NRCC Radio Ad

Liz Benjamin has the details on a National Republican Congressional Committee radio ad targeting Eric Massa and other Democrats supporting the stimulus. USA Today notes that the ads are launched at a time when there's pretty broad support for the stimulus plan.


That's funny. Everything I've been reading and hearing says the opposite. Support for this so-called stimulus package has been dwindling ever since it was announced. USA Today should talk to my neighbors.

The USAToday story is consistent with the polling:

There's no backlash against the bill that's been detected so far.

USA Today should talk to my neighbors.

I'm sure that would be a representative sample.

Don't forget there's no money for meth production in this bill.

Gotta love polls, pick the one you like. This one says only 37% favor it:

So only 37% of people support it, the congress didn't even have time to read it, just RAM it through! Give Amtrak a billion, give Harry Read (or Reid) 8 BILLION to build a rail system to LA. Whoopie! Yea! So what did Mr. Massa get US? Did he get us 8 BILLION for fast canal boats to travel the Erie?

It's a terrible bill, but they are going to ram it through and hope people forget about it all within 4 years.

Love the tax break we got though, 13 bucks a week! Woo Hoo! Major deal there!

On the poll, it's all about how you ask the question:

So you don't want the government to spend money on infrastructure projects that save energy and employ workers (e.g., rail from LA to Las Vegas, which will do both). And you don't want a tax cut.

Herbert Hoover tried that strategy. It didn't work out too well for him, or the country.

It isn't the Federal governments responsibility to build infrastructure, it belongs to the states and NO project should go forward without proper state funding. If it isn't worth funding to the local people, it isn't worth doing. So no, I don't want the government to spend MY money on a rail system between LA and Vegas, it does ME absolutely no good, so why should I help pay for that? Have the people in California and Nevada get together and spend THEIR money (through state government) on projects like that.

As for tax cuts, of course I'm all for tax cuts, for EVERYONE, across the board. I think we should all PAY the same percentage, and if their is a tax cut it should be across the board, not targeted at certain people. That way we are ALL effected and we will ALL support or not support the proposition. If you target certain groups, you pit people against people and divide and everyone starts looking for their piece of the pie and stealing from others. So yes, in my opinion, they should have done more in the tax cut area. Why? Giving people a tax cut puts more money in their pocket, and what do people do with money? They either BUY things, Save it for things to buy later (college), or Invest it in businesses. ALL of those are stimulating propositions. Buying things stimulates more production, saving it gives banks money to lend, and investing helps fund business activities. The difference is people spend money on things they find valuable, and those businesses thrive, whereas government spends money on mouse research, saving the San Fran wetlands, or some other stupid junk. Like Amtrak, who hasn't profited in years, if a business isn't profitable, it should go under. Rail won't work in the U.S.? Why? Because Americans like freedom! They want to go WHEN and WHERE they want, we are not a people who want to be tied to a rail schedule.

Government needs to keep their hands out of business! Bad businesses should fail! End of story. Unions that drive up costs so much on a business (or government) that makes it not viable, should fail.

As for the tax cut? WHAT tax cut? You have to look at the NET cost. The government is going to spend 800 Billion. There are 300 Million people in the US. So the cost is $2,667 per person. Our kickback is 13 dollars per week for working adults, which comes to $676 a year (first year, less second year). So as a family of 5, this bill costs us $2667 * 5 = $13,333, we have two working adults, so we 'get' $1,352. So the net loss to an American family such as us is $13,333 - $1,352 = $11,981.

If people wanted to do this stimulus, then it could have been real easy, send a check to every family who files their taxes (which would leave out most democrats I guess), and send them $2,667 for every person in the family.

It isn't the Federal governments responsibility to build infrastructure

So I guess you're opposed to the Interstate Highway System, the product of the liberal Democratic Eisenhower administration?

It's been shown by many studies that tax cuts do not stimulate the economy. But you're not even being consistent about them: You want across-the-board tax cuts but yet you say that the tax cuts aren't really a tax cut. Which is it?

Nope, States should be responsible for their roads, if they don't want to 'hook them together' with the other states highways that run through there state, then so be it, but doesn't make much sense for them since traffic across their state will bring in money. Our federal government should not be involved with building roads.

