Dick Morris Restates "Big Theory" (Rush Limbaugh)

Rush Limbaugh ^ | June 24, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

[Dane]

So, then, you are content to witness the death of the republic at the hands of the mob, as long as the GOP controls the smoking ruins. The GOP won in 2002 despite the best efforts of Katie Couric and the liberal media. And they've taken that victory and undone much of what was accomplished in the previous decade by the GOP. All they had to do was say NO. And all you can do is rationalize that away

Please can the tin foil drama queen rhetoric. It doesn't become you, IMO.

My opinion, is that Bush is a lot better than Clinton or any democrat.

I will trust Bush and not some nitpicking one issue malcontnents.

[dirtboy]

I'll ask this again since you deftly avoided it: Are you in favor of expanding Medicare, even though we can't pay for existing promises with Medicare and Social Security? Are you in favor of giving tax credits to those who don't pay taxes, which undermines the welfare reforms that the GOP fought so hard for last decade? Are you in favor of a $500 billion deficit, and proposing massive spending increases while we are running a deficit? Forget what Katie Couric thinks, what do YOU think of these issues?

[Miss Marple]

Privatization of Social Security is one of the long-term goals. That has been cloaked in giving younger people a choice in their Social Security fund investment. Once people see the difference in what they will earn by investing a portion in the market (whether stocks, bonds,or bank accounts) there will be a clamor for more freedom with that money. As more goes into the private sector the program's administration will be made smaller, and people will learn to make the decisions for themselves.

The type of long-term strategy we are seeing is very unusual in a president, and that is why so many people are only looking at what is going to happen in the next year or so. Many of the policies he is pushing for will take several years and another president after him in order to fully implement.

That is why it is so darned important that he win re-election and hand the reins over to someone who shares that type of thinking.

Another example on this is Medicare. The President has repeatedly stated that he thinks seniors should have a choice. Now that is nice, but it is more than simply being conciliatory to the elderly. People who have a choice in plans tend to ask questions and also make decisions based on cost. The congressman who is writing this bill was just on Fox and said that part of this would be an 80-20 co-pay. That means that 20% will come from the seniors' own pocket, so they will be paying attention on that 20%.

Regarding the prescription coverage, I have repeatedly pointed out that seniors who can't afford prescriptions skip getting them, and end up sicker and in the hospital, which Medicare DOES pay for. It makes sense to get all those people with diabetes, heart conditions, hypertension, etc. on medication so that they don't end up in the hospital with strokes, heart attacks, kidney failure, or amputations. Those cost the government a whole lot more than what prescriptions for the same patient would cost.

I would imagine that they have had an analysis done which proves just this point. And if we lower the cost of Medicare, that will leave room for other reforms.

It is important to not see this as one isolated issue at a time, but as an entire tapestry that must be woven together .

[Dane]

calling him a socialist

what else is it? Is it Conservative that we are seeing?

Uh no we aren't seeing a tlb, saber, or dirt "conservative".

What you are seeing, IMO, is Bush negotiating the mine field called politics very well, while rightfully ignoring the arm chair "generals", who snipe from behind and in the comfort of their keyboards.

[Dane]

I'll ask this again since you deftly avoided it: Are you in favor of expanding Medicare, even though we can't pay for existing promises with Medicare and Social Security? Are you in favor of giving tax credits to those who don't pay taxes, which undermines the welfare reforms that the GOP fought so hard for last decade? Are you in favor of a $500 billion deficit, and proposing massive spending increases while we are running a deficit? Forget what Katie Couric thinks, what do YOU think of these issues?

Sorry but your above reply is focused in dirtboy world. We don't live in dirtboy world.

Get back to me when you re-enter the real world of American politics.

[Miss Marple]

I am not talking about consistency on 100% support of the President. I am talking about scattershot, "I will support him in 2004" followed by "Bush is a socialist" etc. etc. You know what I am talking about.

