<All your rhetoric is recycled from the debate over Bush's tax cut plan (took you what, 15 seconds to spew?), which at least didn't pretend to be an "emergency economic stimulus plan". It's the Big Lie that makes this stinking piece of corruption so offensive. It's opportunistic greed under cover of patriotism...a dollar bill wrapped in the flag.

It took me very little time because I have had a lot of practice. I agree...it is shameful that excuses have to be made for restoring wealth to its owner, as opposed to simply citing the moral right of ownership, but this philosophical point seems to elude many people. For example:

How does one "earn" a special dispensation from taxes? (As opposed to purchasing it with campaign contributions.) The Alternative Minimum Tax was passed by Congress because companies like GE were exploiting so many cozy little loopholes in the tax law that they were paying nothing in taxes despite billions in profits. Basically, then, you're saying that government intervention in the economy that cuts into corporate profits is bad, but government handouts that pad the bottom line are good?

You shouldn't have to "earn" relief from looting. You think refunding taxes is a "handout?" As you see, my point flew right through you without making a dent, like a hummingbird down the center of the Holland Tunnel. Let me try again:

WEALTH BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE WHO EARN IT. IT'S THEIR PROPERTY.*

Of course, this concept, along with the corollaries of "earning," "property," and "ownership" negates the entire foundation of wealth redistribution, which is the primary function of our government now, so bringing it to the attention of liberals gets about the same response as I would get by dragging the skeleton of Jesus Christ into the Vatican.

Did you ever get around to actually reading Adam Smith? If so, maybe you could explain how pumping billions into the supply side can do anything to help the economy without a corresponding increase in the demand side. GE and its cohorts can't build factories or hire workers with this handout; they can only put it in the bank. USDA Prime pork.

Money in the private sector, wherever you put it, tends to flow where it can be the most productive, because that's how you grow it into more money. Money in a bank, assuming for the sake of argument that that's where GE puts it (instead of being productive or hiring workers) flows into the community as loans and other investments. Since the bank wants to make money as well, these investments will tend to be productive ones.

Money in the public sector flows to the noisiest looter, or the one with the most "pull" in Washington. Maybe it will flow to actual corporate welfare, which is completely different than returning a corporation's taxes. But since you define the latter as "pork," then that distinction will probably elude you too.

*A real radical libertarian would have added "TAXATION IS THEFT."