"Tax cuts don't stimulate the economy." Been shown by whom? Anyone can write a report, showing anything they want. HISTORY shows reality. William Bradford tried socialism, it didn't work. The Reagan tax cuts prove that tax cuts DO stimulate the economy. But I guess people can't learn from history, they have to live it themselves. So in order to get Reagan we had to survive Carter, to get the next Reagan, HOPEfully we CAN survive Obama. Unless it becomes un-repairable.

I want across the board tax cuts for 'stimulus', with no additional government spending.

The current plans says we get a tax cut of 13 dollars per week. But is that REALLY a tax cut? It isn't a tax cut! It's them calling it a tax cut so people feel they personally got something. But we are getting anything, they are spending 2667 for each person and giving us 676 back as a "tax cut", so now we are only paying around 2000 per person. They are taking YOUR money and spending it how THEY want to. I think you would know better on how to spend YOUR money. It is a tax increase for every person in America of 2000!

I'm saying give each person in America 2667. Unless the person is going to keep the money and put it in their mattress it will stimulate economy.

Also I continue to point this out. What are the two most liberal states in the Union? California and NY. What two states are basically broke? California and NY. Businesses continue to leave NY! But Schumer can't seem to understand that if they suck businesses dry they will leave and the state gets nothing. Look across history, socialism and government intervention has never worked, and never will. Russia failed. Economically, and our policies will lead us to failure if we continue on this path.

Good Lord these wingnuts are long-winded.

Maybe they really are on meth.

Nope, States should be responsible for their roads, if they don't want to 'hook them together' with the other states highways that run through there state, then so be it, but doesn't make much sense for them since traffic across their state will bring in money. Our federal government should not be involved with building roads.

I hate to say this, but that may be the dumbest thing I have ever heard in my life. You do know that we've had an interstate system for 50 years, right? That it was put in under a Republican president and that it is widely hailed as a huge success? That all other western countries have copied it to some extent?

I am saddened by this - I thought my stance on global warming was the dumbest thing you have ever heard :(

Wasn't one of the reasons for the Interstate Highway System strategic? Could it be that's why the official name is "The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways"? Why do Republicans now hate America?

Could it be that's why the official name is "The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways"?

Eisenhower was a RINO, though. Remember all that Chomskyite stuff he said about the military industrial complex?

RINO, hell, he was a socialist.

I was going to respond to Casey last night, but then I began to imagine what it would be like if the US was organized the way he advocates. Since the server hosting this blog is in New Jersey, we'd need to have a New York/New Jersey "Internet Compact" that permitted packets to flow across state lines. What if NY and NJ decided they didn't want to "hook them together"?

Ok, let me clear a few things up. I don't do the Republican/Democrat thing, there are some ideas of the Republicans I like and some (albeit fewer) of the Democrat things. So I would much prefer to talk about issues, rather than what the Dems and Pubs party lines are. After all, that has shifted, in the wrong (left) position way to far and has skewed what all of our core values are. JFK, although a Dem had more Republican values than GW had.

As for a 'compact' to do somethign across state lines. That is PERFECT! Because I mention somethign about states taking care of their own stuff and as a dem, the first thing you think about is 'power' and how to control it, and that you would have to setup compacts with the bordering states. I said they should be RESPONSIBLE for their own roads, and schools, and laws. Isn't America suppose to be based on FREEdom? So why is it anytime we talk about how somethign should be structured, the first thing the Dems come up with is "Ok, who gets to be in charge, who is going to CONTROL it? I wanna I wanna". That is the whole idea of the Dems, CONTROL everything. If the past year and the first 30 days of this presidency doesn't make you think of the book 1984, then you are blind.

Don't worry, I think Al Gore would ensure that the internet could freely cross state borders since he invented it. Just like he has invented global warming.

As for the comment about 'hating' America. Not a chance! I just hate its' current direction. This 24 year vet of the Navy and Army doesnt' hate America, just totally dislikes the direction Pelosi, Read and Obama, and yes, to some extent, the way GW has taken it. I also can't believe that people can't see that what they are supporting is in such polar opposite of what this country was founded on. We fought the British over freedom and taxes, that is what America is suppose to be about. Instead, we have a president who takes 1.2 Trillion from its people and spends it on BS! And a govenor who institutes 88 new taxes (see link below). If you want socialism and a nanny government, then as far as I'm concerned, you aren't American and should move to Europe. Especially since most of them are fleeing there, for here.