[dirtboy]

Sorry but your above reply is focused in dirtboy world. We don't live in dirtboy world. Get back to me when you re-enter the real world of American politics.

How is asking your opinion on these political issues some kind of alternative world? Why won't you state your opinion? These are very simple questions.

[Miss Marple]

I am not talking about consistency on 100% support of the President. I am talking about scattershot, "I will support him in 2004" followed by "Bush is a socialist" etc. etc. You know what I am talking about.

[Dane]

How is asking your opinion on these political issues some kind of alternative world? Why won't you state your opinion? These are very simple questions

My opinion is that the Bush administration is doing much better than the previous administration in directing the country towards conservative principles.

We can talk to death about the idealogical minutae and then watch some scream "betrayal", but that accomplishes nil, IMO.

I look at the big picture as was stated in Southack's reply #22, and basically damn those who only focus on idealogical minutae as the basis of their being.

[dirtboy]

My opinion is that the Bush administration is doing much better than the previous administration in directing the country towards conservative principles. We can talk to death about the idealogical minutae and then watch some scream "betrayal", but that accomplishes nil, IMO.

How is a huge expansion of Medicare "minutae," when we all know the feds will not be able to pay for EXISTING obligations in the very near future? Dane, you're shameless, and then you have the gall to attack posters willing to express their opinions on issues while you refuse to answer simple questions on issues. We all can see what you are made of, and it's not a pretty sight.

[WRhine]

Only one warning: If you decide to go up against bush in `04, you'd darn well better succeed in denying him re-election, because if he wins without your support, he won't owe you a damn thing.

LOL. How much worse can it get for Conservatives under Bush? He shamelessly panders to illegal aliens with amnesties, social security entitlements and all sorts of other taxpayer financed goodies while leaving our borders open to this invasion. He has put many of our freedoms in jeopardy with the Patriot Act because he doesn’t have the backbone to put an end to the immigration free for all in America. He likes the idea of getting the government involved in making down payments on homes for, of course, certain targeted groups. He has proposed out of thin air the biggest entitlement since the days of LBJ to say nothing of his Farm, Education, CFR monstrosities on top of a budget that makes Slick Willie look like Piker.

No, I'm afraid Bush has already told the conservative wing of the republican party what he thinks about us and has casted his lot in with the Immigrant/Soccer Mom/Grey Panther constituencies. If there is any doubt about this, he just answered it with his socialized drug plan for seniors. Until proven otherwise we owe Bush NOTHING.

[Miss Marple]

You never gave him anything to begin with. Don't use that "we." I support him cheerfully.

[Dane]

How is a huge expansion of Medicare "minutae," when we all know the feds will not be able to pay for EXISTING obligations in the very near future? Dane, you're shameless, and then you have the gall to attack posters willing to express their opinions on issues while you refuse to answer simple questions on issues. We all can see what you are made of, and it's not a pretty sight

Whatever dirt. You are speaking from, IMO, the comfortable confines of dirt world and ignoring the real American political world.

That's fine, dirt, that is your right as an American, just as it is my right to point out the real world of modern American politics.

Look I do not like the reality of medicare prescription drugs, but it is reality and must be dealt with in reality.

No chest thumping speech about how the founders would be against this will change that reality.

Get the picture here dirt, you know that picture called modern American political reality.

[CroftonFreeper]

well said

[kansan]

It almost seems in this day and age that you're better off politically having the opposition party in power, as they will vote your agenda to keep you from returning to power.

This is my observation as well. Nixon to China, Clinton on welfare reform/NAFTA, Bush on education and potentially prescription drugs. It's pretty surreal.

[dirtboy]

Whatever dirt. You are speaking from, IMO, the comfortable confines of dirt world and ignoring the real American political world. That's fine, dirt, that is your right as an American, just as it is my right to point out the real world of modern American politics. Look I do not like the reality of medicare prescription drugs, but it is reality and must be dealt with in reality.

