Rush Limbaugh...Defacto leader of the GOP. [Archive] - Debate Policy

bullypulpit

03-03-2009, 08:00 AM

First Michael Steele takes Rush Limbaugh to the woodshed...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/W4EWB0Wc4wQ&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/W4EWB0Wc4wQ&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Then kisses Limbaugh's ass...

<blockquote>“My intent was not to go after Rush – I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh,” Steele said in a telephone interview. “I was maybe a little bit inarticulate. … There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership.” (…)

“I went back at that tape and I realized words that I said weren’t what I was thinking,” Steele said. “It was one of those things where I thinking I was saying one thing, and it came out differently. What I was trying to say was a lot of people … want to make Rush the scapegoat, the bogeyman, and he’s not.” - RNC Chairman, Michael Steele</blockquote>

It would appear that the lunatic fringe of the GOP has become its mainstream when the titular leader of the GOP, Michael Steele plays "Steppin' Fetchit" to the likes of Rush Limbaugh.

red states rule

03-03-2009, 08:04 AM

Classact

03-03-2009, 09:18 AM

Here is an excellent article that explains this mess http://townhall.com/columnists/DavidLimbaugh/2009/03/03/this_is_way_bigger_than_rush

bullypulpit

03-03-2009, 09:50 AM

red states rule

03-03-2009, 09:54 AM

As usual, you've both evaded the point.

The intellectual bankruptcy of the GOP and the America conservative movement is clearly highlighted in the GOP leadership kowtowing to a drug addled college drop-out.

Don't forget your helmets when you get on the short bus.

We answered your questions Bully - unlike you who has a history of running away from threads when the facts get to you

Rush may accurately voice Conservative viewpoints - but he is not the face of the GOP just because libs say he is. he's not the face of the GOP until the GOP puts him in that position - which they have not done.

Given the tanking Dow, increasing deficits, massive spending increases, more government welfare, and rising unemployment - are you feeling stimulated Bully?

Are you enjoying the change?

Why not talk about Obama's failing policies and not a radio talk show host who gets under your skin by pointing out the failure of liberalism

Classact

03-03-2009, 09:55 AM

As usual, you've both evaded the point.

The intellectual bankruptcy of the GOP and the America conservative movement is clearly highlighted in the GOP leadership kowtowing to a drug addled college drop-out.

Don't forget your helmets when you get on the short bus.I'll give you odds that there are a large number of Blue Dog Conservative Democrats that are worried to death about 2010 as Rush continues to be brought into the limelight... Blue Dogs voters listen to Rush and Rush is making a lot of sense... as days pass 100% of Republicans will divorce Obama and then the Blue Dogs followers will follow as Obama wrecks the economy. Watch the interest rates go up and watch Rush say told you so dumbasses!

red states rule

03-03-2009, 09:57 AM

I'll give you odds that there are a large number of Blue Dog Conservative Democrats that are worried to death about 2010 as Rush continues to be brought into the limelight... Blue Dogs voters listen to Rush and Rush is making a lot of sense... as days pass 100% of Republicans will divorce Obama and then the Blue Dogs followers will follow as Obama wrecks the economy. Watch the interest rates go up and watch Rush say told you so dumbasses!

If Obama's policies keep delivering the current levels of change we could see a bigger shift in power then we saw in 1994

Then Bully can play the race card on a daily basis again, and blame Rush for drowning out the Dems message

That is if anyone can afford the power for their radio, or the batteries for them

PostmodernProphet

03-03-2009, 10:34 AM

red states rule

03-03-2009, 10:38 AM

Classact

03-03-2009, 10:47 AM

How does punishing the rich make anyone's life better?

Rush has asked this question several times before, and i am still waitnng for an answer

When Obama and the Dems take more of a successful persons income, how does that imporve the life a "poor" person? Does the poor person go to bed thinking "Damn I am glad Pres Obama screwed over those damn rich bastards"?America's longest war, the war on poverty. If Obama thinks poor people need more money why doesn't he just raise the minimum wage to $20 an hour and be done with it? He has the majority and law is law why involve the IRS just raise the damned minimum wage if that is the problem.

Jagger

03-03-2009, 06:52 PM

How does punishing the rich make anyone's life better? It makes my life better because by punishing me, a rich liberal Democrat, proportionally more than my less successful Republican neighbors, our great socialist republic can afford a military powerful enough to prevent foreign governments and others from unlawfully and unfairly seizing the foreign assets of the many companies I own stock in.

I have more to protect, therefore I have no objection to paying more taxes in proportion to those poor conservative Republicans who have so little to protect.

Progressive taxation has been one of the basic doctrines of capitalism since the time of Adam Smith.

PostmodernProphet

03-03-2009, 06:59 PM

.... of the many companies I own stock in. I have more to lose....

just keep supporting Obama, you'll lose the rest as well......he's only had a few months and he's already wiped out 40%......

Jagger

03-03-2009, 07:06 PM

just keep supporting Obama, you'll lose the rest as well......he's only had a few months and he's already wiped out 40%...... It is well established that Reaganomics is the root cause of our current economic problems. It will take some time, but the Bama will get us back on the right track.

Yurt

03-03-2009, 07:10 PM

It is well established that Reaganomics is the root cause of our current economic problems. It will take some time, but the Bama will get us back on the right track.

absolutely not true...

Kathianne

03-03-2009, 07:52 PM

It is well established that Reaganomics is the root cause of our current economic problems. It will take some time, but the Bama will get us back on the right track.

Got a link there, Squirt?

PostmodernProphet

03-03-2009, 08:14 PM

It is well established that Reaganomics is the root cause of our current economic problems. It will take some time, but the Bama will get us back on the right track.

"established"?.......by what kindergarten class.....

Immanuel

03-03-2009, 08:29 PM

It makes my life better because by punishing me, a rich liberal Democrat, proportionally more than my less successful Republican neighbors, our great socialist republic can afford a military powerful enough to prevent foreign governments and others from unlawfully and unfairly seizing the foreign assets of the many companies I own stock in.

I have more to protect, therefore I have no objection to paying more taxes in proportion to those poor conservative Republicans who have so little to protect.

Progressive taxation has been one of the basic doctrines of capitalism since the time of Adam Smith.

It is well established that Reaganomics is the root cause of our current economic problems. It will take some time, but the Bama will get us back on the right track.

Would you tell me what you think the right track is? I can hardly believe that you think governmental control of business, which would include your own, is what you mean is the right track. Maybe what you really mean by the right track would be is the government squashing your competition?

Immie

Jagger

03-03-2009, 10:20 PM

Got a link there, Squirt?

Just take my word for it, dude.

Kathianne

03-03-2009, 10:21 PM

Just take my word for it, dude.

Not happening, Missy.

PostmodernProphet

03-03-2009, 10:46 PM

Just take my word for it, dude.

lol.....

sgtdmski

03-04-2009, 05:18 AM

As usual, you've both evaded the point.

The intellectual bankruptcy of the GOP and the America conservative movement is clearly highlighted in the GOP leadership kowtowing to a drug addled college drop-out.

Don't forget your helmets when you get on the short bus.

Well for a college-drop out he is doing just as well as a few other college drop outs we all know: Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.

20 million listeners per week, giving 3 hours a day of live broadcast in which he puts his perspective out there and others listen and support him. And like Brett Favre he has overcome his addiction and still remains a threat to those who oppose him.

You have to love it when a mere entertainer is constantly touted as the head of the Republican party by members of the Democrat party. Why does Rush scare them so much if he is nothing more than a drug addled college drop out. All those Democrats in Congress with their college educations and law degress should have nothing to worry about right??????

dmk

sgtdmski

03-04-2009, 05:33 AM

Progressive taxation has been one of the basic doctrines of capitalism since the time of Adam Smith.

Adam Smith proposed four principles which went to identify and justified and fair tax. Those were:

1. "The subject of every State ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the State."

2. "The tax each individual is bound to pay ought to be certain, and not arbitrary. The time of payment, the manner of payment, and the quantity to be paid, ought all to be clear and plain to the contributor, and to ever other person."

3. "Every tax ought to be levied at the time, or in the manner in which it is most likely to be convenient for the contributor to pay it."

4. "Every tax ought to be so contrived as both to take out and to keep out of the pockets of the people as little as possible, over and above what it brings into the public treasury of the State."

While reading these principles it would seem that Adam Smith was in favor of a progressive tax system. However, he was not in favor of our the way in which our system is progressive. You see our progressive tax system is based upon the direct taxes on wages, something which Adam Smith opposed.

In all cases, a direct tax upon the wages of labour must, in the long run, occasion both a greater reduction in the rent of land, and a greater rise in the price of manufactured goods, than would have followed from a proper assessment of a sum equal to the produce of the tax, [levied] partly upon the rent of land, and partly upon consumable comodities

Smith progressive system was based upon the taxes on consumption and land. The more land you owned the more in taxes you paid. The same with the more you bought or consumed the more you paid. This was his idea of a progressive tax, it had nothing to do with the income tax in which ours is progressive.

