Posted on 08/01/2011 6:31:48 PM PDT by Steelfish
AUGUST 1, 2011 A Tea Party Triumph The debt deal is a rare bipartisan victory for the forces of smaller government.
If a good political compromise is one that has something for everyone to hate, then last night's bipartisan debt-ceiling deal is a triumph. The bargain is nonetheless better than what seemed achievable in recent days, especially given the revolt of some GOP conservatives that gave the White House and Democrats more political leverage.
*** The big picture is that the deal is a victory for the cause of smaller government, arguably the biggest since welfare reform in 1996. Most bipartisan budget deals trade tax increases that are immediate for spending cuts that turn out to be fictional. This one includes no immediate tax increases, despite President Obama's demand as recently as last Monday. The immediate spending cuts are real, if smaller than we'd prefer, and the longer-term cuts could be real if Republicans hold Congress and continue to enforce the deal's spending caps.
The framework (we haven't seen all the details) calls for an initial step of some $900 billion in domestic discretionary cuts over 10 years from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) baseline puffed up by recent spending. If the cuts hold, this would go some way to erasing the fiscal damage from the Obama-Nancy Pelosi stimulus. This is no small achievement considering that Republicans control neither the Senate nor the White House, and it underscores how much the GOP victory in November has reshaped the U.S. fiscal debate.
No wonder liberals are howling. They have come to believe in the upward spending ratchet, under which all spending increases are permanent. Not any more.
The second phase of the deal is less clear cut, though it also could turn out to shrink Leviathan.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The WSJ has become a leftist rag.
If anyone believes this was a victory for the Tea Party, I have some prime oceanfront property in Detroit that I’ll sell for a great price.
This Hobbit doesn’t recognize the WSJ as an authority on what constitutes victory.
I’m no Boehner fan and without the pressure from the Tea Party I would hate to see what Boehner would have done but I guess in the end we did pretty good with what we had. I’d have loved to see something different and much better but I guess we will have to have more control to get that.
The GOP elites are trying to split up the tea party. They have now forced us to choose between a strong defense and low taxes.
WSJ is delusional
What are the spending cuts for this year?
Does anyone really think they are going to reduce defense by 40 to 50%.
What a load of Bull. The WSJ is panning the Dems, is Murdoch that afraid of being investigated in the USA by Holder?
The WSJ is a leftist rag these days.
What are they smoking? Sheesh.
Whats ironic is the WSJ used to be about restricting government.
This is the exact same stunt they pulled the last time during the Shutdown Debacle: Bash the Tea Party for “extremism” the whole time during the debate... and then once it’s over, declare it a phony massive “victory” for the Tea Party.
Same people and newspapers involved, too (WSJ, Jen Rubin at the WaPo, etc.)
Ahhhhhh WSJ... uhhhh... Hell no!
LLS
Damn those republicrats.as I’ve said before, we are watching a new “divine comedy”its just the joke is on us
No joke!
I am not going to hold my breath hoping for the supposed cuts yet to be decided on and mark my words..... the dems on the “bi-partisan” committee will get some tax increases in there somewhere to poke us poor hobbits. If they do that, so many on the right will be disaffected it will influence 2012.
It’s like watching Lucy and Charlie Brown over and over.
The WSJ and other conservatives point out how there were no tax increases. As even Bill Kristol pointed out in the Weekly Standard. We didn’t have any part of govt form 2009-2010 and there were no tax increases. So now we win a huge victory in 2010 and have our biggets majority in the House in 75 years(really our biggest ever in the modern conservative era)and there’s no tax increases and we call that a huge win?
There were no tax increases under the dems from 2009-2010 when they could have enacted them any time. They were never going to raise taxes.
Moreover, at some point, the GOP will have to stand and fight to the end over cutting spending. They say “we only have 1/2 of 1/3 of the govt’. That’s highly misleading as the SC has nothing to do with spending and the budget. Moreover they have control of the branch where spending originates and have a veto over all spending. All.
Even if we win the WH and Senate in 2012 we’re not going to have 60+ conservatives in the Senate to overcome a dem filibuster.
At some point they are going to have to say “we’re cutting spending and we’re willing to do whatever it takes”. Just as Obama and the dems were over health care and the stimulus. They knew they might lose Congress, but they were willing to risk it. They were willing to do whatever it took to pass them.
Have you seen any evidence from the current GOP leadershop that they’re willing to do something similar over cutting spending, over really dealing with the issue. So far, I haven’t.
Exactly!
That's exactly what it is.
The WSJ is correct in this case. I know that this deal is mostly smoke and mirrors. However the Tea Party stared down the lib and won the battle of public opinion over the rats and their lackey’s in the MSM. This sets the debate parameters for 2012, the opportunity is to Put a Tea Party President in place and take control of the Senate. This is something we haven’t seen on out lifetimes. It is also the only chance to move back from the brink of disaster.
Given the number of RINO’s and Rats in Congress this is a great outcome IMO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.