:: We just handed the most liberal president, I believe, in U.S. history a $2.4 billion debt increase ::
Let me correct that for you Governor: “We just handed the most liberal president in U.S. history a $2.4 billion campaign fund that will be converted into the proverbial “walking around money” for Holder’s people and individuals in urban centers.”
Get an effin clue!
I remain hopeful because I remember how long it took Reagan to change the thinking in the Cold War. Appeasement, Mutually Assured Destruction and moral equivalence between the East and the West were the thinking when he took office. To actually speak of "winning" the Cold War was considered lunacy. It didn't happen until after he left office, but there is no doubt who finally won the Cold War because he was actually willing to fight the fight.
To speak of limiting the growth of government and entitlements is what is today considered lunacy and impossible. Reagan understood that winning the hearts and minds first was necessary to win legislatively. The Tea Party has been successful in getting the country to understand that the size and scope of the federal government is unsustainable. George W. Bush attempted to take on Social Security and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but retreated when he met resistance. We just now need a new Reagan who is willing to actually fight the fight.
It’s a start. It’s not enough, not NEARLY enough. But it’s more than would have been done without the Tea Party, and in that sense, I guess you can call it a sort of “victory,” if you squint when you look at it.
That old proverb says “a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” This is that single step. I’m just not confident that who we’ve got in Washington right now will be willing to take any more steps to keep us going on the path to fiscal sanity.
}:-)4
Yeah. It's a 100% pure genuine defeat.
After pushing CC&B within 4 votes of passing Congress, we end up with $26T new spending over 10 years, Presidential increase of debt limit, and guaranteed tax hikes.
I do not support her contention in this case.
Too bad to....I - and I dare say many others - had such high hopes. Those have been diminished by her position on this.
“We shall take this victory and make sure our politicians in office today are learning from this victory,” Ms. Palin said Monday night on Fox News, where she is a paid contributor. “It’s not a 100% pure genuine victory. We just handed the most liberal president, I believe, in U.S. history a $2.4 billion debt increase.”
I hope this will be a wake up call to Palinistas that Sarah Palin is fallible and far from perfect. She is a politician.
I’m not denigrating Sarah Palin, she is still in the top three I am considering voting for in the primary. What my point is to extreme Palin supporters is that she is NOT perfect and the “great white hope.” She is one of the best of potential candidates, but she is not without error...and is subject to error....and subject to compromising even on principles.
By all means you should vote for her, support her, but STOP worshipping her. You are setting yourself, and the party, up for sorrow. No one can live up to the hype ascribed to her. She is no “RONALD REAGAN” of legend. Goodness, even President Ronald Reagan wasn’t the legend that is “RONALD REAGAN.”
We need to look at the candidates through realistic lens and examine each closely. Like I said, Sarah is in the top three of potentials (I don’t have a choice yet) and will get my close consideration. And, even if she should not get my vote in a primary, she WOULD in a general election if she is the candidate. I’m hoping others that are GOP voters will be a little less on the scorched earth thinking....(i.e. candidate “......” or nothing.
Now moving on, I think she was making a mistake to suggest this is a “victory” for the Tea Party.....that is the current MSMs tact. They will start changing their tune when Obama signs it. They will start calling it a “great victory for the Obama administration as a great unifier.” President Obama is the winner here.
Did Palin ever say how she would have voted were she in congress?
Thank for posting this Troll Bait. I see a few of them took it.
I used to think people on here were intelligent. I don't pay much attention to peoples screenames, so I don't know if all the usual intelligent people are laying low or if only the dumb people are currently posting.
They should have just quietly raised the debt limit as in the past, for all the credit conservatives are getting for doing the best they could.
All this doesn't matter much. One Congress can't bind another. All this can go away in the next Congress, when we will have significant majorities in both houses and the white house.
The current Congress won't allow a lame duck Obama to let the Bush tax cuts expire.