Even if it did, you would quite clearly see that he supported the idea of everyone paying taxes, which again would not include our system for the simple fact that the bottom 50% of wage earners pay not taxes, so under Smith this would not be a progressive system.

dmk

sgtdmski

03-04-2009, 05:40 AM

Just take my word for it, dude.

Because I said so!!!!!!!

Some proof. More of the same, you cannot argue the facts so you make a statement a because you made it, it must be true.

We are not buying it, and thus you have no argument.

dmk

sgtdmski

03-04-2009, 05:40 AM

It is well established that Reaganomics is the root cause of our current economic problems. It will take some time, but the Bama will get us back on the right track.

Established by whom? Where is your support for this outrageous accusation?

Reaganomics led to 86 months of coninuous economic expansion. Despite the deficits caused by the military build up. But thanks to the military build up, the Soviet Union's economy crashed because they could not compete and thus it allowed Bill Clinton to actual reduce the cost being spent on the military which led to Clinton's supposed Budget surplus.

Had the cold war not ended, military spending would never have decreased under Clinton. Reaganomics forced the collapse of the Soviet economy by placing a burder upon them to compete with the United States in the military aresenals. They couldn't because their economy was already unable to support their people.

Nice try!!!!!! But all you have shown is that you can make a statement but not provide any support to prove that it actually is valid.

dmk

red states rule

03-04-2009, 07:00 AM

Well for a college-drop out he is doing just as well as a few other college drop outs we all know: Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.

20 million listeners per week, giving 3 hours a day of live broadcast in which he puts his perspective out there and others listen and support him. And like Brett Favre he has overcome his addiction and still remains a threat to those who oppose him.

You have to love it when a mere entertainer is constantly touted as the head of the Republican party by members of the Democrat party. Why does Rush scare them so much if he is nothing more than a drug addled college drop out. All those Democrats in Congress with their college educations and law degress should have nothing to worry about right??????

dmk

Moderates and RINO's who do not like Limbaugh and don't want "Obama to fail" are more concerned about their own standing in the liberal media, and being liked by Dems, then they are about the future of the country.

Which is why we have people like David Brooks lecturing us on how the "era of Reagan" is dead and how we need to become a mini version of the Dem party.

History repeats itself. These same kind of "conservatives/republicans" were running around in the 60s wanting us to become a lighter version of the Democrat party.

All I can say is "Keep up the good work Rush"

moderate democrat

03-04-2009, 07:38 AM

All I can say is "Keep up the good work Rush"

On this point, I couldn't agree with you more! I NEVER wish to silence Limbaugh. Let his talk and let LOTS of people listen. That can only be good for democracy.

red states rule

03-04-2009, 07:40 AM

On this point, I couldn't agree with you more! I NEVER wish to silence Limbaugh. Let his talk and let LOTS of people listen. That can only be good for democracy.

Then why is Obama, and his spokemen going after Rush?

Obama must pull out of this war at once. His goal of defeating conservative talk radio is only creating more and more followers. He is feeding the insurgency. Obama's War on Rush is a failure.

moderate democrat

03-04-2009, 07:42 AM

Then why is Obama, and his spokemen going after Rush?

Obama must pull out of this war at once. His goal of defeating conservative talk radio is only creating more and more followers. He is feeding the insurgency. Obama's War on Rush is a failure.

He doesn't want to defeat Rush. He wants to elevate Rush. He WANTS America to see Rush Limbaugh as the face and the voice of the GOP. I think Team Obama is doing a great job of doing that. I thought it was hilarious yesterday when Gibbs said that he was surprised at how fast the head of the RNC had apologized to the head of the republican party.

red states rule

03-04-2009, 07:44 AM

moderate democrat

03-04-2009, 07:52 AM

Is that why the messaih ordered Republicans not to listen to Rush?

Rush is too big to fail. Socialism isn't.

how many people touch the seat of the park bench with the sign "wet paint"?:lol: Clearly... Obama and Gibbs have played Limbaugh and Steele like two fiddles. We WANT republicans to listen to Rush... honestly we do... and the BEST way to get ornery republicans to do something is to have a democrat tell them to do the exact opposite!:dance:

red states rule

03-04-2009, 07:55 AM

how many people touch the seat of the park bench with the sign "wet paint"?:lol: Clearly... Obama and Gibbs have played Limbaugh and Steele like two fiddles. We WANT republicans to listen to Rush... honestly we do... and the BEST way to get ornery republicans to do something is to have a democrat tell them to do the exact opposite!:dance:

I don't think the dems obsessing over him is all that bad in of itself.

What I find more disturbing are the attempts to use him to distract from bad and failed policy. If Obama's plans were all that great, they'd stand on their own merits.

moderate democrat

03-04-2009, 07:58 AM

I don't think the dems obsessing over him is all that bad in of itself.

What I find more disturbing are the attempts to use him to distract from bad and failed policy. If Obama's plans were all that great, they'd stand on their own merits.

trust me: what YOU find disturbing is of little concern to me, and certainly not to the administration!:lol:
and the policy has not failed, simply because you want it to.

red states rule

03-04-2009, 08:02 AM

trust me: what YOU find disturbing is of little concern to me, and certainly not to the administration!:lol:
and the policy has not failed, simply because you want it to.

This has been Obama's Modus operandi from day one.

He did both of his elections, unapposed, because he took out the competition.

He's trying to do the same ahead of 2012. He fears conservatism, because real conservatism could stop him.

He wants to turn the country into one big liberal welfare state and only REAL conservatism can stop him.

Go Rush!

I do not have to hope his policies will fail - they are doing it all on their own without any help from me or anyone else

moderate democrat

03-04-2009, 08:22 AM

This has been Obama's Modus operandi from day one.

He did both of his elections, unapposed, because he took out the competition.
He's trying to do the same ahead of 2012. He fears conservatism, because real conservatism could stop him.

He wants to turn the country into one big liberal welfare state and only REAL conservatism can stop him.

Go Rush!

I do not have to hope his policies will fail - they are doing it all on their own without any help from me or anyone else

it is way too early to measure the success of a stimulus package which has just barely started to be implemented.

And are you saying that Obama won the election in 2008 UNOPPOSED?:lol:

red states rule

03-04-2009, 08:38 AM

it is way too early to measure the success of a stimulus package which has just barely started to be implemented.

And are you saying that Obama won the election in 2008 UNOPPOSED?:lol:

That is how Obama won his state Senate seat. He had his opponents removed from the ballot and ran unopposed

moderate democrat

03-04-2009, 08:46 AM

That is how Obama won his state Senate seat. He had his opponents removed from the ballot and ran unopposed

those opponents did not play by the rules.

He certainly pistol whipped your conservative golden boy Alan Keyes and then handed McCain his ass. I realize, in retrospect, that it might seem as if he won his last two elections unopposed, but what really happened was that the GOP had NOBODY that could hold a candle to him.:lol:

red states rule

03-04-2009, 08:50 AM

those opponents did not play by the rules.

He certainly pistol whipped your conservative golden boy Alan Keyes and then handed McCain his ass. I realize, in retrospect, that it might seem as if he won his last two elections unopposed, but what really happened was that the GOP had NOBODY that could hold a candle to him.:lol:

Like most libs, he used the liberal courts to get his way

Right now, we are seeing the results of Obama's policies and the change he is bringing the country

Obama showed his knowledge by saying the Dow is like a political tracking poll

moderate democrat

03-04-2009, 09:03 AM

Like most libs, he used the liberal courts to get his way

Right now, we are seeing the results of Obama's policies and the change he is bringing the country

Obama showed his knowledge by saying the Dow is like a political tracking poll

the liberal courts gave him the victory over Keyes?

The liberal courst gave him the victory over McCain?

whatever, koolaid boy.:laugh2:

did you see the latest WSJ poll about "direction of the country"? It's up to 41%....highest in YEARS!:lol:

red states rule

03-04-2009, 09:12 AM

the liberal courts gave him the victory over Keyes?

