Why not Rush's plan?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Pastor Larry, Jan 29, 2009.

  1. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here it is: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123318906638926749.html

    Why not this plan?

    Don't focus on who it is. Forget that it is Rush. For once in the life of the political forum, let's focus on substance.

    What is substantively wrong with this plan?

    Moderators, please delete any posts that focus on Rush as a person. He is not the topic here.
     
  2. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Neither has the right to spend money. Congress does. And Limbaugh was not elected to anything. If he wants to play, he should go run for office. He is a citizen like anyone else here, and has no more right to make such a determination than do you or I.
     
  3. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps you missed it, MP (or just ignored it), but the thread is not about Rush. It is about the plan. I realize he is a private citizen (remember Obama said he wanted to hear from them). I specifically asked that this focus on the plan.

    So forget where the plan comes from. It is irrelevant for this discussion.

    Why not the plan? What is wrong or right with the actual ideas?
     
  4. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,417
    Likes Received:
    72
    Temporary tax cuts, IMO, will not do much to stimulate growth. Individuals will not make long-term decisions based on temporary cuts. Now, permanent tax cuts are another matter, but the budget is hemorrhaging as is.

    I do think it would be wise to cut the corporate tax. Between the 35% tax rate and Sarbanes-Oxley, we are driving business overseas.
     
  5. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    The plan sounds fine to me. I am basically against any government intervention.

    You would have been well served by just presenting the plan without mentioning the name of the author. You know what kind of reaction it is going to get from both liberal and conservative alike. It only serves to take the thread off track.

    At least use a source that has some similance of Christian values.
     
  6. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, I ignored nothing. I answered the opening question...why not? I know it matters not. I addressed the fact that Rush...or ANYONE unelected can't determine tax cuts. THAT is the flaw in the plan...not that it is Rush's idea. That it is unconstitutional. Did you miss that or ignore it?

    Edited to add: Even if it were you, me, or Joe the Plumber, it isn't legal, nor does a private individual get to make such determinations about the public funds. In a republican form of government, we elect people to do that for us.
     
    #6 Magnetic Poles, Jan 29, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 29, 2009
  7. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought about not mentioning who it was, but the link made it clear, and someone would probably accuse me of something underhanded. Besides, it is pretty well known where the plan comes from I think.

    Hopefully we are mature enough to focus on the issues and not the personality.
     
  8. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    If we must spend government money, the plan is much better thought out than the one going through Congress.
     
  9. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let's stop playing stupid games. You were not making a valid point about the plan. Your point was about process. Again, that's not a particularly fine distinction, and I rather imagine that you know that very well, but couldnd't pass up the chance to say something about Rush. So get over it, and get on topic, or don't post.

    Pretend it is Obama's plan, or McConnell, or Pelosi, or anyone you choose.

    What is wrong with the plan?
     
  10. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't consider following the Constitution a stupid game. Perhaps this exercise could be thusly described however.

    I said nothing about Rush, other than he is not Constitutionally eligible. So get off your high horse. I have already told you what is wrong with the plan. Even if it were Obama's, Pelosi's, or Marvin the Martian's. You sir are ignoring the flaw that has been pointed out, and now falsely accusing me of saying something derogatory about your radio god. I said nothing at all negative about Rush here. Not one thing. So quit derailing your own thread.

    If you think I attacked Rush in this thread, show me where. Can't find it, can you? SO get over your hypersensitivity to your hero.
     
  11. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,503
    Likes Received:
    40
    God has given you a gift, MP, use it wisely!
     
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't either. But that's not the topic, as you can tell by reading.

    Your contributions have certainly made it so. You are making the issue about process. The issue is about the plan itself. If Congress passed this plan, what would be wrong with it?

    Rush isn't the topic.

    I am not on one. I am trying to foster and intelligent conversation and you are thwarting that with your contributions.

    No you didn't. You said, "neither has the right to spend money." That is a process issue (who can spend it), not a plan issue (how should it be spent). Again, that distinction is not all that fine, so it doesn't take a great amount of thought to understand it. You should be able to get it.

    Let's explore this a bit: You said, I falsely accused you of saying something derogatory about Rush. Where did I say you said something derogatory or made an attack against Rush? Please quote it for me. If you can't find it, apologize. Either will be fine with me.

    Second, you call Rush my radio god and my hero. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have listened to Rush more in the last week than in the last ten years, and that equals about two hours. I don't even like Rush. As I have often said, if I am listening to the radio from noon to three (which is rarely), I am listening to Jim Rome. That is well known here at the BB, so you are simply not telling the truth.

    So you have some matters here to clear up.

    1) You need to find where I said you attacked Rush or said something derogatory about him, or you need to apologize for making false accusations and saying things about fellows posters that aren't true.

    2) You need to apologize for saying that Rush is my radio god or my hero. Neither is true, and you know it.
     
  13. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,646
    Likes Received:
    223
    Get used to disappointment.
     
  14. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    What's so constitutional about the bailout ? That's what's being rammed down our throat, not Limbaugh's idea.
     
  15. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's not the topic here.
     
  16. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    It's my response to MP's caterwauling.

    Like I've said for years, the only time the left will use the constitution is when they think conservatives will be made to look bad.
     
  17. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,086
    Likes Received:
    218
     
  18. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rush isn't an elected official and doesn't have the right to spend tax money.
     
  19. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    I guess the only problem with the plan is who came up with it. Nobody can argue one point. Typical.
     
  20. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course not, but that's not the issue. You, like MP, are talking about process for some reason. No single individual, including Obama, has the right. But this is a different subject.

    Why not talk about the plan?
     

Share This Page

Loading...