Replies

"1) I haven’t noticed her support the Tarp bank bailout after the 08 election campaign. If you have a link that shows her doing that and a date, I’ll stand corrected."

She did so in her book on page 270: "The House of Representatives rejected a Bush-backed economic bailout plan in a vote in which two-thirds of Republicans voted no. The impression this made on the electorate was not helpful to our cause. Millions of Americans were poised to go bankrupt or lose their savings, and the perception was that Republicans had failed to respond." Not only is she sticking with her support of the bailout here, but throwing those brave GOP House members who opposed it in favor of a free market alternative under the bus. It was not their opposition that "hurt the cause" but support for the measure. Polls showed that an overwhelming number of Americans opposed it and McCain's support dropped when suspended his campaign to lead the fight for it. Sarah could have dissented like she did on drilling in Alaska, but chose to go along with the plan and later to criticize those who opposed it. This is not the actions of a leader of the movement for limited government.

"2) The primary action that Bush/Paulson took during the economic financial meltdown was the TARP action where they bailed out banks in crisis.

Now, I disagreed with this action, but why are we still bitching about this?"

We are still "bitching" about it because it was a big government proposal that directly contradicts the principles of limited government. We still "bitch" about Romney's past support for big government proposals and rightly so.

I had Dr. Walt Williams on as a guest for a local radio program at the time and he ran through a number of problems with it. By bailing out those who failed, we did not allow for more efficient competitors to rise up and replace the failures. We also set a precedent for other even more unwise bailouts.

She did so in her book on page 270: “The House of Representatives rejected a Bush-backed economic bailout plan in a vote in which two-thirds of Republicans voted no. The impression this made on the electorate was not helpful to our cause. Millions of Americans were poised to go bankrupt or lose their savings, and the perception was that Republicans had failed to respond.”

Since I’ve read most of the book, I read that section closely. Look carefully at what she says. The context is explaining how the campaign went from being up 4 percent in the polls to the loss of support after the economic implosion and the vote in the House where GOP members voted against the Tarp bailout.

1)That is not post election support for the TARP.
2) More importantly she talks about perception of the hurting American voter.

***Her quote:

“The *impression* this made on the electorate was not helpful to our cause. Millions of Americans were poised to go bankrupt or lose their savings, and the *perception* was that Republicans had failed to respond.”

That’s not support.