The liberal courst gave him the victory over McCain?

whatever, koolaid boy.:laugh2:

did you see the latest WSJ poll about "direction of the country"? It's up to 41%....highest in YEARS!:lol:

Did you read the page near the end of the poll? There were more Dems polled then Republicans - so NBC got the results they wanted - and you lap it up

Generally speaking, do you think of yourself as a Democrat, a Republican, an independent, or something
else? (IF "DEMOCRAT" OR "REPUBLICAN," Would you call yourself a strong
(Democrat/Republican) or not a very strong (Democrat/Republican)? (IF "INDEPENDENT,"
Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party, closer to the Democratic Party, or do you think of yourself
as strictly independent?
Strong Democrat ......................................... 23 [277]
Not very strong Democrat ........................... 8
Independent/lean Democrat ....................... 12
Strictly independent..................................... 20
Independent/lean Republican..................... 10
Not very strong Republican ........................ 7
Strong Republican....................................... 13
Other (VOL) ............................................... 4
Not sure .................................................. 3

moderate democrat

03-04-2009, 09:30 AM

Did you read the page near the end of the poll? There were more Dems polled then Republicans - so NBC got the results they wanted - and you lap it up

Generally speaking, do you think of yourself as a Democrat, a Republican, an independent, or something
else? (IF "DEMOCRAT" OR "REPUBLICAN," Would you call yourself a strong
(Democrat/Republican) or not a very strong (Democrat/Republican)? (IF "INDEPENDENT,"
Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party, closer to the Democratic Party, or do you think of yourself
as strictly independent?
Strong Democrat ......................................... 23 [277]
Not very strong Democrat ........................... 8
Independent/lean Democrat ....................... 12
Strictly independent..................................... 20
Independent/lean Republican..................... 10
Not very strong Republican ........................ 7
Strong Republican....................................... 13
Other (VOL) ............................................... 4
Not sure .................................................. 3

that is because there ARE more democrats than republicans...

the same poll gave the GOP their worst approval rating EVER. 26% positive approval! :lol:
but hey.... you can look at the polls and realize that your party is indeed out in the wilderness and needs to take steps to reconnect with the middle of america, or you can claim that the polls are biased. take your pick.:lol:

Jagger

03-04-2009, 09:58 AM

Reaganomics led to 86 months of coninuous economic expansion. How exactly did it do that?

Kathianne

03-05-2009, 06:37 AM

A reasonable response to MD's oft repeated question:

http://www.reason.com/news/show/132040.html

Nothing Personal, But I Hope You All Fail

What's wrong with rooting against our elected officials?

David Harsanyi | March 4, 2009

Is it inherently unpatriotic or immoral to want to see a president fail? After chewing over the larger implications of that vital question, I've come to a conclusion: I am a twisted human being. Thankfully, I'm not alone.

You see, when I'm not wasting time greedily praying to be rich, I plead with some higher power to sentence my middling local representatives to painful obscurity and professional failure. My congresswoman, for instance, carries an intellectual confidence so severely out of step with her skill set that the promise of disappointment, I trust, one day will bring me great joy.

If we can't look to our politicians to fulfill our yearly schadenfreude quota, whom can we trust? Which brings me to radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who recently, at a conservative conference, had the temerity to reiterate his desire that President Barack Obama "fail"—not the economy or nation, mind you, but the politician. Pundits across the nation went into apoplectic tizzy fits over such blasphemous and ugly thoughts....

red states rule

03-05-2009, 06:42 AM

Kathianne

03-05-2009, 06:47 AM

What is wrong with this picture?

Pres Obama and his spokespeople attack Rush - yet Obama will not sit down and speak to him when asked by Rush

Yet Pres Obama and his spokepeople say nothing bad about President: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - yet Obama will sit down and talk to him when asked by President: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

What's more confusing, since Obama et al have declared Rush to be the leader of the conservative movement, they have an obligation to do so.

red states rule

03-05-2009, 06:54 AM

What's more confusing, since Obama et al have declared Rush to be the leader of the conservative movement, they have an obligation to do so.

I thought Rush was irrelevent? "Just an entertainer"?

Obama must really be worried about him.

Kat, Rush isn't the face of anythig but his own show.

Rahm's position and opinion that Rush is the "face" of the Republican party is easier to argue against since Rush is a polarizing figure.

It also serves to soften up folks for the localization coming down the pike for radio, so in time, Dems can try to silence conservative voices like Rush, and Sean Hannity

Kathianne

03-05-2009, 06:58 AM

red states rule

03-05-2009, 07:01 AM

Thanks for straitening me out on that. One uses what one is 'given', this is, to quote my ex-governor, f'ing golden!

Kat, you are the last person that needs "straitening out"

The way the economy and Obama's policies are going - Obama needs something to distract the people and the liberal media

Rush is an easy strawman for the left to beat up on, and their followers eat it up.

PostmodernProphet

03-05-2009, 07:02 AM

those opponents did not play by the rules.

He certainly pistol whipped your conservative golden boy Alan Keyes and then handed McCain his ass. I realize, in retrospect, that it might seem as if he won his last two elections unopposed, but what really happened was that the GOP had NOBODY that could hold a candle to him.:lol:

/shrugs...so he won a seat in the Illinois legislature and accomplished nothing there.....and he won a seat in the US Congress and accomplished nothing there.....now he's won the presidency....and seeking to change things, will accomplish the destruction of 250 years of economic superiority......

moderate democrat

03-05-2009, 07:03 AM

I thought Rush was irrelevent? "Just an entertainer"?

Obama must really be worried about him.

Kat, Rush isn't the face of anythig but his own show.

Rahm's position and opinion that Rush is the "face" of the Republican party is easier to argue against since Rush is a polarizing figure.

It also serves to soften up folks for the localization coming down the pike for radio, so in time, Dems can try to silence conservative voices like Rush, and Sean Hannity

trust me...we do NOT want to "silence" Rush. We want him to continue to do exactly what he is doing and we want him to be heard by an ever larger audience. Everytime he says that he wants Obama's efforts to save the economy to fail, democrats love it.

As I said yesterday, there is no doubt that Rush solidifies the conservative base of the republican party. There is ALSO no doubt that he alienates moderates. There is also no doubt that he energizes the left. Republicans can go into the next election cycle with a rabidly loyal and solidified base, but that alone can't win them anything. The folks Rush chases away are more important to the republican party than the ones he brings closer to the fold, because they NEED those folks he chases away and they had the conservatives already.

Kathianne

03-05-2009, 07:03 AM

Kat, you are the last person that needs "straitening out"

The way the economy and Obama's policies are going - Obama needs something to distract the people and the liberal media

Rush is an easy strawman for the left to beat up on, and their followers eat it up.

I don't really care for Rush, I've said so for years, he irritates my sensibilities. With that said, he recognizes the potential, for himself and conservatives. Like I said, f'ing golden.

red states rule

03-05-2009, 07:04 AM

trust me...we do NOT want to "silence" Rush. We want him to continue to do exactly what he is doing and we want him to be heard by an ever larger audience. Everytime he says that he wants Obama's efforts to save the economy to fail, democrats love it.

As I said yesterday, there is no doubt that Rush solidifies the conservative base of the republican party. There is ALSO no doubt that he alienates moderates. There is also no doubt that he energizes the left. Republicans can go into the next election cycle with a rabidly loyal and solidified base, but that alone can't win them anything. The folks Rush chases away are more important to the republican party than the ones he brings closer to the fold, because they NEED those folks he chases away and they had the conservatives already.

Yet many Dems have said they want to bring back the Fairness Doctrine

Will this be the excuse when Obama's polices fail, and the economy tanks further? It is Rush's fault!!!!

red states rule

03-05-2009, 07:06 AM

I don't really care for Rush, I've said so for years, he irritates my sensibilities. With that said, he recognizes the potential, for himself and conservatives. Like I said, f'ing golden.

I like Rush and listen to him. Since I only get to listen to about 20 min of his show now that I am back to work - I am glad I subscribe to his website and listen to his show in the morning

Kathianne

03-05-2009, 07:07 AM

I like Rush and listen to him. Since I only get to listen to about 20 min of his show now that I am back to work - I am glad I subscribe to his website and listen to his show in the morning

You and many others. Which is why one can change the dial, I don't need the 'fairness doctrine.' :laugh2:

red states rule

03-05-2009, 07:10 AM

You and many others. Which is why one can change the dial, I don't need the 'fairness doctrine.' :laugh2:

A rep worthy post Kat!!!!

moderate democrat

03-05-2009, 07:13 AM

Yet many Dems have said they want to bring back the Fairness Doctrine

Will this be the excuse when Obama's polices fail, and the economy tanks further? It is Rush's fault!!!!
No...I think that president Obama has been very clear...he has said that if his plans do not work that we will probably have a new president in 2012. He will rightfully take responsibility for the success or the failure of the economic stimulus plan.

red states rule

03-05-2009, 07:18 AM

No...I think that president Obama has been very clear...he has said that if his plans do not work that we will probably have a new president in 2012. He will rightfully take responsibility for the success or the failure of the economic stimulus plan.

Just like he said there would be no pork in the stimulus and spending bills

What Obama says and what he actually does are two different things

moderate democrat

03-05-2009, 07:19 AM

Just like he said there would be no pork in the stimulus and spending bills

What Obama says and what he actually does are two different things

wy am I not surprised that you would express that opinion? but the larger question is: why bother?

red states rule

03-05-2009, 07:21 AM

wy am I not surprised that you would express that opinion? but the larger question is: why bother?

I do post facts, and they do have an adverse effect on Obamabots

moderate democrat

03-05-2009, 07:22 AM

I do post facts, and they do have an adverse effect on Obamabots

the post in question was nothing more than your opinion...which you tried to masquerade as fact once again.

red states rule

03-05-2009, 07:25 AM

the post in question was nothing more than your opinion...which you tried to masquerade as fact once again.

