Limbaugh allowed Cantor to falsely claim on his show that CBO said recovery bill "is not a stimulative bill"
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
SUMMARY: On his radio show, Rush Limbaugh allowed Rep. Eric Cantor to falsely claim of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: "Even the Congressional Budget Office ... says it is not a stimulative bill." In fact, the CBO stated in its January 26 report: "CBO anticipates that implementation of H.R. 1 would have a noticeable impact on economic growth and employment in the next few years," while the CBO director said that the bill would "provide massive fiscal stimulus."
During the January 28 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh allowed guest Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) to falsely claim of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: "Even the Congressional Budget Office [CBO], controlled by the Democrats now, says it is not a stimulative bill." In fact, the CBO stated in its January 26 report: "CBO anticipates that implementation of H.R. 1 would have a noticeable impact on economic growth and employment in the next few years." Further, during his January 27 testimony before the House Committee on the Budget, CBO director Douglas Elmendorf said that H.R. 1 would "provide massive fiscal stimulus that includes a combination of government spending increases and revenue reductions." Elmendorf further stated: "In CBO's judgment, H.R. 1 would provide a substantial boost to economic activity over the next several years relative to what would occur without any legislation."
From Elmendorf's January 27 congressional testimony:
H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, would provide massive fiscal stimulus that includes a combination of government spending increases and revenue reductions. According to estimates by CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), that legislation would widen the federal budget deficit by $170 billion in fiscal year 2009, $356 billion in fiscal year 2010, $174 billion in fiscal year 2011, and by a total of $816 billion over the 2009-2019 period (excluding additional interest costs).
In CBO's judgment, H.R. 1 would provide a substantial boost to economic activity over the next several years relative to what would occur without any legislation. With the legislation, CBO estimates, output would be between 1.3 percent and 3.6 percent higher at the end of this year, higher by a similar amount at the end of next year, and 0.5 percent to 1.4 percent higher at the end of 2011. That additional production would raise the demand for workers, turning some part-time jobs into full-time jobs and boosting the number of people employed. According to CBO's estimates, the number of jobs would be between 0.8 million and 2.1 million higher at the end of this year, 1.2 million to 3.6 million higher at the end of next year, and 0.7 million to 2.1 million higher at the end of 2011.
From the January 28 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: It could be [NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent] Andrea Mitchell, it could be anybody in the drive-by media, just basically treating you as a suspect, accusing you of opposing this marvelous, miraculous package just because it's his. I don't think she has the slightest idea what's in it after you told her.
CANTOR: Right, and that's the frustrating part, Rush. But we're not giving up, and thank goodness you're there to try and help get the message out about what this bill is and isn't. This is a -- this is a spending bill. This is not a stimulus bill. And, you know, the message to the president that I've delivered on several occasions has been this: You were elected by the people of this country because they had hope that you would actually change the way that our federal government works so that it could start working for the people again. And first order of business should be to cut the waste and pork barrel spending in Washington.
This bill is so chock full of government expansion, they can't -- you -- it's hard to even find the stimulus programs in here. Even the Congressional Budget Office, controlled by the Democrats now, says it is not a stimulative bill. Twelve cents out of every dollar could be maybe argued that it is worth some stimulative effect. That is a far cry from doing things the right way and delivering results.
LIMBAUGH: Congressman, did you happen to have a chance this morning to hear President Obama's remarks in the White House after the two CEOs from IBM and Honeywell spoke?
CANTOR: No, I didn't.
















yeah, i noticed him too. With his southern accent, he sounds like cowboy Bush in training. It is going to be fun watching them find their next melody. the republican party has no claim on conservatism anymore so we shall see what the next song and dance going to be like. I heard him trot out the tax cut myth again so i am guessing the words to the music will change but the music is the same, lipstick on the pig trickery.
How DARE you talk about Palin like that?
I am sooooooooooooooooooo sorry !!!!
The real test will be if Cantor can tear up like Boehner can.
Rep. Cantor will have some big shoes to fill. Rep. Boehner seems to be the scumbags scumbag. Here's one of his stunts.
"In 1995, Boehner handed out campaign checks from the tobacco industry to members on the House floor at a time when lawmakers were considering eliminating a tobacco subsidy."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a64ZIkmVPv_w&refer=us
Looks like the real horse racer is Rush Limbaugh wanting to be the voice of the republicans. Great, guess he got the blessing of Hannity and O'reilly. How the party went from conservative principles based on family values to be represented by a drug addicted mouthpiece is beyond me .
