really didn't hear them screaming class warfare. I heard Beck, Limbaugh, Hannitty and FoxNews claiming that is what he is doing. In listening to the politicians, I heard that taxes have been to low and spending to high. I think what Obama and the Democrats wanted to do is let the tax provisions expire for those over $200 & 250,000, then work on cutting spending in other area's. But we'll never know if that is what he intended or not, since he passed the tax bill as it is.

It is simpler to cut spending than it is to try to raise taxes. We need to do what England has done but take it a step further. We need to cut across the entire board except the military 10% out of the budget.

I agree. But I'm not real sure when you say, "cut across the board". Are you saying to make 10% cuts across the board? And leave military spending alone?

I would implement the course that the Fiscal Commissions Report Obama had put together, in place as soon as possible. I don't agree with everything, but you are not going to make everyone happy. The people are ready for this but the politicians due not have the balls to start making these cuts. I think confidence would boil over with the American people if the politicians would just do what has to be done. Cut spending and get taxes to help pay down the deficit.

 

[greg334]

You are correct, but you must make the cuts in spending. They haven't done that, nothing has been cut from our spending budget. Where do you start?

It starts with serious cuts, no forward COLA, no budgetary discretionary funding increases, but serious cuts.

Huh? Then what happened to the last 8 years? You can say the war and the mortgage crisis hampered any benefits that might have been seen, but I would respectfully disagree. You are a proponent of the "trickle down" theory I take it? Well, you got another 2 years to see if that fact is proven.

Actually the last 8 years was not a situation that could be worked out by using theories. The 'mortgage crisis', the other factors involved outside of military spending have more to do with the medling of the congress and especially the lack of enforcement of the regulations (Country Wide ring a bell?) than did the taxes and the revenue generated by the taxes.

Here are some things to ponder:

Link: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/01/ten-myths-about-the-bush-tax-cuts

It seems to back what I said

The proven fact seems to be the case that when taxes are cut, revenue goes up.

Care to share where you got that infromation?

Well let's see... the recession of 2001 is a good start, this is after the Dot-Com bubble died, but for some reason many revised their estimation when it started to sometime in early-mid 2000 just before the Dot-Com bubble deflated.

There in lies the problem. What do you do when that happens? You raise taxes to pay for the spending increase. What you do is not spend more than what you are budgeted for. If you do, it better be for a good reason and you better have a plan to pay back the money.

NO you cut spending. It is a leader who can do this, so for the last 55 years, we have had no leader strong enough to do that.

We should be looking at the Jackson administration for guidance, not the Clinton or Reagan.

I don't know if I would catergorize the argument such as you did. I really didn't hear them screaming class warfare. I heard Beck, Limbaugh, Hannitty and FoxNews claiming that is what he is doing. In listening to the politicians, I heard that taxes have been to low and spending to high. I think what Obama and the Democrats wanted to do is let the tax provisions expire for those over $200 & 250,000, then work on cutting spending in other area's. But we'll never know if that is what he intended or not, since he passed the tax bill as it is.

But see here is the problem, the rich do not pay income taxes. Everyone got all giddy when Buffet said "I pay less in taxes than my secritary" and he was telling the truth while explaining why taxes should be raised. The point is that these is a class of people who are considered rich but no where near rich, those are people making under a million. It is that group that actually does more good with their money than say the group above them. You can call this trickle down but in reality it has never been the case that poor people provide the revenue to run the country at any time in any history. They don't hire, they don't invest but rather they receive. The same goes for the middle class who is not the auto worker but the auto worker and the teacher, the professor and the engineer. The only thing between the middle class of the past and present, it did not include factory workers. Class matters because many of the "bright people" in our society looks at other countries, like France and asks why are we not like them while telling us our system doesn't work.

I agree. But I'm not real sure when you say, "cut across the board". Are you saying to make 10% cuts across the board? And leave military spending alone?

Yes right across the board - from Foreign Aid to Social Security to the FBI/CIA. Leave the military alone for now - we are fighting a war.

It would have to happen with a serious reduction in federal payroll and the elimination of the federal worker's right to have collective bargaining - they don't work for a union but for the people and if we don't need them, then they are out of a job.

