Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: rob777

“...dedicated to figuring out what she said.”

Yes, I’ve noted Sarah’s tendency to be cryptic. It is not a deal-breaker for me, but I certainly don’t list it on the Advantages side of her balance.

For example, her mysterious remarks about contested primaries. For all I know she could have been talking about Obama. Most reports say she was referring to TEA Party freshmen who were going soft on earlier debt talks/votes. If that is the case, then it appears most of the TEA folk, including herself, did not put much stock in her threat.

Or... perhaps this is just a political maneuver to make it look like the TEA folk voted as she wanted.

Does she have sway and these guys voted for a bill she would sign? Or was she swayed by ambition to feign tacit support for the position a majority of her threatened minions eventually took?

Neither option would be good.

Of course, I understand her qualifications of the ‘victory’ statement and her supporters analysis of that which says she does not like the bill but still considers the TEA influence as some sort of moral victory. But Rush is Right, as usual, there is no such thing as moral victory in politics.

At the VERY best, today’s law is an IMMORAL victory for those who claim it anything other than a disastrous defeat.

Victory in that it might save some seats or reputations or tee times. Immoral in that we just gave the most irresponsible spender in US history the largest credit card balance bump ever recorded. And all I got was this lousy “I survived ‘Victory’” T-shirt.

Perhaps this is an example of Palin either swaying or approving the majority of the TEA caucus and their votes. And perhaps it will be hailed another Bachmann legislative failure because she and a third of the TEA people chose higher and righter ground to make a stand.

If so, I am DEFINITELY voting for legislative failure over executive experience in 2012.

As Micheal Reagan just reminded us, his dad died waiting for Congress to fulfill the elusive 3-to-1 ‘out years’ promise. Not only did we NOT win one for the Gipper today, we also failed to learn from his mistake:

You will ALL be ‘under’ long before the Capitol calender gets to any ‘out’ years.


122 posted on 08/02/2011 5:40:32 PM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies ]


To: BuddhaBrown
"Yes, I’ve noted Sarah’s tendency to be cryptic. It is not a deal-breaker for me, but I certainly don’t list it on the Advantages side of her balance."


The problem I have with this "tendency to be cryptic" is that it sometimes comes off as an attempt to satisfy more than one audience while not saying anything of substance. It reinforces my suspicion that she is more of a populist than an ideological conservative. Bachmann may have her faults, but I have no doubts about where she stands ideologically.
123 posted on 08/02/2011 6:36:06 PM PDT by rob777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson