Why Win If You're Going to Wimp Out? (Rush Limbaugh asks Republicans)

rushlimbaugh ^ | January 2, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

[TLBSHOW]

Why Win If You're Going to Wimp Out?

January 2, 2003

There is no reason for going soft on the Bush agenda, yet we're doing that more and more on everything from ending racial discrimination (aka: affirmative action) to tax fairness to Saddam. If we'd already dealt with him, we wouldn't be faced with this supposed dilemma over whether North Korea or Iraq should be our primary focus. It's not a dilemma, anyway. They're both going to be dealt with, so there's no reason to create these openings.

Reuters reports that President Bush plans to unveil an economic stimulus package expected to reach up to $300 billion, including "targeted" tax cuts, but only a 50% cut in taxes on corporate dividends to shareholders. The original proposal was to eliminate them, because it's immoral to tax earnings twice. It's double taxation. It's ridiculous. For crying out loud, why do you win the White House and Senate if you're only going to water down your agenda?

I love this administration when it comes to foreign policy and protecting us from terrorism, but I continue to scratch my head over some of this on the domestic side. If this Reuters story isn't just wishful thinking, the White House is going to shelve tax cuts because they fear the Democratic lie that it's "for the rich." They don't have the sand to go out there and cite the IRS figures we have on this site, proving that only the rich are paying income taxes.

Who are "the rich," anyway? It used to be millionaires. Today it's any family that earns $100,000 a year - and we have multimillionaires like Kerry and Edwards and Rockefeller and Kennedy saying, "I have my wealth, so I don't favor a wealth tax, but I'm going to tax income so you can't get wealthy."

The White House is also said to be staying out of the Supreme Court case of a woman kept out of the University of Michigan because of her skin color: white. Admission based on race is wrong, but the administration fears taking the woman's side because it would damage White House counsel Alberto Gonzales' Supreme Court confirmation.

They're also ready to extend unemployment insurance yet again – which means paying people not to work by taking the money from those of us who are working. Folks, the Democrats are going to criticize us no matter what we do. It's absurd to back down on our agenda. As Senator Mitch McConnell told me in our upcoming Limbaugh Letter interview, the Senate only has six months to get things done. The Democrats want to bottle things up so they can have issues. Why help them out?

[HankReardon]

Who? Mitch McConnell?

[Stew Padasso]

Anyone who can do a better job of framing the argument for small government and rally people to the cause. Right now its half assed and lip service.

[TLBSHOW]

Right now there is no reason to go after Bush except to keep him on the right side! He has it all there is no excuss now about putting forth the conservative agenda which voters voted for in November! If he caves and goes left well then Bush is open season for replacement!

[jonathonandjennifer]

The Democrats pressured him into raising taxes...

The way I've heard it was even worse; The Congressional Democrats promised to cut spending in return for Bush 41's support in raising taxes, promply broke their promise and increased spending, then used the ensuing deficit as a campaign issue against Bush.

[HankReardon]

Yes, I agree, it's 180 degrees from where we were. Who do you like? J. C. Watts?

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" Seems to me that the last time Rush was heavily into criticizing GW (prior to the Nov election), he ended up making a public apology after the election. Basically saying he was wrong and what GW was doing and planning had eluded him."

I hope Rush isn't starting the Bush bashing again.He apparently partially read the Reuters story. It said that Bush has been tight lipped on his economic plan and no one knows what he is going to do,until he makes his address on Tuesday.Reuters quotes aides who say they think Bush will do this or he might do that or he might not do this-but,until Bush gives his speech,no one will know for sure what to expect. I wish Rush would wait for the actual facts and not jump to conclusions,based on media reports and speculation.

[TLBSHOW]

http://mcconnell.senate.gov/

His landslide victory on November 5, 1996, made Mitch McConnell the only Republican in Kentucky history to be elected to three full terms in the United States Senate. In fact, until Jim Bunning's election to the Senate in 1998, McConnell, Kentucky's senior senator, had been the only Kentucky Republican to win a statewide race since 1967.

Named by several national publications, including Congressional Quarterly and George magazine, as one of Washington's most powerful people, McConnell currently serves as Ranking Member of the Senate Rules Committee, which has jurisdiction over federal election law and the administration of the Senate.

McConnell also held the honor of being named the Chairman of the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, which directed the planning and production of President George W. Bush's Inauguration as the 43rd President of the United States. As Chairman, McConnell served as emcee of the 2001 Inauguration Ceremony and escorted President Bush throughout the day's festivities.

McConnell also serves as Ranking Member of the Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee, a key foreign policy committee, and a senior member of the Agriculture and Appropriations Committees, and as a member of the Judiciary Committee. Serving on these committees has allowed McConnell to become involved in a broad array of issues critical to Kentucky and the nation. Consequently, McConnell is a familiar face on network and cable television public affairs programs. He is also a frequent contributor of opinion pieces to national newspapers, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal. For the second year in a row, McConnell was a top national draw on Sunday news shows, appearing on more Sunday programs than nearly every other member of Congress. McConnell was a regular on NBC's Meet the Press, FOX News Sunday, ABC's This Week, CNN's Late Edition and CBS's Face the Nation.

Washington news bookers and producers also sought McConnell out for appearances on several cable political shows. McConnell appeared on nearly 50 cable news programs during 2000, including repeat performances on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, CNN's Crossfire and Inside Politics, and FOX's Special Report and The Beltway Boys. McConnell offered regular comment on a wide range of issues including the 2000 elections, tax relief, Social Security reform and foreign affairs.

From January 1997 - January 2001, McConnell served as Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC). As Chairman, McConnell was responsible for developing and supporting the campaigns of Republican Senate candidates. He also helped Republicans maintain control of the Senate for four Congresses in a row, a feat which has not been accomplished since the 1920's.