I am pointing out how Obama has lied several times, and what he says he will do is meaningless

Except to those drunk on the Kool Aid

bullypulpit

03-05-2009, 07:29 AM

Just like he said there would be no pork in the stimulus and spending bills

What Obama says and what he actually does are two different things

Sorry Red, but you're thinking on the matter is a little fuzzy (Nothing new threre...). You're mistaking Obama for the PREVIOUS occupant of the Oval Office who took responsibility for nothing and spoke out of both sides of his mouth so frequently he heeded a bib just to keep the drool off himself.

Take your meds and go back to sleep.

moderate democrat

03-05-2009, 07:31 AM

I am pointing out how Obama has lied several times, and what he says he will do is meaningless

Except to those drunk on the Kool Aid

how can you say that what he says he WILL do is meaningless... it's clearly your opinion.

and isn't that like how Dubya said that he would NOT engage in nation building?

red states rule

03-05-2009, 07:33 AM

Sorry Red, but you're thinking on the matter is a little fuzzy (Nothing new threre...). You're mistaking Obama for the PREVIOUS occupant of the Oval Office who took responsibility for nothing and spoke out of both sides of his mouth so frequently he heeded a bib just to keep the drool off himself.

Take your meds and go back to sleep.

Sorry BP - once again Obama says one things and does another

Obama bans earmarks from economic package
Stimulus plan expected to cost about $775 billion

updated 12:18 p.m. PT, Tues., Jan. 6, 2009
WASHINGTON - President-elect Barack Obama vowed Tuesday to bar lawmakers' pet projects from his massive economic stimulus plan and to bring unprecedented accountability to federal spending.

Even as he promised to fight waste and to make tough budgetary decisions, however, Obama warned that the nation could face trillion-dollar deficits for years to come. Eight years ago the federal budget ran a surplus, and the deficit on Sept. 30 was about $455 billion.

Two weeks before taking office, Obama said Americans will accept his proposed stimulus plan — expected to cost about $775 billion — only if they believe the money is being used wisely to boost the troubled economy and to make smart long-term investments in public projects.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28525113/

Trigg

03-05-2009, 05:05 PM

He doesn't want to defeat Rush. He wants to elevate Rush. He WANTS America to see Rush Limbaugh as the face and the voice of the GOP. I think Team Obama is doing a great job of doing that. I thought it was hilarious yesterday when Gibbs said that he was surprised at how fast the head of the RNC had apologized to the head of the republican party.

I was watching MSNBC yesterday regarding this subject. You know what was brought up.

The fact that this country is in trouble financially and the white house is playing this game with Rush instead of seeing to the real problems that are going on right now.

Rush is getting a little more air-time than he usually does out of this true. But he's an entertainer, nothing more.

The dems have found a distraction for the American people, something they desperately need. Anything, so that we don't realize that bambam's "budget" and "stimulus" are leading to the bankruptcy of this country.

Little-Acorn

03-05-2009, 05:34 PM

You're mistaking Obama for the PREVIOUS occupant of the Oval Office who took responsibility for nothing and spoke out of both sides of his mouth so frequently he heeded a bib just to keep the drool off himself.

An accurate, if uncomplimentary, description of former President Clinton.

BTW, that wasn't drool.

sgtdmski

03-05-2009, 05:41 PM

How exactly did it do that?

Perhaps if you listened to Rush you would already know. Since Obama is using massive spending at the expense of the taxpayer to end the recession whereas Reagan used massive tax cuts to do the same.

dmk

sgtdmski

03-05-2009, 05:44 PM

The attack on Rush is expected and right out of the playbook. Why allow people to listen to a critique of your policy and a comparison to another policy which in the past has been proven to work?

Obama and the other democrats want to discredit Rush so that when their massive spending and stimulus plans fail to revive the economy they will be able to say that only more time and more money is needed. They want people to be unaware of how other recessions and economic downturns have been defeated by the use of lower taxes, less spending, and more importantly relying on the people and not the government.

dmk

Jagger

03-05-2009, 06:42 PM

The attack on Rush is expected and right out of the playbook.
Why won't you explain how Reaganomics led to 86 months of continuous economic expansion?

Is it a lie?

Jagger

03-05-2009, 06:44 PM

Perhaps if you listened to Rush you would already know. Since Obama is using massive spending at the expense of the taxpayer to end the recession whereas Reagan used massive tax cuts to do the same.
How did Reagan's tax cuts end the recession? Why won't you explain how Reaganomics led to 86 months of continuous economic expansion?

Jagger

03-05-2009, 06:46 PM

They want people to be unaware of how other recessions and economic downturns have been defeated by the use of lower taxes, less spending, and more importantly relying on the people and not the government. When exactly were other recessions and economic downturns defeated by the use of lower taxes, less spending, and relying on the people and not the government?

Kathianne

03-05-2009, 06:50 PM

:trolls:

Jagger

03-05-2009, 07:25 PM

:trolls:

Rush Limbaugh is a troll...

moderate democrat

03-05-2009, 09:35 PM

Kathianne

03-05-2009, 09:38 PM

Rush Limbaugh is a troll...

:trolls:

Silver

03-05-2009, 09:46 PM

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track/right_direction_or_wrong_track

seems like America is increasingly happy with the road on which our president is leading us.

Rush may be looking good to his koolaid soaked faithful followers, but clearly, regardless of how much "exposure" El Rushbo is getting, the NUMBERS of conservatives who buy into his "I want the president to fail" schtick are not growing. Good to know there are bunches of them here, however!:salute:

(DOW -1,634 since Jan.20)

For the second straight week, the percentage of voters who say the United States is heading in the right direction rose to its highest level in recent years.

No doubt about the poll numbers...you're right....

The US is heading in the right direction......:beer::lol::beer:

moderate democrat

03-05-2009, 10:11 PM

(DOW -1,634 since Jan.20)

For the second straight week, the percentage of voters who say the United States is heading in the right direction rose to its highest level in recent years.

No doubt about the poll numbers...you're right....

The US is heading in the right direction......:beer::lol::beer:

I suppose if the ONLY thing you used to measure the correct direction of the country was the DJIA, you must have really LOVED the presidency of Bill Clinton.

Clearly, most Americans are not so one dimensional.

Kathianne

03-05-2009, 10:26 PM

I suppose if the ONLY thing you used to measure the correct direction of the country was the DJIA, you must have really LOVED the presidency of Bill Clinton.

Clearly, most Americans are not so one dimensional.

Clearly most Americans would not be easily led down whatever path your current personality might wish. Are they communists? Socialists? Capitalists? Which of these is not like the others?

hjmick

03-05-2009, 10:28 PM

tZIvgQ9ik48

Silver

03-05-2009, 11:31 PM

I suppose if the ONLY thing you used to measure the correct direction of the country was the DJIA, you must have really LOVED the presidency of Bill Clinton.

Clearly, most Americans are not so one dimensional.

I certainly did...Clinton was an embarrassment but ran the country well.... ..Americans vote their wallet...its been said thousands of times by both partys....and sooner rather than later, they will awaken to reality rather than react to an Obama friendly media....

PostmodernProphet

03-05-2009, 11:48 PM

tZIvgQ9ik48

oh, oh....I know this one.....it's the rectangle in the center with the arrow on it.....

red states rule

03-06-2009, 07:35 AM

I suppose if the ONLY thing you used to measure the correct direction of the country was the DJIA, you must have really LOVED the presidency of Bill Clinton.

Clearly, most Americans are not so one dimensional.

Obama dismissed the Dow as nothing more then a dialy tracking poll. Like his apporoval numbers and the number of employed Americans it is heading south

Nice to see the compassion libs show over people losing their retirement funds in a short period of time

This is not the change people thought they were voting for

red states rule

03-06-2009, 07:59 AM

I think if the Dow were a tracking poll, he'd pay more attention to it. It's not 'bobbing' it's dropping.

Being a liberal KAt - he WANTS to Dow to drop and people to lose their life savings. What better way to rope them in to government dependency?

Now Dems can bring back their idea to take over 401K's and give people Government Savings Accounts

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122477680834462659.html

Kathianne

03-06-2009, 08:00 AM

moderate democrat

03-06-2009, 08:02 AM

Obama dismissed the Dow as nothing more then a dialy tracking poll. Like his apporoval numbers and the number of employed Americans it is heading south

Nice to see the compassion libs show over people losing their retirement funds in a short period of time

This is not the change people thought they were voting for

again...

your party never used the DJIA as the final arbiter for the success of the presidency when it was in the midst of the longest bull market ever in the Clinton years....

you don't seem to want to address this:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_wrong_track/right_direction_or_wrong_track :lol:

Jagger

03-06-2009, 09:45 AM

Limbaugh is a traitor.

red states rule

03-06-2009, 09:50 AM

The stock market is often called the leading indicator. I projects what the market expects to happen over the next few months.

