Outrageous Rush and the Press
Limbaugh's entertainment value is unparalleled, and we should all appreciate him for that—preferably from afar [10 Things You Didn't Know About Rush Limbaugh, usnews.com]. Michael Steele was wrong to revise his comment that the big guy is just a personality and not a spokesperson for the Republican Party. Limbaugh has to say outrageous things because his shrinking listener base counts on that to re-enforce their prehistoric views of American life. If he didn't say totally outlandish things, Limbaugh wouldn't get any press. I will continue to listen to him as little as possible. I don't need to spend my valuable time listening to bigotry and personal attacks. He does nothing to make this a better country and plenty to degrade it. It's a sad commentary on all of us that he has any following at all.
Comment by Ellen Landers of VA
I am not a Rush Limbaugh fan, but I deeply respect the right of freedom of speech and appreciate that there are diverse (and strongly held) opinions on a wide array of issues. I simply wish that we would all be a little more civil in stating those differences of opinions. I also appreciate information from a wide array of reliable sources so that I may form informed opinions and make fact-based decisions whenever possible. I do believe in a two party (at least) political system and sincerely hope that the Republican Party will not use Rush Limbaugh as a spokesperson. He is a radio show host and, as such, is a bit outspoken and appeals (seemingly) to the far right. I do not feel that this would be beneficial in strengthening and expanding the Republican Party.
Comment by M. Rowe of FL
Rush Limbaugh's outrageousness garners all of the attention he receives because he knows what he needs to say to ensure media will cover him. Of course democrats, and even many republicans, do not like to associate with Limbaugh due to his tendency to be as far right as possible. Limbaugh's style of expressing his opinions seems to be for attention-grabbing purposes.
Comment by Shay R. of LA
What's Sinking the Stock Market?
Seems to me what is going on now is a switch over from supply side economics to demand side economics [Is Obama to Blame for the Plunging Stock Market? usnews.com]. We've had supply side for a long time and there is plenty of supply. We need demand. Nobody ever invested in something until they found somebody who wanted to buy it. The Obama administration is doing stuff to increase demand. Probably not enough, but it's barely started. The markets are dominated by supply-siders. They don't see demand as important, because it's been ignored for 30 years. Thus the markets are scared this tactic will not work. If those of us who believe in demand are right, the market will be hearing good news in a few months and start back up.
Comment by Bill Couture of CA
Blaming Obama for the recent stock market decline is silly. There are many reasons for the decline, just as there are many reasons for the economic troubles we face. But Obama is not helping the market. The market hates uncertainty. The impact of Obama's planned energy tax hike (Carbon cap and trade) will reach many areas of the economy. Oil companies, coal companies, utilities, and the companies that service them and build their facilities will be impacted by the tax. As will steel producers, railroads, airlines and other companies that use lots of hydrocarbon based energy. No one knows how much the carbon permits will cost, so these companies can't plan very well. Who wants to invest when the future is muddled? Health care reform will have a major impact on medical service providers, insurance companies and drug companies. These impacts are unknown. Who would invest in those companies now? There may be some winners in the Obama plan (think wind turbines, solar and such). But right now these companies have very little market capitalization as compared with the existing industries. So gains in their value won't help the market much. Another problem is the long term budget plan that projects deficits of at least $500 billion per year after the economy recovers (years 2103 to 2020). This massive increase in the national debt dwarfs the deficit of the Bush years. One more reason for the market to be concerned.
Comment by Bob of TX
The bailouts never stop after they start. It's like giving money to a kid. The more you give him the more he spends. When a well runs dry you don't try to fill it back up with buckets of water you dig a new one. I am not an expert in money matters but I know that if you want to fix a problem you have to correct what is causing it before you can solve it. We claim the housing market caused the problem. My belief is that a combination of things created by money-hungry people caused it. The big question is how do we jump start the economy? We need to get people to start spending. How can we get them to start spending if we are giving all the money to the people who created the problem in the first place? They will do the same thing they have been doing for decades and we know where that will lead us to again.
Comment by J.R. Torres of CA
The market is crashing and this fake wealth is going to be all gone. There is nothing the president can do but soften the landing and start the rebuilding, which he is doing beautifully.
Comment by Lynn of MA