August 1, 2011

House Passes Debt-Ceiling Deal

As was expected, the House of Representatives passed the debt-ceiling deal tonight by a margin of 269-161. Democrats split their vote exactly evenly 95-95 while Republicans voted 174-66 in favor of the bill. As Politico points out, all this talk of uber-radical freshmen turns out to be more than a little spin. You can see how your Representative voted here.

However, the most dramatic moment of the night was when Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, still recovering from an attempted assassination, made her way to the floor and cast her first vote since January. As you might guess, the returning Congresswoman was met by an emotional, emphatic and overwhelming response. I defy anyone to not feel a small lump in your throat or a tear in your eye at this one.

by @ 9:40 pm. Filed under Deficit, Misc., Spending
Trackback URL for this post:
http://race42016.com/2011/08/01/house-passes-debt-ceiling-deal/trackback/

154 Responses to “House Passes Debt-Ceiling Deal”

  1. Massachusetts Conservative Says:

    I am extremely glad this bill passed. If we didn’t raise the debt ceiling, even if there were no default, Obama could have tried to blame a bad economy on the Republicans.

    Now, the economy is 100% Obama’s. And now, the Dems are going to have to vote against the Balanced Budget Amendment, much to their negative political prospects in 2012.

  2. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    South Carolina Senator Graham on Fox News just said, “The Party of Ronald Reagan died tonight.”

    Utah Senator Hatch then came on and said, “I was an original tea party member with Reagan before they had a name so I also have to vote ‘no’ tomorrow.”

    Any guesses on the other Republican Senators voting ‘no’ tomorrow or how many?

  3. Matt "MWS" Says:

    I was glad to see this deal done.

    And during it, Huntsman accumulated big time respect points from me. All the other candidates? Not so much……

  4. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Craig,

    Yes, because we all know that you’ve always looked to Lindsay Graham and Orrin Hatch when it comes to defining and understanding conservatism.

  5. Heath Says:

    John Boener looks great tonight. Romney looks small and petty. Maybe Boener should run for President. Or perhaps Jon. R. Huntsman Jrn can take off now.

  6. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    OK Senator Tom Coburn, of Gang of Six, is a ‘no’ way.

    But he said it will pass 70-30 …so if the Dems hold pretty strong after arm twisting from Obama and Biden (but probably not totally per West Virgina Senator Manchin), that leaves a couple more dozen Republicans to vote ‘no’.

    ‘No’

    Both SC Senators
    Both Utah Senators
    Both Oklahoma Senators
    Florida Senator Rubio
    Kentucky Senator Paul

    That’s eight, who else?

    (p.s. My two dumb

  7. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    ..Cali liberals, Feinstein & Boxerstein are probably ‘yes’ which will make Matt happy :) and me sad :(

  8. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    4.

    Matt,

    Hmmm…

    Are Mr. Utah and Mr. Miltary RINOs or just trying to default America?

  9. Dave Gaultier Says:

    Obama will be adjudicated next year on the economy. This is true. But the Republican candidates for president have not been helped by this issue. They look small. Like they are afraid to stand up to the elements of their base that would have destroyed the country over this nonsense. That’s not leadership. People don’t elect a poodle to the presidency. I can easily see a major third party candidate making waves next year, taking 20 percent of the vote or so.

  10. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Let me throw this out there>

    HUNT & HUCK 2012 or 2016 (if Obama & his lapdog, Biden manage to get reelected)

  11. Dave Gaultier Says:

    Huntsman would be a good choice for 2016. He is clearly a statesman. We don’t have a lot of statesmen in government anymore. We have entertainers. Showmen. It’s a symptom of our decaying sense of civic duty.

  12. K.G. Says:

    #2 Craig: Hatch is up for reelection and is trying to stave off a primary challenge from a true tea partier, Jason Chaffetz, one of the 3 authors of CCB. Hatch’s attempt to align himself w/Reagan and the Tea Party is just election year rhetoric.

