[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 13]
[House]
[Page 18846]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   LOOK WHO RUNS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Madam Speaker, we've heard endless braying from the 
Republicans time after time, demanding an extension of tax cuts for the 
rich in this country. They tell us that extending the tax cuts for the 
rich will somehow create jobs when we've had these tax cuts for the 
rich for 9 years, and I haven't noticed a whole lot of jobs being 
created in the last 9 years. They tell us it will dramatically boost 
the economy. I haven't noticed that happening for the last 9 years 
either.
  So you really have to wonder why they persist in this mania, this 
obsession of theirs that we need to have more tax cuts for the rich 
when the economy is flat on its back and unemployment is almost 10 
percent.
  I think I have the answer. The answer turns out to be very simple. 
They want a tax cut for the rich because they want a tax cut for 
themselves.
  What do I mean by that? Well, let's take a look at the people who are 
really in charge, the ones who actually run the Republican Party.
  Let's start with this gentleman here, the man with the cigar, Rush 
Limbaugh. Doesn't he look happy?
  According to Newsweek, he makes $58.7 million a year, and extending 
the Bush tax cuts for the rich will mean that he'll have another $2.7 
million. Mega dittos, Rush, and mega money.
  Let's look at the next one.
  Here's Glenn Beck. According to Newsweek, Glenn Beck makes $33 
million a year as a pundit, and extending the Bush tax cuts means a 
cool $1.5 million for Glenn Beck's ongoing, night-by-night imitation of 
Howard Beale from ``Network.''
  Now let's take a look at the next one.
  Sean Hannity. Newsweek says that Sean Hannity, this man of the 
people, makes $22 million a year from his act on Fox, and that means 
that the Bush tax cuts mean an extra $1 million for Sean Hannity. Maybe 
he can go now and afford some anger management classes.
  Let's take a look at the next one.
  Bill O'Reilly. He makes a modest $20 million a year from his gig on 
Fox. And that means that the Bush tax cuts give him not quite seven 
figures, merely $914,000 a year of extra cash. It's easy to see why 
Bill O'Reilly wants to see the Bush tax cuts extended. And I have to 
say he's no Pinhead when it comes to that.
  And now Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin has made $14 million this year from 
cashing in on her fame. In fact, she has done a better job of turning 
fame into cash than anyone in American history, $14 million. She wants 
the Bush tax cuts extended so she can make an extra cool $638,000.
  And now on to Newt Gingrich, the man who did such a great job in 
running America back in the 1990s that he wants a second chance in this 
decade. Newt, if you do to us now what you did to us then, we're going 
to be in big trouble. But Newt Gingrich makes $5 million a year from 
his punditry, which means he'll get an extra quarter million dollars a 
year from the Bush tax cuts being extended.
  And now let's go on to the Big Cheese, George W. Bush, himself, the 
man who got us into two endless wars, the man who brought us to the 
brink of national bankruptcy, the man who gave us $4-a-gallon gasoline.

                              {time}  1820

  George W. Bush makes a cool $4.2 million a year, according to 
Newsweek. That means that extending the Bush tax cuts for George Bush 
means an extra $187,000 in his pocket every single year.
  I have a better idea. Instead of placating these people and letting 
them spew out onto the airwaves their lies about the Bush tax cuts 
without ever revealing the fact that they stand to gain millions, 
millions of dollars each year from their selfish desire to take 
advantage of the rest of America, let's do this: let's take that money 
and create jobs. All that money that the Bush tax cuts are charging us, 
that could create jobs for 3 million Americans a year. A $30,000 job, a 
fair wage for fair work, a dignified wage for dignified work, and a way 
to revive our economy in America.
  I think that's a better idea than stuffing even more money into the 
pockets of the rich. Because the problem in America today is not that 
the poor have too much money. That's not the problem at all. It's that 
they need jobs.

                          ____________________