What would you have had them do? Your expectations of what was possible isn't based in reality. Instead of progress you would have shut down 40% of the government, with OBAMA deciding who gets paid. He would be as vindictive as you could imagine. Republicans would be blamed for all of it. This would have been the end of the Republican Party at the exact time we Conservatives are finally taking it over.
One election (2010) isn't enough to correct mistakes that took decades to accumulate. Hopefully we can do it with just two (2010 & 2012) elections. When we have control of Washington, will be the time to demand drastic changes. This will be when we can actually deliver. Not now. We did the best we could and won a minor victory.
We haven't “cut” spending. Technically, by definition, no we haven't. BUT we are going to spend Trillions less than we would have. That is SOMETHING, no? Better than nothing, yes?
Rush and Harry Reid are both WRONG. Not tax increases, more spending CUTS accomplishes the same thing. Instead of increasing taxes, cut spending instead.
Rush and others are trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Eating our own is a recipe for disaster.
Most seem to be missing this sentence. If it wasn't for the Tea Party and their supporters like Sarah Palin you asses would be hurting hurt alot more than they do today. You should be thanking them (and her). What did your candidate do for the cause?
Does mean some of her supporters here are going to being saying the same thing?
I listened to Rush today, I do not think he agrees, never heard him so down in the dump.
I think the most “direct link” would be the video in question. With all due respect to the WSJ, I don’t need someone to tell me what was said if I can see/hear it myself. Granted, the video link is in the WSJ blog post, but still, the video itself is unquestionably the most “direct link”.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1090216652001/palin-vs-bidens-terrorist-tea-party-comments
After Gov. Palin and Greta are through talking about The latest bilge to come from Biden’s mouth, the conversation in question begins, at approximately 3:16.
From the outset, we can see from Greta’s initial question, and the context thereof, that the term “victory” here is not being applied to the bill itself, but to the tone and type of conversation that surrounded the bill (spending cuts). Indeed, one can see/hear Palin herself near the end of the video clip criticizing the actual bill, much less calling it a “victory”.
As anyone who knows my posts on FR knows, I’m no Palin cult follower, as some around here are. But make no mistake, this “controversy” is clearly manufactured.
I don’t know about the actual word “victory” but you can’t deny that without the tea party it would have been simply a roll over and probably would have been shoved down our throats in a tenth of the time it took to do so. So the tea party, like in November 2010, had a major impact. If not, the VP and many others wouldn’t have been using words like “terrorists”. Maybe Sarah was trying to be positive. Just more proof that everything she says is parsed because she is the major player on our side. For example, where the hell was finger in the wind Romney the whole time?
1000 ways to die
Yesterdays episode trashing Sarah Palin and Tea Party.
Last segment of episode: ;mayoral candidate gets the point. (20:00)
VIEW VIDEO
Advance the slider to 17 minutes into the episode.
http://www.spike.com/full-episodes/rf7lm7/1000-ways-to-die-today-s-special-death-season-3-ep-326
I like to watch the cable series “A 1000 ways to die” on Spike TV. And I like the series “Coal”. But I have seen how the leftist liberals influence the production of stories on 1000 Ways to Die.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1000 Ways to Die
1000 Ways to Die is a docufiction television series that premiered on May 14, 2008 on Spike. The program recreates unusual supposed deaths and debunked urban legends[1] and includes interviews with experts who describe the science behind each death. Up until the end of season one, the final story of each episode showed actual footage of dangerous situations that almost ended in death, along with interviews with people involved in the situations. A portion of these deaths have been nominated for or have received a Darwin Award.
About Spike TV
Spike TV is available in 99.4 million homes and is a division of MTV Networks. A unit of Viacom (NYSE: VIA, VIA.B), MTV Networks is one of the world’s leading creators of programming and content across all media platforms.
bump.
Flagrant spin!
Quoting Greta’s assignment of “victory” to TEA for changing the nature of the debate, Palin reiterated “this victory” strictly in context of TEA’s influence on the process. Palin did not offer any other significant notion of “victory” concerning this bastard of a bill.