Actually, I think MMFA got this one wrong. Most likely, Rush didn't "allow" Cantor to lie.... he brought him on the show because he KNEW he would lie.
I agree.
Could it still be said that he's desperate?
True enough. It's not as if Rush is an objective reporter.
He is now known as The Entertainer, Rush Limbaugh. Please make a note of that... ;>)
I thought he was the comedian Rush Limbaugh? I get so confused with all of his names and guises.
Whoever he might be, he seems to have incredible problems with the stimulus package. Enough that he is willing to lend his incredible entertainmet gravitus towards stopping it. Does he put forward alternatives? People with alternatives? Is he willing to move his bulk away from his microphone and engage in a spirited open debate about it? No. Somehow I have a hard time imagining that his way will somehow be any different from the economic policies of the last eight years. Perhaps making the tax cuts for the more afluent members of our society permanent.
Just what are the details of his economic dream for America? Anyone?
taxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcutstaxcuts...
But, of course, The Entertainer, Rush Limbaugh doesn't speak for the Republican Party... ;>)
This is what I don't get. Republicans want more tax cuts, that didn't seem to help our economy during the Bush years, and now they want MORE tax cuts? Broken records these guys. It's as if tax cuts will fix everything, which we know, they don't.
Irony I noticed in the other thread you called him "Terl", wasn't that the name of the character name of John Travolta played in that stink bomb movie "Battleship Earth"? You know the story written by the scientology guy.
they had a " staff meeting ' just prior.
Allowed? ALLOWED?!??!?! HAHAHAHA!
"Allowed" in that he gathered all his desparate ideologues around their radios for their daily trip through his comic book world, and then gave Cantor broadcast time to mislead them just as he would himself if he wasn't such a lazy blob of goo.
Rush is crying now about government expansion but I dont remember him complaining about the growth of the federal government during the last 8 years under his hero president numbn--s.
Also, what you fail to mention is that the expansion of the federal government under Bush was the largest expansion EVER.
http://dccc.org/blog/archives/stand_strong_against_rush_limbaugh/
This has got to be killing the lefties! Will someone from the dccc please put an end to your own misery?
At least the Dems don't have any celebrity spokespeople that they live in fear of.
Why does something like this put us in misery?
Everytime Limbaugh says something really stupid like he did, we post it up on the old website, it gets lots of traffic from party loyalists, and I'm sure Limbaugh is good for generating donations to the Democratic party. This isn't killing us. This is making our coffers probably overflow with donations. Nothing wrong with signing a petition telling Rush how stupid he is. It's called, you know, freedom of speech after all.
This is the yell at Rush website, go and read the comments. I posted on another thread here that even democrats were upset at the DCCC.
This has got to be killing the lefties! Will someone from the dccc please put an end to your own misery?
Are YOU freaking kidding me?
The comments posted on this site come from rabid Rush listeners who were told about the site from Rush. They, the stepford morons that they are, followed Rush's instructions and posted 'pro Rush' opinions. We already know there are morons who think every words out of Rush's mouth is the gospel.
The adults are working on solutions to unemployment, mortgages foreclosures and a failing economy.
But I'm sure Rush thanks you, the Republican stupid, for keeping him employed.
Limbaugh quickly responded with, "I am greatly puzzled. Why would the Democrats petition against me if I am doing such terrible damage to the GOP?" His site is linking to the DCCC page's "feedback" page, where Limbaugh is asking listeners to "tell the DCCC and all other Democrats that it is time to stop lying about and distorting Rush's comments on Barack Obama's War on Prosperity."
Well I didn't hear about this from Rush, but linked from this website. I still believe the only explanations for continuing to keep this up was that no one from the DCCC was actually looking or that they are into some S & M and were enjoying the flogging!
Stop cut and pasting, media matters (for very little), oops what does that mean?
CBO anticipates that implementation of H.R. 1 would have a noticeable impact on
economic growth and employment in the next few years. Following longstanding
Congressional budget procedures, however, this estimate does not address the potential
budgetary effects of such changes in the economic outlook.
oops what does that mean,mm(fvl)?
Umm, they cut and paste sections of it (and then provided the link) for brevity. You seem to be able to click the link and read what is there, what makes you think others haven't done it already?
We've tried economic stimulus the Bush way (paying off poorly performing companies), let's try it Obama's way.
Why link to it and attack the fashion in which media matters (for very little) chopped off the quotation? Why?
Why cut and paste?
Because either folks never looked at it before the earlier comments, the absence of anyone defending MM(fvl) editing. Once, I showed what it was actually in the CBO report, the response was deafening or maybe they saw it and realized how foolish MM(fvl) was making them look.
