Devil's Advocate.....

[Fountain79]

There have been many on this discussion board saying that states whose representatives/senators/governors were oppossed to the stimulus should not receive any funding now that the stimulus has passed. Myself I find the argument flawed and was curious about something....using that same argument....if a president was to create a tax cut and/or tax rebate that you were opposed to would you still take the money?

[DesertFlower]

1. the people shouldn't be

punished because their leaders are assholes.

[Deja Q]

2. If I genuinely cared about the people I governed, yes.

And I would say that too. We all have to do things we don't always agree with, but there is a greater good or sacrifice. The stimulus under * was hokey. President Obama's is better but I can't agree with all of it either. However, it is what it is. A stop gap measure. Let's do it and work on the foundation so it can't happen again.

[ColbertWatcher]

3. Good question.

As for me: at this point I can't afford to turn money away!

[Rick Myers]

4. Turning down the money is pure posture...

These idiots KNOW they can't turn it down... It's all for the base, and a hope that the public has a short memory...

[bbinacan]

5. Good point

Those who are opposed to a tax cut and benefit from it should return their cut with a letter of protest. Short of that, they're hypocrites.

[hfojvt]

6. bad Republican question

My tax cut under the Bush administration was approximately $300 per year. I was never against a $300 tax cut for low wage workers. What I was against was $56 billion in tax cuts for people with income over $2 million a year. All the Republicans crowing about "why don't you liberals send your $300 checks back" missed the point of that.

As for the last $300 stimulus check last spring, my argument was that more money should have gone to people who needed it. To back that up, I donated $150 of it to the Salvation Army and another $50 to the Obama campaign. The other $100 covered my subscription to The Nation for the next two years. But what I did with my $300 does not touch the $1800 checks that went out to some families making $90,000 or $130,000 a year.

[hfojvt]

7. I should note that the $56 billion is just for the dividend tax cut of 2003

The Bush tax cuts actually gave much more than $56 billion to the wealthy as they lowered the top rates that only the wealthy pay. Over the last seven years the total windfall is probably over $800 billion going to the top 20%.