The market often reflects confidence in the President, policies, Congress, and the economy and where investors feel their money is safer.

The markets are reacting to the lack of confidence in Obama's "new" America

Jagger

03-06-2009, 10:14 AM

The market is clearly reacting to the fact that the Limbaugh Republican Traitors want our economy to fail. If we hang them the market will skyrocket.

Yurt

03-06-2009, 10:15 AM

The market is clearly reacting to the fact that the Limbaugh Republican Traitors want our economy to fail. If we hang them the market will skyrocket.

oh look, you stopped blaming bush :poke:

red states rule

03-06-2009, 10:16 AM

oh look, you stopped blaming bush :poke:

Next up - another vast right wing conspiracy

Yurt

03-06-2009, 10:19 AM

Obama dismissed the Dow as nothing more then a dialy tracking poll. Like his apporoval numbers and the number of employed Americans it is heading south

Nice to see the compassion libs show over people losing their retirement funds in a short period of time

This is not the change people thought they were voting for

exactly. shows how out of touch with america obama really is. to say that the dow is like tracking polls and that people shouldn't pay attention to daily drops or rises is so assinine it is beyond comprehension. many people make their living off of the daily market. often, the daily market effects the long term market.

obama is out of touch with the american people. but that is typical for an elitist.

red states rule

03-06-2009, 10:20 AM

exactly. shows how out of touch with america obama really is. to say that the dow is like tracking polls and that people shouldn't pay attention to daily drops or rises is so assinine it is beyond comprehension. many people make their living off of the daily market. often, the daily market effects the long term market.

obama is out of touch with the american people. but that is typical for an elitist.

Heard a little poem yesterday - snot sure where or how it went but it was something like this

The dow is tanking

The economy is dire

All the while, Obama is groovin'

with Earth, Wind, and Fire

Jagger

03-06-2009, 12:00 PM

The Reagan economy was just a recession and a recovery, but not of any sustained improvement in performance. That didn’t come until the middle Clinton years.

PostmodernProphet

03-06-2009, 02:20 PM

That didn’t come until the middle Clinton years.

aka the Gingrich Congress.....

bullypulpit

03-07-2009, 08:30 AM

Sorry BP - once again Obama says one things and does another

Obama bans earmarks from economic package
Stimulus plan expected to cost about $775 billion

updated 12:18 p.m. PT, Tues., Jan. 6, 2009
WASHINGTON - President-elect Barack Obama vowed Tuesday to bar lawmakers' pet projects from his massive economic stimulus plan and to bring unprecedented accountability to federal spending.

Even as he promised to fight waste and to make tough budgetary decisions, however, Obama warned that the nation could face trillion-dollar deficits for years to come. Eight years ago the federal budget ran a surplus, and the deficit on Sept. 30 was about $455 billion.

Two weeks before taking office, Obama said Americans will accept his proposed stimulus plan — expected to cost about $775 billion — only if they believe the money is being used wisely to boost the troubled economy and to make smart long-term investments in public projects.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28525113/

Umm...not so much Red. And please detail the earmarks in the stimulus package by section, page and paragraph. And a few facts regarding the earmarks for the omnibus spending bill working its way through Congress...

<blockquote>Of the top ten Senators requesting the highest amount of $ in solo earmarks 6 are Republicans.

They are:
#2 Shelby - 64 individual earmarks total $114,484,250
#3 Bond - 54 individual earmarks total $95,691,491
#5 Cochran - 65 individual earmarks total $75,908,475
#6 Murkowski - 71 individual earmarks total $74,000,750
#8 Inhofe - 34 individual earmarks total $53,133,500
#9 McConnell - 36 individual earmarks total $51,133,500

Of the top ten Senators requesting highest # of solo earmarks 5 of them are Republicans, four of whom top the list:

#1 Specter - 134 individual earmarks = $25,320,000
#2 Murkowski - 71 individual earmarks = $74,000,750
#3 Chochran - 65 individual earmarks = $75,908,475
#4 Shelby - 64 individual earmarks = $114,484,250
#8 Bond - 54 individual earmarks = $85,691,491</blockquote>

So GOP complaints about earmarks ring hollow, at best. At worst, they are rank hypocrisy...And I always expect the worst of the GOP leadership.

Jagger

03-07-2009, 09:04 AM

Media figures advance false claim that Obama is breaking campaign promise of no earmarks.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903060002?f=h_top

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 11:40 AM

Media figures advance false claim that Obama is breaking campaign promise of no earmarks.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903060002?f=h_top

no surprise that the righties on here misquote him....

Kathianne

03-07-2009, 12:01 PM

Media figures advance false claim that Obama is breaking campaign promise of no earmarks.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903060002?f=h_top

Perhaps or perhaps not:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1517686/obamas_no_earmarks_promise_broken.html?cat=75

Obama's "No Earmarks" Promise Broken
Those Who Voted for Him Will Not Notice the Deception
By Michael J. Bernard

" The truth is, our earmark system in Washington is fraught with abuse. It badly needs reform — which is why I didn't request a single earmark last year, why I've released all my previous requests for the public to see, and why I've pledged to slash earmarks by more than half when I am president of the United States of America." Barack Obama, September 22, 2008
"Absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely." Barack Obama, September 26, 2008

"But when they start characterizing this as pork, without acknowledging that there are no earmarks in this package — something, again, that was pretty rare over the last eight years — then you get a feeling that maybe we're playing politics instead of actually trying to solve problems for the American people." Barack Obama, February 9, 2009

"I'm proud that we passed the recovery plan free of earmarks." Barack Obama, February 24, 2009

Lies. All lies. Do you care?...

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 12:16 PM

Perhaps or perhaps not:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1517686/obamas_no_earmarks_promise_broken.html?cat=75

not a lie in there.

PostmodernProphet

03-07-2009, 12:35 PM

So GOP complaints about earmarks ring hollow, at best. At worst, they are rank hypocrisy...And I always expect the worst of the GOP leadership.

not hollow at all...we want their earmarks vetoed as well as those of the Democrats.....

PostmodernProphet

03-07-2009, 12:38 PM

not a lie in there.

really?....you think he went through the bill line by line and made sure we were spending money wisely?.....

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 01:09 PM

really?....you think he went through the bill line by line and made sure we were spending money wisely?.....
I think he directed that it be done.

I mean, seriously, don't you think that anytime any president says that "HE" will do something, the implication is that he will do it by using the resources of the executive branch of government that he controls?

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 01:12 PM

not hollow at all...we want their earmarks vetoed as well as those of the Democrats.....

that is what YOU might want, but do you honestly think that your GOP elected representatives and senators who submitted earmarks want THEIR earmarks vetoed?

Kathianne

03-07-2009, 02:26 PM

not a lie in there.

True, there were many lies. But, heh you wouldn't care, as long as it's your guy doing the lying.

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 04:23 PM

True, there were many lies. But, heh you wouldn't care, as long as it's your guy doing the lying.

If my president LIED to me, I would definitely care. I don't think that there was ever any intent to deceive in any of those statements.

Kathianne

03-07-2009, 04:39 PM

If my president LIED to me, I would definitely care. I don't think that there was ever any intent to deceive in any of those statements.

There's this bridge I'd like to sell you, right side of NY, you'll make a fortune! Give me $25k upfront, I'll show it to you. $100k if the sale goes through!

PostmodernProphet

03-07-2009, 04:40 PM

that is what YOU might want, but do you honestly think that your GOP elected representatives and senators who submitted earmarks want THEIR earmarks vetoed?

I only have one GOP elected representative.....and he hasn't submitted any earmarks.....

PostmodernProphet

03-07-2009, 04:41 PM

I think he directed that it be done.

I mean, seriously, don't you think that anytime any president says that "HE" will do something, the implication is that he will do it by using the resources of the executive branch of government that he controls?

if he had someone from his branch of government do it, how is it that they didn't notice all the earmarks that the rest of us can see?......at the very least he ought to be eliminating the earmarks you admit the Republicans submitted, neh?.....

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 07:33 PM

if he had someone from his branch of government do it, how is it that they didn't notice all the earmarks that the rest of us can see?......at the very least he ought to be eliminating the earmarks you admit the Republicans submitted, neh?.....

that assumes that earmarks are, by definition, unwise spending.

neh?

Immanuel

03-07-2009, 08:17 PM

If my president LIED to me, I would definitely care. I don't think that there was ever any intent to deceive in any of those statements.

Oh please! Every President and every politician lies to you every time they open their mouths to speak.

Immie

PostmodernProphet

03-07-2009, 08:46 PM

that assumes that earmarks are, by definition, unwise spending.

neh?

no, it merely assumes that you've looked at the list of spending and have a modicum of intelligence.....

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 10:13 PM

no, it merely assumes that you've looked at the list of spending and have a modicum of intelligence.....

actually, your opinion as to the "wisdom" of any of the portions of the stimulus bill or the budget bill are as valuable to me as a bucket of warm spit. You like to trumpet your intellect a lot... :lol:

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 10:14 PM

Oh please! Every President and every politician lies to you every time they open their mouths to speak.

