White House Throws Principle Out Window (Rush Limbaugh)

Rush Limbaugh ^ | June 10, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

[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

[clintonh8r]

I agree, but usually there's a reward for each side in a compromise. I don't see any real upside for Bush here.

[jammer]

One problem I see with your graph is that the red and green lines show no effect on the blue line. That is not reasonable. The ebbing tide lowers all boats.

[Beck_isright]

"As much as I generally agree with Rus, I don't get it in this particular case. What is "conservative" about opposing a measure that shifts wealth from the individuals who earned in in the first place to the government, who didn't? Morever, even if it is political, what's the alternative? Handing the Rats a political issue on a platter so that they can increase their chances of winning the next election and then raising my taxes? Doesn't sound like much of a plan to me."

You are politically correct. Principle is irrelevant. Winning again is. Lying to the people who put you in office doesn't matter. Making the Peeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeople feel good is. Principle is for sale. Why change the process the last administration used for re-election? You're correct. It worked for Bubba and it will work for W. I feel much better now. For a minute there I thought words had meaning again.

[Beck_isright]

"The redistribution of wealth is a sorry idea, whover comes up with it"

That would be Karl Marx, over 100 plus years ago. I'm so glad we have a President following the historical lessons of a communist. Aren't you?

[jammer]

A second question I would have is: If the scheme does no damage, yet helps the low wage earner, why don't we just give all low wage earners money to bring them up to some average? Is it immoral or is it not beneficial? I think both.

[RFTECH]

These folks who are for this WELFARE PAYMENT should look at the EIC forms and see what kind of money the poor receive from the feds. We had a friend who made 13,000 taxable income and recieved 3000 back. the amount that was paid in fica and medcare was returned to her. This BS

[TLBSHOW]

I think it is really sad that the #1 voice for conservatives (Rush) at the #1 web site for conservatives is being talked of as the only reason he says any of this is for Rush ratings

(LOL)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/926567/posts?page=42#42


LIKE RUSH NEEDS BETTER RATINGS. WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS FOR HIS SHOW?

MILLIONS ARE LISTENING?


Shows how right RUSH is on this issue of BUSH supporting socialist democrats ideals.

Just as we ARE see our fellow freepers selling out left and right here at FR and in marching with the Bush White House, THEY ARE LIKE THE WH, selling out their principles.

[Beck_isright]

"These people pay Social Security and sales taxes, and the 3.5 billion dollar cost to include them is peanuts."

Sales taxes are state or localized. Why should I, as a resident of Florida, have my income appropriated from me at gunpoint (which the IRS will do if you do not pay) to give some heroin addict with 5 kids a $1000.00 check in Denver or Phoenix?

"To say they don't pay taxes is ludicrous."

They don't. They get more back than is ever put in on an annualized basis for the alleged SS tax.

"Denying them the $400 is mean spirited and stupid politics."

You are 100% correct. We should throw principle out the window. Win re-election at all cost. Hell, I should send my wife as an intern to D.C. and offer services like the last President received if that is what it takes to get "our guy" four more years.

"At least W is smart enough to not give the socialist bastard Democrats an issue to hit him over the head with."

This is true. By doing the one-upmanship and instuting the policies of Karl Marx, W sure is showing up those socialist demorats.

"Its easy for people who dont have to win a national election to run around talking about who is a "conservative"."

Right again. I must be an evil land owning job-creating income producing piggish facist right wing b*stard. I shall never call myself a convservative again, because of your posting.

"W doesn't have that optio n"

This is true. He must have hired Carville and we just missed that headline.

[supercat]

One problem I see with your graph is that the red and green lines show no effect on the blue line. That is not reasonable. The ebbing tide lowers all boats.

With which of the following do you disagree:

1. It is politically necessary that people who earn nothing nonetheless be given something.
2. People who earn something should end up with more than people who earn nothing. Programs like the EITC serve to ensure that (2) remains true. I think the welfare system is severely badly broken, and the EITC doesn't fix all its flaws, but without the EITC there are many people who couldn't afford to work.

