Posted on 06/10/2003 3:39:53 PM PDT by TLBSHOW
White House Throws Principle Out Window
June 10, 2003
We spent the first hour of Monday's program on the idea that we're going to extend the child tax credit to families that don't pay taxes. Many of you told me that I was making a huge mistake opposing this. If you think you're conservatives, you have a long way to go, because what some of you people were saying is not conservative at all. It's purely political.
However, I have to hand it to you people. You were right in one sense. The White House is leaning on reluctant Republican leaders in the House to act fast on making millions of low-income families (who don't pay taxes) eligible for the 400 dollar per child tax rebates already in the works for middle-income parents. Ari Fleischer said the president's advice to the House Republicans is to pass it, and to send it to him so he can sign it.
The bottom line is the White House wants this and they want it now. They want these people who don't pay taxes to be given the child care exemption of $600 up to $1,000. Principle is out the window, and political calculation is the coin of the realm. Once again illustrating that, but for this program, no one is talking about core conservative principles out there.
by Rush Limbaugh
Unfortunately, hypocracy masquerading as pragmatism infests both parties.
When does pragmatism become hypocrisy?
You have to have a certain amount of pragmatism in politics - if you don't have the numbers you won't win, if you don't win you won't get anything accomplished, and often compromise is necessary to get the numbers.
The necessity of compromise means that generally no one is totally happy, and some people are happier than others. But when does compromise become hypocrisy? Is it sometimes a fine line?
For what it's worth, I never believed George Bush was "a true conservative", and I thought long and hard about voting for one of the 3rd party candidates. The memory of 1992 persuaded me to vote for George W. Bush, even though he wasn't all I wanted in a candidate. Some would say I abandoned my principles with that vote; I'm just relieved that Al Gore isn't running the country right now. George W. Bush isn't perfect - I knew he wasn't perfect when I voted for him - but he's actually done better than I thought he would.
The other thing I've noticed since 2000 is that the country isn't necessarily "true conservative". Notice how close the election was. Notice how many people think the government ought to be providing seniors with help on prescription drugs.
A change in politics is going to require a change in hearts and minds of voters; that is the bottom line.
Right. Just another way to redistribute the wealth.
Ah, there's your problem then. These aren't normal people, they're politicians. War is peace, slavery is freedom, ignorance is strength.
When conservative principles are shoved down the stairs in leiu of political expediency -- something the Democrats do on an hourly basis.
"You have to have a certain amount of pragmatism in politics - if you don't have the numbers you won't win, if you don't win you won't get anything accomplished, and often compromise is necessary to get the numbers."
Yes, but usually "compromise" means a 50-50 two-way street, doesn't it? For the GOP, the definition of "compromise" means bending over without jiffy lube and thanking the Democrats for their "fair cooperation."
"The other thing I've noticed since 2000 is that the country isn't necessarily 'true conservative'. Notice how close the election was..."
IF the GOP EVER were to run on the platform of true conservatism, they'd win by 65-35 every time. They just don't seem to be able to want to shake off years of propaganda, lies, and demonization Left, while they NEVER present their case to the American people in clear and concise terms -- by sticking to their guns...
In other words, too many Republicans for the most part are cowards who are most interested in their own personal power -- NOT ideology.
FICA is for their retirement. (No doubt you and I will be paying for that, too.)
Have you ever heard the phrase, "From those according to ability, to those according to need"? That's what you're supporting, here. Face it, you're in bed with Karl Marx, philosophically speaking.
All families get it, even those who don't make enough money to have to pay income taxes to begin with. That's why some of the people on this thread are so upset.
Most low-income workers are unlikely to ever receive anything close to the money that they put into FICA (even not counting the "employer share"). Pretty rotten investment when even First Mattress Bank offers a better rate of return.
Out of curiosity, for different-sized families and income levels, how do the amounts of the net payouts compare with the FICA taxes paid by, or on behalf of, these people?
Two totally different animals. An income tax refund is an income tax refund. FICA is something different. If they were refunding payroll taxes like FICA it would be a different story. Maybe someone ought to push that through Congress too. I, for one, would like to see a little less of my paycheck being forcefully confiscated by the socialist scheme to redistribute MY wealth to a bunch of leeches.
Hehehe, you're right.
Stealing is stealing -- If the gub'mint needs to defend the country, enforce the law, and built roads, fine. The extra cash is YOURS and MINE -- not a politicians' buy-a-voter slush fund.
On what do you base this? Is this your personal opinion, or do you have some sort of study to back it up?
If you're correct, the GOP would be foolish NOT to run on this platform, even if they are "most interested in their own personal power -- NOT ideology", because it would give them much more power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.