Immie

you need to have a little more faith in your elected leaders. You are perhaps just a bit too jaded.

PostmodernProphet

03-07-2009, 10:28 PM

You like to trumpet your intellect a lot... :lol:

???...I thought I was trumpeting your lack of it......

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 10:34 PM

???...I thought I was trumpeting your lack of it......

...for the rather shallow and self-serving purpose I suggested.

The fact remains: spending items in the budget bill or the stimulus package might not seem "wise" to you, or fit your sense of priorities...but that, in and of itself, hardly makes them "unwise" in anything other than your opinion... and I think I already gave you my opinion as to the worth of YOUR opinion.

PostmodernProphet

03-07-2009, 10:50 PM

...for the rather shallow and self-serving purpose I suggested.

The fact remains: spending items in the budget bill or the stimulus package might not seem "wise" to you, or fit your sense of priorities...but that, in and of itself, hardly makes them "unwise" in anything other than your opinion... and I think I already gave you my opinion as to the worth of YOUR opinion.

you did.....fortunately, the list of earmarks has been readily available to our readers.....if any of them find any expenditure they find unwise, it will easily follow that Obama has failed to keep his promise to them.....

moderate democrat

03-07-2009, 10:58 PM

you did.....fortunately, the list of earmarks has been readily available to our readers.....if any of them find any expenditure they find unwise, it will easily follow that Obama has failed to keep his promise to them.....

what was that Abe Lincoln quote about pleasing all of the people all the time? Just because there may be SOME people who take issue with SOME expenditures, does not mean that those expenditures are "unwise, and it also does not mean that Obama LIED or that he BROKE his PROMISE to the American people.

PostmodernProphet

03-08-2009, 08:06 AM

what was that Abe Lincoln quote about pleasing all of the people all the time? Just because there may be SOME people who take issue with SOME expenditures, does not mean that those expenditures are "unwise, and it also does not mean that Obama LIED or that he BROKE his PROMISE to the American people.

I take it then you and Obama believe that every single expenditure on the list is wise......I don't think Lincoln used them, but I am certain there are some very appropriate quotes about people who think unwise things are wise.....one I think particularly appropriate...."A fool and his money are soon parted"........

red states rule

03-09-2009, 08:17 AM

Umm...not so much Red. And please detail the earmarks in the stimulus package by section, page and paragraph. And a few facts regarding the earmarks for the omnibus spending bill working its way through Congress...

<blockquote>Of the top ten Senators requesting the highest amount of $ in solo earmarks 6 are Republicans.

They are:
#2 Shelby - 64 individual earmarks total $114,484,250
#3 Bond - 54 individual earmarks total $95,691,491
#5 Cochran - 65 individual earmarks total $75,908,475
#6 Murkowski - 71 individual earmarks total $74,000,750
#8 Inhofe - 34 individual earmarks total $53,133,500
#9 McConnell - 36 individual earmarks total $51,133,500

Of the top ten Senators requesting highest # of solo earmarks 5 of them are Republicans, four of whom top the list:

#1 Specter - 134 individual earmarks = $25,320,000
#2 Murkowski - 71 individual earmarks = $74,000,750
#3 Chochran - 65 individual earmarks = $75,908,475
#4 Shelby - 64 individual earmarks = $114,484,250
#8 Bond - 54 individual earmarks = $85,691,491</blockquote>

So GOP complaints about earmarks ring hollow, at best. At worst, they are rank hypocrisy...And I always expect the worst of the GOP leadership.

You are still ducking the main point BP (nothing new) that Obama and Pelosi PROMISED no pork int he so called stimulus bill and the massive spending bill

You fall back on the tired liberal talking points about what Pres Bush did (he is no longer President) and Republicans have their pork. Well, we were told there would be NO pork

Even Chris Matthews sees the obvious, and another broken Obama promise

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4UFRqvCU8R0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4UFRqvCU8R0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Jagger

03-09-2009, 09:54 AM

Obama and Pelosi PROMISED no pork int he so called stimulus bill and the massive spending bill.
No such promise was ever made, dude.

Jagger

03-09-2009, 09:56 AM

pork in the so called stimulus bill and the massive spending bill There is no pork in either of the two laws.

Jagger

03-09-2009, 10:00 AM

We were told there would be NO pork
What is your definition of "pork" and what is the item that you believe is the worst piece of pork in the two bills?

Nukeman

03-09-2009, 10:29 AM

No such promise was ever made, dude.
Gee dude You must have missed all of those videos of San Fran Nan and her staing that ther would be NO earmarks or PORK in the bill... Ohh jsut for you I found one real quick I think it took about 5 seconds on you tube..

Listen closely at 20 seconds.... I know this may be hard for you to understand so I found a SHORT one for you....:poke:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaDtkG6afBc&playnext_from=PL&feature=PlayList&p=F6E21AA62A8BAA18&index=16

moderate democrat

03-09-2009, 10:35 AM

"there will be no EARMARKS in the economic recovery package"

and there aren't.

I don't know of any legislator who was able to insert any EARMARKS into the economic stimulus package.

Nukeman

03-09-2009, 10:38 AM

"there will be no EARMARKS in the economic recovery package"

and there aren't.

I don't know of any legislator who was able to insert any EARMARKS into the economic stimulus package.
Did You read all 1100 pages of the bull (I mean bill)??? I sure haven't but on past experience I would wager that at least 25-30 percent of this bill is utter garbage!!!! It wont stimulate anything except a brother-in-laws company or organization or pet project......

You don't stimulate the economy by supplying someone with a job for a few months it needs to be LONG TERM..........:poke:

Jagger

03-09-2009, 10:49 AM

There are no earmarks in the Economic Recovery Act of 2009. Also, there is no pork whatsoever in the Act.

Jagger

03-09-2009, 10:55 AM

You don't stimulate the economy by supplying someone with a job
Where did you flunk out of college?

moderate democrat

03-09-2009, 11:12 AM

Did You read all 1100 pages of the bull (I mean bill)??? I sure haven't but on past experience I would wager that at least 25-30 percent of this bill is utter garbage!!!! It wont stimulate anything except a brother-in-laws company or organization or pet project......

You don't stimulate the economy by supplying someone with a job for a few months it needs to be LONG TERM..........:poke:

are you aware of the definition of the term "earmark"? It would seem that you are not. Conversation is impossible if we have different definitions for words.

and do you honestly think you can build an interstate bridge over the mississippi river between moline, illinois and bettendorf, iowa in a "few months"?

DannyR

03-09-2009, 11:34 AM

There are no earmarks in the Economic Recovery Act of 2009. Also, there is no pork whatsoever in the Act.

Not so fast...

In part, the answer hinges on what's an "earmark." Democrats insist they are nowhere in the plan; Republicans see "pork" everywhere. So we cribbed from criteria Congress laid out in a 2007 reform bill: language that aims spending at specific programs, states or localities, often at a member's request.

Specific location? The Senate stimulus contains $50 million for habitat restoration and other water needs in the San Francisco Bay area. There is another $62 million for military projects in Guam.

Specific industry? The House bill includes an amendment authored by Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley setting aside $500 million for biofuel makers, which he says, would bring jobs home to Iowa.

Specific program? There's $198 million to compensate Filipino World War II veterans for their service. Most don't live in the United States.

http://www.propublica.org/feature/welcome-in-the-stimulus-bill-an-earmark-by-any-other-name

And as the article points out, there are a number of programs that would seem to benefit specific districts. The yacht tax deduction benefits a florida dem especially. The call to buy uniforms would benefit a NC freshman congressman.

Interesting article.

Jagger

03-09-2009, 11:44 AM

The Economic Recovery Act of 2009 does not contain any earmarks.

Nukeman

03-09-2009, 12:06 PM

Where did you flunk out of college?

Way to pick a SMALL portion of the whole comment. dumb fuck. Ohh by the way you might next time make sure NO ONE ELSE CAN SEE EVERYTHING I TYPED. RETARD!!!!!!!!!!!

PostmodernProphet

03-09-2009, 12:30 PM

"there will be no EARMARKS in the economic recovery package"

and there aren't.

I don't know of any legislator who was able to insert any EARMARKS into the economic stimulus package.

come on, that's completely silly.....you aren't going to find anyone outside the Democratic Underground site who is stupid enough to believe that.....

Jagger

03-09-2009, 12:56 PM

The Economic Recovery Act of 2009 does not contain any earmarks.

Nukeman

03-09-2009, 03:14 PM

I flunked out of college?There that is probably more the truth than what you attempted to say....
:lol:

Binky

03-09-2009, 05:30 PM

Why are libs so obsessed with Rush? On the one hand you say he just an entertainer, then you want to silence him via the Fairness Doctrine

Oh, and the idiot talking to Steele

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=yd8znzuzqG" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=yd8znzuzqG" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

Hell, I say let him run his mouth. People that love to talk and yapping fills up the better part of their day, will eventually hang themselves just because they yap too damn much.