  13. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Craig,

    In truth, only the nihilists like Bachmann want a default. The other conservative “no” voters are simply being puerile- demanding the ends but rejecting the means.

  14. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    most dramatic moment of the night was when Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords

    Very moving.

    Btw, now that it looks like she will run again for congress or governor or senator, perhaps Palin who I kinda recall has moved into her district could oppose her.

    Now there’s a Realty TV show idea. No charge.

  15. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Dave,

    Huntsman is indeed a statesman, and we are sorely in need of statesmen.

  16. Jonathan Says:

    #11:

    We might not have to wait until 2016. I firmly believe that Romney has left himself a huge opening by hiding under his desk on this debt-ceiling fight. Just imagine the next debate. Someone asks about the debt and Huntsman turns to Romney and says “I was standing with Speaker Boehner and the House Republicans to responsibily cut spending. Governor, where were you? And why, on the day before default, did you reject the only plan that could pass Congress?”

  17. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Matt,

    Yeah that’s it. She’s pure evil. Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Rachel Maddow are with ya. [eyeroll]

  18. TEX Says:

    Linda Graham (S.C.) and Orin Kennedy Hatch (UT) are certified,card carrying
    RINOs coming up for reelection.

    They are very scared RINOs,very scared from Tea Party,so they are playing the rotten game to fool people one more time and go back to Washington
    and be friends with Libs and the rest of the RINOs.

  19. TEX Says:

    Aaaaaah,the newest savior of all RINOs!!!

    Jonny Huntsman!

    The guy who should be Obama’s VP instead of Joe Bite Me.

  20. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    So of all the headshots up top on Kavon’s site, ONLY Huntsman Jr was a ‘yes’ from day one?

    The only one out of the 13 pictured? Statesman or Jonny rebel with a cause?

  21. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    I wonder if we could get a zoo advertisement to pop up on top of this thread.

    Rhino. Rhino. Zoo.

  22. Rightgal. Says:

    KG. I’m one of those voters who will vote Hatch over Chavtez anyday. Jason C does not reside in my district (does not reside in his either, but that’s a different story). I’m represented by Bishop.

  23. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    RIN0-BUSTER TEX,

    Is Perry a RINO? How about the other 12 pictured at the top of Race42012?

    Just wondering.

  24. Franklin Says:

    A Rasmussen poll released today shows 47% prefer to wait for a better bill while 40% prefer their legislator vote for a bad bill. I guess 47% of Americans aren’t statesmen. If this country is downgraded anyway then these people are going to look like fools and there is going to be a lot of anger.
    There are a lot of tea party traitors that will need to be dealt with in the next election. I would sooner vote for Benedict Arnold than John Boehner for anything. It was amazing watching people like Paul Ryan trying to spin it as if it has big budget cuts in it. If the choice is Huntsman or Obama then I am staying home.

  25. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Don’t worry so much, Frankie…

    It’ll be one of my top four :) :) :) 8)

    …so you won’t have to stay home after all.

  26. K.G. Says:

    #22 Rightgal. My congressman is Duncan Hunter Jr., a solid conservative. Voted no. My senators are Feinstein and Boxer. I wish I had to choose between Chaffetz (if he runs) and Hatch. Feinstein is up for reelection this time too. After the nut-case CA voters thumped Carlie Fiorini, I wonder if there will be any Pub contender for Feinstein’s seat.

    The best use of CA right now is to be used as a horrible, terrible, awful, miserable example of why not to follow BHO and the rest of the proud progressive idiots that vote for them.

  27. TEX Says:

    # Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    I wonder if we could get a zoo advertisement to pop up on top of this thread.

    Rhino. Rhino. Zoo.
    ==========================================

    Hahahaha…….LOL………

    Have to admit,this is good…..hahahaha……..

  28. thunder (Romney/Huckabee 2012) Says:

    I don’t know who are worst, the RINO’s who passed this bill or the RINO’s here that supported it…..