[Beck_isright]

"We will all pay for this lunacy later"

You mean when FNM hits $20 and we have 0.25% interest rates? Or when it's $2 US to the $1 EU? Or when the newly emerging communist nations of South and Central America default in a few years wiping out our banking system? Or when the real estate bubble pops? Or when corporate corruption totally collapses the pension system, overwhelming the Social Security and other safety nets?

Sorry, I'm in a mood to vent.

BIR

[cardinal4]

I agree, but usually there's a reward for each side in a compromise. I don't see any real upside for Bush here.

I do. When Little Katie Communist and the rest of the lib fart catchers start whining about tax cuts for the rich, he can point to the tax credit. Again just my opinion. But W has a long way to go before he wont get my vote.

[Gary Boldwater]

I like your comments.

[Beck_isright]

"And in turn so will the economy."

So it's more productive to sell 6 packs of beer and state gambling tickets (lotteries) than to give a job producer or creator like myself a tax break? Sounds like the logic of a Kennedy to me.

"Cmon people, politics have to be about compromise sometimes."

Yeah, compromise worked so well for W's Dad.

"Give the money to the poor this time, it will get spent at the liquor store and walmart, so thats good for the economy."

Yuppers, gotta keep those $7.50 per hour employees and slave laborers producing.

"As for the roadmap, the Arabs cant handle the responsibility, it will fail. And Bush and co will say we tried, and turn it over to Sharon."

This is a stall. W is just waiting for the new wall to be completed and then the West Jordanians will be forced into a settlement. Until then, enjoy the Apache air show every month or so and see what wins; a missle or a Toyota.

"But to not vote for Bush, or not vote at all, or worse for one one the clowns on the other team in addition to being childish, is just plain assinine. Can you imagine Breck-girl in charge? How about Ketchup boy?"

You're right. We should all become like the party we despise. The 'rats voted for a rapist, theif and probably murderer and since W hasn't had those allegations leveled against him (he's just a liar so far, like Bubba) then we should hold our nose and vote for him. Principle be damned.

[Beck_isright]

Thank you. I'm furious. The RNC is nothing more than a Carvillized version of the right. I'm sick and disgusted. This current program being proposed has me so mad, I can not see straight.

[arete]

Sorry, I'm in a mood to vent.

Nothing to be sorry about. The economic plan that we are following is total insanity. It is all based on everyone borrowing more and more and spending it so that someone else can borrow more and more and spend it. It a flustercluck.

Richard W.

[CyberAnt]

Geeee ... thanks for that inspiring information.

[cardinal4]

You're right. We should all become like the party we despise. The 'rats voted for a rapist, theif and probably murderer and since W hasn't had those allegations leveled against him (he's just a liar so far, like Bubba) then we should hold our nose and vote for him. Principle be damned.

And your solution would be? All Im saying is pick our battles, have you forgotten the ongoing filibuster? This tax issue will be forgotten next year, but Estrada may or not. So I suppose you going to show him and not vote for Bush, huh? Thats how Clinton got elected. That'll show Bush you mean business.

[Beck_isright]

"The economic plan that we are following is total insanity. It is all based on everyone borrowing more and more and spending it so that someone else can borrow more and more and spend it. It a flustercluck."

It's so dangerous to short the dollar. Yet so tempting. This is a disaster of proportions I never thought I would live to see. If it is not stopped soon, I dare say the 1890's and 1930's will look like boom times.

[The Iguana]

This is certainly an income transfer but we should recall that both Friedman and Hayek first advocated the "negative income tax."

Especially since the money is being spent by individuals, not the government.

[Rome2000]

The point of the tax cut is to put money back in Americans pockets, anybody who works pays over $400 a year in FICA, which goes into the general fund, no different than my money does.

Why refuse to give them back their money?.

A lot of multi-milliondollar corporations don't pay incometaxes,yet get tons of corporate welfare.

It doesn't make economic or political sense to cut the poor out.

And the 3.5 billion price tag is miniscule.