Once in awhile it would behoove yappers to shut their pie holes and just "listen" for a change. Now there's a change that won't happen.

red states rule

03-10-2009, 07:23 AM

Thank you liberals!!!!

Democrats' Strategy Backfires as Limbaugh's Ratings Double

It wasn't supposed to happen this way.

The Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats have been pursuing a strategy of tying elected Republicans to Rush Limbaugh, concocted in hopes of painting Republican opposition to the Administration's policy proposals as extremist. And while the questions posed to Republicans by willing Democratic allies in the media may have made some of them uncomfortable, they have also served as a boon to Limbaugh's ratings.

The conservative radio host, and liberal scourge, reports that his ratings have nearly doubled since Democrats began their campaign to marginalize him. Revenues are up as well. Limbaugh told the Washington D.C. Examiner that he has booked 80 percent of his total for all of 2008, and expects to surpass that mark by the end of March. Things are so good for him right now, even the White House had to admit its attacks on Limbaugh were becoming "counterproductive."

The danger for Democrats is that the increased attention they have focused on Limbaugh drives more people to listen to him, many for the first time. Limbaugh is a very eloquent, entertaining, and persuasive broadcaster that has commanded the largest audience in talk radio for twenty years. The more people that listen to him, the better the chances that more Americans will find some truth in his arguments against the Administration. And that could result in a lessening of the public's trust in the president's policies.

For now, with each passing day the Democrats focus on him, Limbaugh is laughing all the way to the bank. Democrats hope that voters newly exposed to his message don't end up laughing right along with him all the way to the ballot box.

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2009/03/07/democrats-strategy-backfires-as-limbaughs-ratings-double/

bullypulpit

03-10-2009, 09:39 AM

Jagger

03-10-2009, 12:08 PM

The conservative radio host... reports that his ratings have nearly doubled since Democrats began their campaign to marginalize him. He's probably lying. He lies about everything.

_____________________

Limbaugh Hopes For Prolonged Recession

Bret Baier reported that Rush Limbaugh "has been under fire for saying he wants President Obama to fail. Limbaugh has since explained he was talking about the president's policies and not the president specifically or the economy."

In fact, Limbaugh has said he hopes the economic recovery package "prolongs the recession" and has also repeatedly said he wants Obama specifically to fail.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903100012?f=h_latest

moderate democrat

03-10-2009, 12:12 PM

I try to catch Rush even more now than I did before... it certainly doesn't mean that I am at all persuaded by his rhetoric. I can well imagine many other liberals and moderates and independents tuning into Rush more frequently... just to find out what all the fuss is about... and, given the fact that Rush has ALWAYS had high negatives among moderates, liberals and independents, and given the fact that his schtick hasn't changed one iota, my guess is that those moderates, liberals and independents that are now tuning in for the first time will be just as repulsed by the fat junky as all the others have been.

Sitarro

03-10-2009, 12:31 PM

Established by whom? Where is your support for this outrageous accusation?

Reaganomics led to 86 months of coninuous economic expansion. Despite the deficits caused by the military build up. But thanks to the military build up, the Soviet Union's economy crashed because they could not compete and thus it allowed Bill Clinton to actual reduce the cost being spent on the military which led to Clinton's supposed Budget surplus.

Had the cold war not ended, military spending would never have decreased under Clinton. Reaganomics forced the collapse of the Soviet economy by placing a burder upon them to compete with the United States in the military aresenals. They couldn't because their economy was already unable to support their people.

Nice try!!!!!! But all you have shown is that you can make a statement but not provide any support to prove that it actually is valid.

dmk

Hey sgt,
How did you get so much knowledge? Everyone knows that you guys don't get newspapers, books, magazines or televisions way up there in Alaska........ I learned that from Katy Couric.:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Your posts in this thread have been spot on.:thumb:

Sitarro

03-10-2009, 12:36 PM

A reasonable response to MD's oft repeated question:

http://www.reason.com/news/show/132040.html

Rush just finished addressing that question in a most eloquent way, he brought the Federalist Papers into the discussion along with the reasons for a separation between the powers of the different branches of government...... brilliant, as usual.

Sitarro

03-10-2009, 12:43 PM

That anyone actually take seriously the rantings of a drug addled gas-bag with a brain deep fried in hillbilly heroine and a permanent woody from off market Viagra, shows just how intellectually bankrupt the GOP and its apologists truly are.

On his worst days, when he was suffering from an addiction to pain killers that his doctor prescribed and failed to recognize what was happening to his patient, he could still kick the ass of any Democrat fraud politician in any debate on any subject, especially government. He beat the addiction, you know that and don't want to give him credit for it.

Judging from the way your messiah speaks when he isn't reading someone else's words, he must be addicted still, to the numerous drugs he has consumed for many years.

moderate democrat

03-10-2009, 01:12 PM

On his worst days, when he was suffering from an addiction to pain killers that his doctor prescribed and failed to recognize what was happening to his patient, he could still kick the ass of any Democrat fraud politician in any debate on any subject, especially government. He beat the addiction, you know that and don't want to give him credit for it.

Judging from the way your messiah speaks when he isn't reading someone else's words, he must be addicted still, to the numerous drugs he has consumed for many years.

what was the "addiction" that made Rush take a boatload of unprescribed viagra to the dominican republic for vacation?

bullypulpit

03-10-2009, 01:31 PM

what was the "addiction" that made Rush take a boatload of unprescribed viagra to the dominican republic for vacation?

Hmmm...could it be under age children?

bullypulpit

03-10-2009, 01:33 PM

On his worst days, when he was suffering from an addiction to pain killers that his doctor prescribed and failed to recognize what was happening to his patient, he could still kick the ass of any Democrat fraud politician in any debate on any subject, especially government. He beat the addiction, you know that and don't want to give him credit for it.

Judging from the way your messiah speaks when he isn't reading someone else's words, he must be addicted still, to the numerous drugs he has consumed for many years.

Wow. Talk about needing drugs...you should see a shrink about getting medicated to control your delusions. :lmao:

Sitarro

03-10-2009, 01:38 PM

what was the "addiction" that made Rush take a boatload of unprescribed viagra to the dominican republic for vacation?

where's the link that proves that any of this shit is true.......... let me guess, you got this from Keithy Oberfuhrer.

bullypulpit

03-10-2009, 01:57 PM

where's the link that proves that any of this shit is true.......... let me guess, you got this from Keithy Oberfuhrer.

No, I do my own research...

<center><a href=http://www.walnet.org/csis/news/world_2002/ap-021129.html>Study by Profamilia in Dominican Republic highlights threats to children</a></center>

Why else would anyone go to the Dominican Republic with Viagra? You tell me.

moderate democrat

03-10-2009, 02:25 PM

where's the link that proves that any of this shit is true.......... let me guess, you got this from Keithy Oberfuhrer.

are you suggesting that Rush was NOt caught with a bunch of viagra at the airport on his way to the dominican republic and the bottle he had had not been prescribed to him?

moderate democrat

03-10-2009, 02:26 PM

Hmmm...could it be under age children?

THAT'S MY GUESS:lol:

Sitarro

03-10-2009, 02:28 PM

No, I do my own research...

<center><a href=http://www.walnet.org/csis/news/world_2002/ap-021129.html>Study by Profamilia in Dominican Republic highlights threats to children</a></center>

Why else would anyone go to the Dominican Republic with Viagra? You tell me.

Where's the link to Rush going to the Dominican Republic? Rush does smoke high end cigars, high end cigars are produced there, any cigar smoker would love to visit the plantation that produces the cigars he smokes. I like Comachos, they're Honduran, I may go with my tobacconist next time he and his son goes.

http://cigarblog.net/2007/12/04/comacho-triple-maduro-review/

Leave it to perverted liberals to assume that Limbaugh has the same sick interests as the Democrat constituents. Seems to me he had a subsciption bottle of Viagra...... he's over 50 and overweight. You're a nurse, you should know what Viagra is for.

Sitarro

03-10-2009, 02:29 PM

THAT'S MY GUESS:lol:

Projecting your own needs ace? I'm sure you'll be able to find plenty of little boys in Mexico when you relocate.

Jagger

03-10-2009, 02:36 PM

Rush Limbaugh is a socialist. He's also a traitor who hopes we have a long economic recession. He should be hanged.

Trigg

03-10-2009, 02:42 PM

Rush Limbaugh is a socialist. He's also a traitor who hopes we have a long economic recession. He should be hanged.

He doesn't agree with bambam's way of getting us out of this recession. That is completely different from hoping for a long recovery.

Should we just hang everyone who is against your messiah???

Jagger

03-10-2009, 02:56 PM

He doesn't agree with bambam's way of getting us out of this recession. That is completely different from hoping for a long recovery.