As for paying off the those poor performing companies, it was instructive how president Obama felt how the executives of those companies were irresponsible in giving themselves huge bonuses. Yet, he still wants to give them more money! Let them flounder and die on their own if this is what they are going to do with government money. Listen to Rush and the republicans who say, enough already, make better companies on your own with lower tax rates and seeking private capital rather that keeping lousy ones afloat is another socialist ponzi scheme!
And here is more from the CBO testimony and report, mm(fvl),
● Purchases of goods and services, either directly by the federal government or
indirectly in the form of grants to state and local governments. Many of those
involve construction or investment activity that would take several years to
complete.
In estimating outlays for that third category, CBO expects that the rate of spending in
2009 for many programs funded in H.R. 1 would be considerably slower than historical
rates of spending for a full year of funding because the bill would be enacted almost
halfway into the fiscal year. Thus, it would not be appropriate in most cases to use the
full-year rates that CBO typically employs for appropriations enacted near the start of the
fiscal year. Moreover, under H.R. 1, some programs would receive funding that is
significantly above (double, triple, or more) the amounts provided for existing or similar
programs in recent years. Frequently in the past, in all types of federal programs, a
noticeable lag has occurred between sharp increases in budget authority and the resulting
increases in outlays. Based on such experiences, CBO expects that federal agencies,
along with states and other recipients of that funding, would find it difficult to properly
manage and oversee a rapid expansion of existing programs so as to expend the added
funds as quickly as they expend the resources provided for their ongoing programs.
Lags in spending stem in part from the need to draft plans, solicit bids, enter into
contracts, and conduct regulatory or environmental reviews. Spending can be further
delayed because some activities are by their nature seasonal. For example, major school
repairs are generally scheduled during the summer to avoid disrupting classes, and
construction and highway work are difficult to carry out during the winter months in
many parts of the country.
Brand new programs pose additional challenges. Developing procedures and criteria,
issuing the necessary regulations, and reviewing plans and proposals would make
distributing money quickly even more difficult—as can be seen, for example, in the lack
of any disbursements to date under the loan programs established for automakers last
summer to invest in producing energy-efficient vehicles. Throughout the federal
government, spending for new programs has frequently been slower than expected and
rarely been faster.
ooops there it is....
Ahhh, what the heck, why don't we all just look at the whole document together! Consider it a bonding experience and getting in touch with our inner leftist.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9968/hr1.pdf
Specifically, with the first table on page 4, how fast this 'descretionary' spending, ie pork, gets into the economy. And remember, even the CBO said that historically this goes slower than predicted.
Have you read the entire bill?? It is full of PORK spending that should be voted on at another time.
I do admit that there is some good things in this bill, but, Who is going to pay for all of this??? Oh, thats right, you want the wealthy and the big bad corporations to pay for it.
You seem to be up to speed on all 600+ pages of it. How long did it take you to read it? Somehow you neglected to offer any examples of pork spending.
I don't remember anything mentioned in the bill about giving the bill to the wealthy and AnyCorp. Can you refferrence the page(s) which spell this out. Ditto on the tax shelters under siege due to this bill.
Well, I can't and won't be forced to do research for you. And before you go bananas, I am all for helping the poor & needy. I donate all labor costs, while still paying my employees, when called to do jobs for churches and other non-profit orginazation.
Explain to me how enhanced food stamps to recipients create jobs. As before, I am all for helping those in need and this is just one of the4 many items that need to be voted on in a seperate bill.
Oh yes the wonderfully praternal employer how will do anything for his workers, except allow collective bargaining. You'll lock the door and destroy the key before that ever happens. Its for their own good after all.
Well the figure acepted by even conservative think tanks is that every dollar spent on food stamps produces $1.75 dollars in the economy. The food samps go into the wages of the people in the chain who produced and sell that food.
What would the affect on your business be if the people you finally saw for hiring were malnurished or far into starvation? What kind of work force would they be. How would they help your company thrive?
There you go again. I said, "I am all for helping those in need". You failed to show how a single job was created. Each dollar spent on this only passes through several hands. Again this part needs to be in a seperate bill. If were going to do something, lets use that money for something that creates a job with a PAYCHECK for those that need help getting back on their feet so they can provide food for their family and pay their bills.
My mistake, how did you miss it? That's only $1.73 not $1.75. Why do you let me get away with something like that?
I must have missed the part of the bill that includes $xxxxx.xx to crank up the printing presses.
Imagine my surprise. That strawman never saw it coming, nice foot to groin action on a prone noncombatent, five stars fer sure.