The entitlements need to be defunded and have a sunset date to them - all of them. I do not think in my lifetime I will end up with anything because of the mis-management of the programs and the abuse that goes on. Social Security was good programs when they were left untouched but the addition to these little programs have pretty much killed it. The Great Society and those programs were all an experiment that failed within 5 years and should have ended in the 70's.

I would implement the course that the Fiscal Commissions Report Obama had put together, in place as soon as possible. I don't agree with everything, but you are not going to make everyone happy. The people are ready for this but the politicians due not have the balls to start making these cuts. I think confidence would boil over with the American people if the politicians would just do what has to be done. Cut spending and get taxes to help pay down the deficit.

Actually the commission report as much as a bunch are jumping for joy over it, presents a problem - the people who created it are the same ones who created the mess in the first place. I would think instead of coming up with 'share solutions' where I have to pay more taxes that I can't afford, the best way is to just cut across the board. IT is painful but simple, it would work. Our biggest problem is fiscal accountability and responsibility - not a problem with the American citizen being unable to foot the bill.

 

[Pilgrim]

Because that's what they were supposed to do, that's why the thax cuts were able to pass in the first place, because they weren't paid for and still aren't paid for. Extending them will only add more to the deficit. Bush's tax cuts were set to expire on Jan.1st. and that is what should happen.

There is so much wrong in that paragraph it boggles the mind. First of all, the tax cuts weren't "meant to expire". The only way Bush got those cuts through Congress was to make them "temporary" so he could get enough support for them to pass. Even Obama admits that letting them expire in the middle of this recession would be disastrous.

The experiment is over, we had 8 years of taxes were they are, and we have had one of the worst economies in our history.

Patently absurd - read your own article:

Ten Myths About the Bush Tax Cuts | The Heritage Foundation

"Myth #9: The Bush tax cuts have not helped the economy.
Fact: The economy responded strongly to the 2003 tax cuts."

The wheels fell off because of the excessive spending (we agree on that) plus the lack of regulation on the sub-prime mortgage industry; this has been discussed and explained ad nauseum in this forum and others, and it's undeniable that the Democrats blocked the necessary controls that the GOP wanted to put in place.

I do not see Obama much different than Bush when it comes to spending. They both have spent money we do not have. Bush spent it on the War. Obama is spending it on health care. Obama is just adding to the deficit and not paying for it just as Bush and other's that proceeded him. Business as usual in Washington.

Another absurd statement - see below:

Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

As much of a big spender that Bush and the GOP Congress were, they pale in comparison to Obama and the Pelosi-Reid Democrats. Remember, the Dems have been in control of Congress since the last two years of Bush's term. Is it mere coincidence that the economy started to weaken about the same time they took control of the purse strings? It's been obvious that since Obama took office the economic management of the nation's economy has been ineffective to say the least.

Dude, turn off FoxNews, it's hampering your ability to think for yourself.

Fox has nothing to do with the fact that this president has alienated the British, the Israelis, the French and the Germans with his bungling foreign policy and arrogant attitude. Combine that with his kowtowing to the Chinese, the Saudis and Hugo Chavez and his lax policies in dealing with Iran while they steadily go nuclear. One has only to look at the results of his efforts to bring the Olympics to Chicago to see how effective he is with foreign affairs. So far we've been lucky that there's been no major incident between the Palestinians or Iran, and Israel. But that's probably due to Netanyahu being the PM now. It's kind of a helpless feeling just sitting back and watching Iran develop nuclear weapons and at the same time wonder what the govt. of Pakistan will be like in 2012. My point in going into this subject matter is that if armed conflict breaks out with Iran, the military spending that will be necessary for that war will be pocket change compared to Iraq. Put that on top of the ObamaCare deficits and where do you think the US economy will be then?

 

[greg334]

We never had a real tax revenue surplus, the last time was in the 60's. What we had was an estimation going into 2000.

 

[layoutshooter]

Start cutting spending, in REAL money. Start by removing all spending that is not either paid for by a specific tax, like Pittman/Robison, OR, allowed for in the Constitution. Get rid of social spending, education, health care, aid to other countries.