From Limbaugh's February 13 show, as transcribed on his website:

CALLER: Well, I understand that. Like I oppose the stimulus package, for instance, because of the overspending, but once it is passed, do we have another choice? How can you oppose it once it's passed?

RUSH: Oh, (sigh). Easily. I oppose it beforehand; I oppose it afterwards. I'm being consistent. You know the reason? You know why I oppose it, Trevor?

RUSH: Well, because I'm all for prosperity and opportunity and freedom. I don't want people to be poor. I don't want people to be unemployed. I don't want people to be hopeless. I don't want people to be misled. I don't want people to be lied to. I don't want people to be told that somebody like government is going to do something for them when they're not.I want this to fail because this is the most expansive expenditure in the Democrat Party and liberalism's power that there has ever been. I hope it blows up in their face. I hope this thing does exactly what those of us who have studied these kinds of things do. I hope it prolongs the failure. I hope it prolongs the recession.

Jagger

03-10-2009, 03:01 PM

Should we just hang everyone who is against your messiah??? We should hang anyone who is a traitor like Rush Limbaugh who hopes our nation's economy fails to recovery soon from this horrible economic recession caused by the Socialist Conservatives.

Trigg

03-10-2009, 03:03 PM

Well at least he's consistent.

Still, you can't hang people for their oppinions, even if they do disagree with you.

Trigg

03-10-2009, 03:07 PM

We should hang anyone who is a traitor like Rush Limbaugh who hopes our nation's economy fails to recovery soon from this horrible economic recession caused by the Socialist Conservatives.

This recession will correct it self just like every other recession has. The doom and gloom reported by the president and the media aren't helping matters.

People listen to the news and hold onto their money.....more people get laid off....the media joyfully reports it.......more people hold onto their money.

IMHO, this recent recession can be laid at the feet of the speculators who drove up the gas prices last year. That caused people, already living at the edge of their means, to get behind on their bills and mortgages.

Their was a worse recession in the 80's, we all lived through it and we'll live through this one. Good god, get ahold of yourself.

I can't believe I'm actually arguing with someone who thinks people who have 401K's are socialists

Yurt

03-10-2009, 04:07 PM

We should hang anyone who is a traitor like Rush Limbaugh who hopes our nation's economy fails to recovery soon from this horrible economic recession caused by the Socialist Conservatives.

do you then agree that we should hang anyone who causes our nation's economy to fail? or is it only those who hope it fails?

as obama continues to implement his disasterous policies, i expect you to want to see obama hanged for causing our nation's economy to fail.

Yurt

03-10-2009, 04:08 PM

This recession will correct it self just like every other recession has. The doom and gloom reported by the president and the media aren't helping matters.

People listen to the news and hold onto their money.....more people get laid off....the media joyfully reports it.......more people hold onto their money.

IMHO, this recent recession can be laid at the feet of the speculators who drove up the gas prices last year. That caused people, already living at the edge of their means, to get behind on their bills and mortgages.

Their was a worse recession in the 80's, we all lived through it and we'll live through this one. Good god, get ahold of yourself.

I can't believe I'm actually arguing with someone who thinks people who have 401K's are socialists

obama and the dems policies are going to prolong the recession and cause great harm to our economy.

bullypulpit

03-10-2009, 04:16 PM

Where's the link to Rush going to the Dominican Republic? Rush does smoke high end cigars, high end cigars are produced there, any cigar smoker would love to visit the plantation that produces the cigars he smokes. I like Comachos, they're Honduran, I may go with my tobacconist next time he and his son goes.

http://cigarblog.net/2007/12/04/comacho-triple-maduro-review/

Leave it to perverted liberals to assume that Limbaugh has the same sick interests as the Democrat constituents. Seems to me he had a subsciption bottle of Viagra...... he's over 50 and overweight. You're a nurse, you should know what Viagra is for.

So why did he have Viagra not prescribed to him if he was just going to the facility that produces his favorite cigars? You'd better ice that groin down after that stretch...you probably tore a few muscles. :lmao:

Yurt

03-10-2009, 04:23 PM

So why did he have Viagra not prescribed to him if he was just going to the facility that produces his favorite cigars? You'd better ice that groin down after that stretch...you probably tore a few muscles. :lmao:

please continue to attack rush and deflect from obama's failures. you only make rush more popular...10 million new listeners, thanks to obama and your ilk

Immanuel

03-10-2009, 05:30 PM

you need to have a little more faith in your elected leaders. You are perhaps just a bit too jaded.

They have not earned either my faith nor my respect. They have proven themselves to be corrupt and deserving of only a stint in Guantanamo Prison. Every last one of them.

Immie

Yurt

03-10-2009, 05:55 PM

They have not earned either my faith nor my respect. They have proven themselves to be corrupt and deserving of only a stint in Guantanamo Prison. Every last one of them.

Immie

and we all know md gave a little more faith to his elected leaders when bush was in office. he is nothing more than a political hack and places party over country everytime. his hypocrisy is a well known fact, just imagine you telling him just what he told you, when bush was in office.

i hope obama succeeds appointing many liberals to his office, because the more he appoints liberals the more back taxes are paid :laugh2:

Jagger

03-10-2009, 07:05 PM

The only people who like Limbaugh are the Reagan Socialists.

Yurt

03-10-2009, 07:16 PM

The only people who like Limbaugh are the Reagan Socialists.

why do you hate black people?

red states rule

03-11-2009, 06:54 AM

So why did he have Viagra not prescribed to him if he was just going to the facility that produces his favorite cigars? You'd better ice that groin down after that stretch...you probably tore a few muscles. :lmao:

Lord knows Bully, you sure as hell can't talk about Obama and all the change he is bringing America - so go after a priovate citizen because he dares to voice a different POV then you

By the time the messiah is done with the country, he will be looking up at Carter's and Bush 43's approval numbers

Jagger

03-11-2009, 09:06 AM

Nukeman

03-11-2009, 09:31 AM

While media figures and outlets continue to use the term "Obama bear market" to refer to the decline in the stock market since President Obama's inauguration, a review for the term "Bush bear market" found no uses of that phrase from the end of 2005 through the end of his presidency, despite there having been a second bear market.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903100036?f=s_search

blah.. blah.. blah.. And the same could be said for Clintons bear market at the end of HIS presidency, You know that one Bush ha to deal with when he was elected........ No where was it called "Clintons Bear market".. :poke:

Jagger

03-11-2009, 09:56 AM

Rush Limbaugh wants our nation to suffer a sever economic depression because it would advance his political agenda. He's a traitor who should be hanged.

bullypulpit

03-13-2009, 08:49 PM

please continue to attack rush and deflect from obama's failures. you only make rush more popular...10 million new listeners, thanks to obama and your ilk

Sorry, but you can't track that kind of jump in radio listenership. It's not like Nielsen ratings that can track minute to minute changes. It can take more than a week to track changes in radio listening audiences with any reliability.

sgtdmski

03-13-2009, 11:49 PM

Rush Limbaugh wants our nation to suffer a sever economic depression because it would advance his political agenda. He's a traitor who should be hanged.

No he does not. He want the policies that Obama is enacting that are moving this country closer and closer to outright socialism to fail. The people elected Obama, they like what he preached, but they did not truly understand what it would mean, now that his policies are being enacted they are starting to see. His approval rating is dropping, the majority of people did not like the stimulus package, a majority of people do not like the Cram Down law, thus far those have been his two biggest achievements. Not a good start.

Luckily the American people are resilient and despite his best efforts Obama cannot ruin the economy. The people are smarter than that.

Let's see using your statement about a traitor who should be hanged, could not the same thing be said about anyone who opposed the Iraqi Push????? They were traitors who wanted to see American soldiers die, to advance their own political agenda, that the war in Iraq was wrong and bogged down. Lo and behold the "Push" worked, better than anyone thought.

dmk

bullypulpit

03-14-2009, 05:46 AM

So America became a socialist republic as a result of the New Deal? Wow...I'm sure that's news to us all. Better dead than Red, y'all. :lmao:

Jagger

03-14-2009, 07:50 AM

So America became a socialist republic as a result of the New Deal?
The social security programs were socialism, at least according to President Ronald Reagan, and many other so called "conservatives", who rescued and expanded them.

So, yes, according to Reagan's conservative world view, it appears that America became a socialist republic as a result of the New Deal's establishment of the Social Security programs.

Jagger

03-14-2009, 07:55 AM

No he does not. He want the policies that Obama is enacting that are moving this country closer and closer to outright socialism to fail. Dude, the United States adopted outright socialism back in the 1930's.

sgtdmski

03-14-2009, 10:15 AM

Dude, the United States adopted outright socialism back in the 1930's.

Dude get a life. How can you be so wrong all the time.

Sorry but the New Deal did send a big blow to the idea of rugged individualism in this country, however, slowly we were moving back to a more resilient and independent society.

We required work for welfare, what a novel idea.

We have discussed and will one day pass private retirements.

So don't even try it.

Get a life, and get a new argument!

dmk