Archive for August, 2009
Found this article online and I thought it would be interesting to start a discussion
Why Rush Limbaugh Is Good for the Republicans
By RAMESH PONNURU Ramesh Ponnuru – Wed Mar 11, 2:20 pm ET
AP – In the March 16 issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, March 9): ‘Enough! A Conservative’s Case Against …
Obama aides Rahm Emanuel and Robert Gibbs knew what they were doing when they declared Rush Limbaugh the leader of the Republican opposition. They were putting Republican politicians in a trap. Repudiating Limbaugh would mean alienating millions of conservatives and declaring Limbaugh’s plainspoken conservatism - which many of those politicians share - outside the lines of the national debate. But neither could Republicans allow the insinuation that they take orders from a radio host stand. If voters got that impression, they would look weak. Worse, the polls show more people dislike Limbaugh than like him.
The Republicans escaped this trap by saying that the White House was talking about Limbaugh in order to avoid talking about Obama’s failure to come up with a financial-rescue plan. But now one Limbaugh controversy has been replaced by another. Instead of squabbling with Democrats about him, Republicans are arguing with each other. The subject of the dispute: Does Limbaugh help spread conservatism among Americans - or turn them off from it? (Read "Criticizing Rush Limbaugh: Over the Line?")
Some conservatives have always winced at Limbaugh’s in-your-face style. But the debate today has a special charge because, like the similar debate over Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin a few months ago, it is tied up with questions about the future of the Republican party.
In one camp are those who believe that the Republican party must modernize its message to account for changing circumstances. The columnist David Brooks has called these people the "reformers." Against them are the "traditionalists," who believe that Republicans need only recommit themselves to Ronald Reagan’s agenda to succeed again. (Read "Can Michael Steele Broaden the Grand Old Party?")
The traditionalists push for upper-income tax cuts. The reformers want to cut the payroll taxes paid by the middle class. Traditionalists often deny that global warming is real. Reformers just want to make sure that our answer to it is cost-effective. The traditionalists want to hold the line on government spending. The reformers think that it’s more important for Republicans to advocate market-friendly solutions to problems such as rising health-care costs and traffic congestion.
Limbaugh, needless to say, is a traditionalist, and some of the reformers have become fierce critics. The debate has gotten pretty hot over the last two weeks, with those critics going after Limbaugh’s girth and his outraged fans accusing them of being closet liberals.
1) Do you think that Rush is really the leader of the repub party?
2) Do you think Rush helps or hurts conservs?
3). Do you think that Rush push repubs away and help them become more moderate or do you think that Rush will attract repubs and make them much more conserv?
4) share additional thoughts!!!!
no the democrats excellently put Rush as the face of the GOP, so hopefully some republican can come out and set the record straight. to be associated with Rush is like suicidal politics.
From this weeks Barron’s Magazine
Matey, I Know a Dead Parrot
By JIM MCTAGUE |
Barron’s Magazine
ObamaCare is deader than a Monty Python parrot.
OBAMACARE HAS KICKED THE BUCKET. IT IS pushing up daisies; has shuffled off this mortal coil. The proposal is deader than Monty Python’s famed dead parrot.
ObamaCare was put to sleep by a death panel: The American public. It has carefully read the three House bills and one Senate bill on the Internet and consequently is shaken. Numerous polls show a majority of persons desire Congress to scrap the plan and begin anew. A recent Rasmussen Report survey found that 54% of Americans don’t want Congress to vote on the measure this year.
It’s not merely the loud-mouths at the town brawl meetings who are opposed to the current bills; so are many open-minded people who have read the legislation cover to cover. They find it vague and confusing and consequently, very worrisome. They cannot decide whether they are reading boilerplate with a foundation of sound case law or the hasty concoction of exhausted aides whose ideological bosses want to railroad the plan through both houses by the fall.
My favorite example of this bewilderment is Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker, who, on August 12, tried to skewer Sarah Palin for her claim that under ObamaCare a death panel would deny treatment to her elderly parents and Down syndrome child. Parker inadvertently makes the case that Palin’s reading is defensible. She writes, "The bill is an enabling document that leaves great discretion to the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop guidelines that ultimately could change the character of what seems to be offered." Parker concludes that people correctly fear bureaucracies and have a right to clarity from lawmakers.
AS IN THE MONTY PYTHON SKETCH, in which a pet-shop owner repeatedly denies that a certain dead parrot is dead, the purveyors of Obama’s health-care turkey claim it is merely stunned. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says the public has "misconceptions" and that our President soon will set them straight. (For the sake of comparison, I urge you to view the parrot sketch on YouTube.)
Misconceptions? Clearly, people are revolted by the plan, a fact that hasn’t been lost on many lawmakers up for re-election next year. Americans, it turns out, retain a preference for private-market solutions and not big-government solutions. Senators talk of slicing and dicing ObamaCare like a turkey so they can digest it one piece at a time.
Divisions within the Democratic-controlled Congress are as much the cause of ObamaCare’s cardiac arrest as is any quackery from right-wing radio hosts and preposterously venomous protesters. The party’s liberals won’t vote for any bill that doesn’t include a government-run insurer. Party moderates and conservatives won’t vote for a plan that does include it. Liberals want a bill at almost any price tag. Party conservatives and moderates fret about the budgetary impacts, which could exceed $1 trillion over 10 years.
In any event, there isn’t enough time left on the legislative calendar to work out these significant differences. No appropriations bills have been passed. The Senate must vote to raise the debt limit. A predicted flu pandemic might disrupt deliberations.
Just like Monty Python’s parrot, not even 4,000 volts can jolt ObamaCare back to life.
Libs rant all you want, Obamacare is dead. Some version of healthcare reform will pass without the "public option" and 0bama will do a phony victory dance and take credit and it will "change’ nothing. The american people are becoming more and more tired of this liberal left agenda.
Wishful thinking on your part. There WILL be a healthcare reform bill passed. And it WILL have the public option in it. I know you can’t stand sick people getting medical care in America but they will and you will have to live with it.
i got a job offer from them and they dont really sound legitamate, and i was wondering if anyone works for them or got scamed by them. if someone can prove to me they are good or bad i will apreciate it a lot, thanks
run don’t walk away