Dick Morris was angry because he wants a shutdown if Republicans don't meet at least the 60 Billion in cuts they wanted originally and do what they said in the plan they touted last fall.
SOme Democrat on after Dick said that they wanted a budget last fall, but there wasn't enough votes. Because these goofs wanted to win re-election. I say we are headed to shutdown. Any bill passing the house gets shot down in the Senate and vice versa.
Huh?
I trust a rogue Bachmann than a rogue Republican AKA RINO.
HMMM, Dick Morris, Michelle Bachmann... who is on the firing line? Who is the conservative?
Her stating she wants a shutdown publically would be dooming the whole fight as Newt did in 1995 when he later caved and gave Clinton what everything asked for. Bachmann is smarter than she is given credit for.
Bachmann is correct. If you control only part of the government, you won’t get everything you want. Hence the compromise.
She’s talking out of both sides of her mouth. I’m really starting to disappointed in her statements. “ I was for the shutdown before I was against it. Or was it that I was against it before I was for it. Tell me Greta, what do you think my position is?”
-—...whether, as many have speculated, it is the Tea Party caucus that has Rep. John Boehner and the Republican leadership “in a straitjacket” over spending.-—
Notice how it is assumed (probably correctly for most of the Dems and RINO’s) that politicians don’t do their own thinking; how they never take a course of action simply it’s the right thing for the country?
What twisted thinking!
I agree. Pay for the troops should be held separate.
Then we can have an argument over Margaret Sanger and her NeoNazis later.
To those who say Michele Bachmann is “talking out of both sides of her mouth,” that she is “being a legislator not a leader,” and that she is “compromising,” I say you’re not seeing the big picture.
Her strategy is different. She doesn’t think THIS is “a hill on which to die.” Why? Because The Republicans are insisting on $61 billion of cuts, and the Democrats say no more than $33 billion. What’s the difference? The Republican plan would mean our annual deficit is 4/10’s of ONE PERCENT LESS of the total Gross Domestic Product for the YEAR. .04%!
Bachmann is making the point that about $28 billion for what’s left of this budget year is CHUMP CHANGE compared to the BIG PRIZE — NEXT YEAR’S budget, when we can REALLY go after the big changes like ObamaCare. THAT, Michele says, is “the hill on which to die.” THAT is where we can literally save HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS next year, and TRILLIONS over the next 5-10 years.
Now, one might disagree with her strategy — but she isn’t compromising. I think she makes some valid points. Frankly, I don’t think it will matter whether the stand is made here, or with next years budget. Either way, the outcome will be the same, one way or the other. But Michele has GOOD REASON and VALID arguments to make the case she’s making. She’s one of the GOOD GUYS (er, gals? :-D ) — let’s NOT forget it.
A shut down is a losing move. It also ignores the problem. If the givernment is going to shut down, do it over trillons, not paultry billions. This recent budget kerfuffle is a giant charade to hide unwillness to solve a massive problem. B rated movies have less transparent plot lines.
Where is a direct quote. Where she says I am against a shut down.
Still waiting for that direct quote, either that are you have told a lie.