You wanna know reality, Dane? Stick around for ten years when the senior entitlement system goes into the red. THAT is reality, not your hash-brained attempt to rationize Bush's making the problem worse, not better. Isn't that what conservatives should be about? Making things better? This is insanity, and you have the temerity to question MY grip on reality.

No chest thumping speech about how the founders would be against this will change that reality.

Here's a copy of the Constitution. Keep it around in case you run out of toilet paper.

Get the picture here dirt, you know that picture called modern American political reality.

I stand in DEFIANCE of the mob. You only wish to be at the head of the mob.

[WRhine]

You never gave him anything to begin with. Don't use that "we." I support him cheerfully.

B/S. Do you KNOW ME? I supported this president with my vote, time and money. Why don't you page back to the FR archives during the 2000 campaign before making any more of a fool of yourself. There you will find me blasting Gore and certain conservatives for NOT supporting Bush. Do It!

[hchutch]

"If it's difficult now to make the case for dismantling the New Deal and the Great Society because so many voters are so dependent on government handouts, how will we be better positioned to make the case by having far more people dependent on ever greater and as yet uncreated handouts?"

First of all, there is the question of how it is implemented: The old saying is, "The devil is in the details." Well, in this case, there is that privatization mechanism that Southack mentioned in Posts 201 and 211. One that could extend to ALL of Medicare.

We could not get a privatization mechanism for Medicare passed as a stand-alone bill. That is political reality. We don't have to like it, but if we don't take that into account, we get our butts kicked. So why not slip the mechanism into popular legislation - even legislation that might upset ideological purists - instead? Then, when the timing is right, and the circumstances are favorable, EXERCISE the option, and defeat any legislative attempt to overturn the decision to exercise the option with the veto pen.

When people realize the world has not ended, the shrill cries from the Left will be unheeded. This is pretty much what has happened with concealed-carry legislation. Folks have realized that it did not cause the end of the world, and it has a strong track record of success. Same sort of thing can happen with the privatization mechanism. Use it, and when people see the world has not ended, and things still work (or work better), the Left's bleating will be ignored. Oh, and by the way, Medicare is privatized, which is the objective, is it not?

Is the path that Bush has taken to make that objective possible the perfect path? No. But it might be good enough to achieve the objective. So, the question I asked you, "Is idealogical purity more important than results?", does not represent a false dilemma. Perhaps a better question to ask is, "How far are you willing to go to get a privatization mechanism for Medicare passed through Congress?"

Miss Marple and Dane have a point: Look at the big picture. We get a privatization mechanism for Medicare passed into law, ready for use when the circumstances are right (use of that mechanism will require having a good political strategy in place). We also cut costs because people may not require the real expensive surgery and long-term care because they don't get the medication they need.

Furthermore, another "big picture" item to consider is this: If Medicare is privatized and working well, that makes the privatization of Social Security easier to sell to the general public.

[dirtboy]

A lot of folks who fought for Bush are now alientated by the last few weeks. But instead of listening to our concerns, we're being told to just suck it up like we always do. We should learn from black Democrats - the only thing you get from unquestioning loyalty is continuous neglect.

[Dane]

You wanna know reality, Dane? Stick around for ten years when the senior entitlement system goes into the red. THAT is reality, not your hash-brained attempt to rationize Bush's making the problem worse, not better. Isn't that what conservatives should be about? Making things better? This is insanity, and you have the temerity to question MY grip on reality.

And that reality will hit the American public hard, IMO, but at the present moment that is what they want. I can't change that.

Look there is a resistance to tax increases and there is a want to provide drugs for medicare. I and you know that this cannot stand. It will come to a confrontation.

This is just my opinion, but the demo's know this. They for years have used as a political stick that prescription drugs will break Medicare. They talk and beat Republicans over the head about it for political purposes, now it is going into fruition and now some demos are backing away. Once the system is bankrupt and more taxes are required, who is going to request more taxes? More than likely the demo's and not the Pubbie's whose precednt is of Bush 43 of saying no new taxes and pushing for tax cuts.

The ball is now in the demo's court.