Born on February 20, 1942, and raised in South Louisville, McConnell's leadership ability was recognized early on as student body president in high school; College of Arts and Sciences student body president at the University of Louisville (where he received a B.A. with honors); and at the University of Kentucky's College of Law where he was elected president of the Student Bar Association. McConnell's political ascension continued as an intern with Senator John Sherman Cooper, chief legislative assistant to Senator Marlow Cook, and deputy assistant attorney general under President Gerald R. Ford. Before being elected to the United States Senate, McConnell served as County Judge-Executive in Jefferson County, Kentucky from 1978 to 1984.

Senator McConnell is married to Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao. Previously, Secretary Chao served as president of the United Way of America and director of the Peace Corps. He is the father of three daughters: Elly, Claire, and Porter.

[Stew Padasso]

"Right now there is no reason to go after Bush"

I agree. What is bothersome is the "hold the feet to the fire" argument has somewhat been doused.

[HankReardon]

When will they learn? You do not make deals with the enemy, be they North Korea, Iraq or the socialist, anti-capitalistic democrats and expect them to keep the deal.

[Stew Padasso]

From what I have seen of JC Watts is positive, however I'm not convinced until I see a voting record and more research on his record/actions and how he frames his arguments.

[Stew Padasso]

He wouldn't run against Bush anyways. Its my understanding that he is a big supporter.

[jonathonandjennifer]

When will they learn?

Your list got me thinking maybe Bush 43 IS learning; He doen't seem inclined to listen to anything Sadam or that N. Korean goof are saying. Hopefully he will use this same thinking with his domestic enemies.

[HankReardon]

Thank you for that very informative post on Mitch McConnell. I think it would be great to have some one like him in the Republic Primaries. It would be great for conservative issues. But of course, if the democrats cannot succeed in wrecking the economic recovery, Bush will win. Isn't this something? Why do these fanatic "I vote Democratic" people not see that these people are willing to sacrifice the economy and cause harm to millions in an attempt to regain power? The media is trying it's damndest! Even with the unemployment extensions hampering people from working there's 94% employment, many of those are working 2 jobs. We need conservatives to write the Truth in their hometown papers, letters to the editor are so powerful!

[TLBSHOW]

What is bothersome is the "hold the feet to the fire" argument has somewhat been doused.


Not by me I have flammed the fire as much as I can and if everyone would get on board we can do a perfect job of it.

The bush bots won't have any part of it but they are in another world anyways! They don't matter. They are for Bush no matter what he does so they are already counted in the mix. We don't have to worry about them. The new election rather we like it or not has started today!

So

What matters is the conservatives united and with Bush and getting the conservative agenda passed!

Bush was given a landslide in November and he has no excuss to go left.

[demkicker]

"You do not cut the premium payment on someone simply because they pay no other "tax" that can be cut. I don't get it? the people that pay no federal tax are wanting a tax cut? Who's taking the dummy pills? Isn't true the Social Security system is in peril? Cutting the premiums can only imperil it further. Of course the Dems want SS to fail so the Gov. can then step in and save the people. The ol' create a crisis then be the savior ploy."

Look, all I'm saying is that it's a slap in the face for folks who receive social security checks to have their money taxed yet again! It's not only STUPID, but an idiotic stupid political move.

[TLBSHOW]

We need conservatives to write the Truth in their hometown papers, letters to the editor are so powerful!

BUMP

[Stew Padasso]

If you have a ping list, feel free to add me and I'll do my part to help.

[HankReardon]

The way I understand it is that Clinton raised the amount of a person's SS payment could be subject to federal tax. If Bush would simply repeal that raise it would do wonders for him politically. Now, is the SS payment taken out of your check taxed when you earned it? No, it was not taxed at that time. It's like my IRA, I pay $3,000 per year and do not pat tax on that amount of income at that time, I'll pay taxes on that as I withdraw on it. Am I wrong?

[Torie]

What I think is that the exiting of Lott has ascribed to it a seminal importance on this forum that it does not have.

[MissAmericanPie]

I am curious as to what there is to love about Bush's stunning ability to protect us from terrorist attacks. I consider it dumb luck so far, given that we have no idea of what terrorist strength or weakness is within our borders. If they are out of juice we will never know it, we will keep getting fed an alert now and then. If they are planning something we will only find out about it after the fact.

If terrorist are waiting for equipment they won't have a problem having it delivered right to their front door by UPS. If they want to come across our borders, no sweat. If we are counting on the F.B.I.'s ability to track and catch them in the nick of time, oh brother. If we are counting on the I.N.S., saint's preserve us.

It is more than mildly curious that when the Democrats win by a slim majority they yell "MANDATE" at the tops of their lungs and push through their agendas. When Republicans win by the same margin they wimper that they must legislate from a left of center position, then move as far left as they dare.

Like you I pushed both non-voters and democrats at work to get out and vote Republican, I only managed five that actually did go to the polls that would not have. Unlike you I did it already knowing what would happen with Repubicans in charge of the Presidency, Congress, and the Senate....a swan dive off the left side of the diving board.

I only put forth the effort to ensure they win so a point would be made and the evidence glaring. The Republican Party is no place for a conservative unless they grit their teeth, hold these dummies feet to the fire, or punish the party by not voting for it, making it face immediate extinction, rather than the future extinction it fears for lack of minority votes that they have no intention of addressing by enforcing the laws of the land, and no chance of out pandering the Democrats to attain.

The price the party would have to pay in principle to move far enough left to attain these, at present, few squalled votes is just too high a cost as far as many conservatives are concerned.

So when do we get cracking with the "hold their feet to the fire" thing? Shouldn't we engage in some activism? Daylight is burning.