I don't do the Republican/Democrat thing

Right, because these kinds of comments aren't about Republican vs. Democrat:

as a dem, the first thing you think about is 'power' and how to control it

Don't worry, I think Al Gore would ensure that the internet could freely cross state borders since he invented it. Just like he has invented global warming.

Also, your views on interstate commerce are, to put it politely, fringe. You realize that the Constitution has clause delegating that right to Congress, don't you? The notion that each state should negotiate a compact with neighbor states to allow Internet traffic is exactly the kind of situation that the Founders were trying to avoid.

No it isn't, as I wasn't comparing a Republican vs. a Democrat, but describing the normal thought pattern of one who follows teh Democratic party line.

You don't have ot be polite, because frankly, I will listen, and read, and think, but in the end, you have your believes and I have mine. You will think I'm a crap head and I will think you are, so doesn't matter.

Well they didn't do a very good job at it, because NY is still terrible at letting in outside goods! Who is probably the first state that wanted to tax online purchases? From day one NY has tried to suck everyone dry and continues to do so.

As for the concept of localization being fringe? .... its reality! The state has roads that it takes care of, the county has them and towns. They are all responsible for taking care of their piece. Does NY cross PA lines and plow their roads? I doubt it! Responsibility and Funding should be kept as local as possible, where the people who use those services decide their value and pay for it. If a community wants to pay a lot in school taxes to have good schools that shoudl be fine. If another community doesn't want to support teh schools in that way, ti shouldn't be the federal governments responsibility to tax everyone else because that community wants better schools, but doesn't want to fund them.

PS: We should probably not trade IP Packets directly with NJ! Let's filter them through PA first. :-)

Casey, the things you right are so stupid that I can't believe you can possibly be serious. Are you playing some kind of a joke on us, taking crazy positions as a form of satire? If so, you're doing a good job, but you ought to keep your comments shorter.

PERFECT again! You are like a template!

When you can't argue points and have no facts or examples based in reality, just call the persons ideas stupid, on the fringe and dismiss them as you return to la la land. Follow your Pelosi to lala land. Follow your Hollywood Sean Penn types and the mainstream media. You follow MSNBC and Moveon like a zombie. Follow Michael Moore like the government has nothing better to do than watch you and brings forth floods on its own people. Follow, follow, follow, be the obedient one. Let others THINK for you. Use a modern version of witchcraft to dismiss others who don't hold your point of view because you don't have the energy or will to put forth the thought and work required to think and write more than soundbytes taken from websites. I feel sorry for you.

This has nothing to do with Michael Moore, Sean Penn or The issue is your inability to engage in a reasonable discussion.

Every single person responding to your blather brought up the one obvious example that everyone who paid attention in high school knows about: the Interstate Highway system. That's a bi-partisan, long-term, Federal commitment to funding transportation systems between states. We have a 50-year tradition of doing that in this country, so if you think it's wrong, you need to provide alternatives.

You're so clueless that you don't even know that what you're saying is in direct contravention of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. Go to a second-hand store and pick up a high-school Civics textbook and read it. You obviously weren't paying attention the first time.

O no Colonel Sanders ...... Youuuurrrrr Wrong! "bi-partisan". One of your favorite words is it?

Ok, I will repeat this again, but will try to keep it as short for those who can't pay attention long.

New Yorkers ... should NOT ... have to fund a rail system that runs from LA to Vegas. Comprendo Amigo?

If you don't agree, tell me WHY WE SHOULD.

Thank goodness we are in the same state, otherwise it would take an "Act of Congress' for us to email each other so we could get the FHA to build us a 'packet bridge' to no where over a fictitious border between states.

Hey Exile. I guess your lucky I have a sense of humor because otherwise I might take your comment to mean something more than what it implies. I'm a college graduate who lives in the southern tier and who happens to be a conservative republican. We don't have meth labs in my neck of the woods but there still might be some boot leggin goin on in these parts. My neighbors don't read and write to well either and I bet they don't even know what the word 'stimulus' means. But you know what, they're my neighbors and I value their opinions.