    Ronald Reagan must be spinning in his grave. For all those who think we should just have passed this bill, you have absolutely no clue what it means to be conservative. Imagine if Ronald Reagan had said to the American people when dealing with the Russians, “Well, it is the best deal we could have done.” Instead of walking away from the Table.

    We just sold the American people down the river. It is time to Primary everyone of the RINO’s who voted Yes for this bill. Gutless is the only word I have for these fools. We can only hope that the Senate Tweaks it so it can go back to the house and they can kill it.

    America is in major financial trouble, and this bill continues the path to American third world status. Shame on the Republican Party. Time for real conservatives to Stand up and be counted!

  29. thunder (Romney/Huckabee 2012) Says:

    Source: DeMint might back primary challenges against Republicans who supported deal

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/01/source-demint-might-back-primary-challenges-against-republicans-who-supported-deal/

  30. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Thunder,

    Would you have said all that if Mitt had come today FOR the bill? ;)

  31. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    ? A deal only a politician could love

    Posted on August 1, 2011

    by Norm Leahy

    The news readers on the financial networks this morning were almost giddy. The political class has reached a debt ceiling deal! The futures are up! Now we can get back to the serious business of letting fund managers talk their books!

    This mindless cheerleading will go on for most of the day, or at least until the closing bell. But for those of us who look upon almost anything that oozes out of DC with contempt, there are a few hard facts to know about this “deal.” Fortunately, Cato’s Chris Edwards, again, does the dirty but essential work:

    Spending isn’t being cut at all. The “cuts” in the deal are only cuts from the CBO “baseline,” which is a Washington construct of ever-rising spending. And even these “cuts” from the baseline include $156 billion of interest savings, which are imaginary because the underlying cuts are imaginary.

    No program or agency terminations are identified in the deal. None of the vast armada of federal subsidies are targeted for elimination. Old folks will continue to gorge themselves on inflated benefits paid for by young families and future generations. None of Senator Tom Coburn’s or Senator Rand Paul’s specific cuts were included.

    The federal government will still run a deficit of $1 trillion next year. This deal will “cut” the 2012 budget of $3.6 trillion by just $22 billion, or less than 1 percent.

    There are those, including many folks I respect, who will call even such lilliputian cuts as these a victory. And they have something of a point: for the last decade, the political class has cut nothing, so even the most modest of cuts, even if they are chained to the ever-rising baseline budget, are at least rhetorically significant. And even more, these pin-pricks have been achieved despite a Democrat-controlled Senate and a Democratic President, both of which were counting on, and campaigning for, higher taxes as part of any deal.

    Fair enough.

    But there’s an old, colorful saying: “Don’t piss on my boots and tell me it’s raining.” This deal is not a solution. Entitlements, war spending, even grants for cowboy poets…they will continue unabated. And far sooner than almost anyone is willing to admit, the bills will come due and the shambling fiscal wreck that is the United States will find itself unable to pay.

  32. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    De Moines Register:

    ‘No, stop the insane, out-of-control spending.’ And so this afternoon, that’s exactly what I’m going to do. I’m bringing your voice … to the halls of Congress … to vote ‘No’ on raising the debt ceiling. Why? Because what we’re doing is giving President Obama a blank check to raise spending another 2.4 trilion dollars, potentially. The issue isn’t even about spending and what we’re going to cut and what we should prioritize. The issue is about giving him one more blank check.”

    In closing the event, Kent Sorenson, the campaign”s state chair, urged attendees to pledge their support for Bachmann at the Ames straw poll on Aug. 13.

    “We’re going to have entertainment for all ages,” he said. “Everything from petting zoos to Randy Travis singing for us at the straw poll.”

    Cindy Dittmer, of Newton, was among the first to sign up with the campaign afterward.

    “So far, she’s my gal,” said Dittmer. “My sister and I run three small businesses, and they are struggling because of the economy.”

    Alice Stewart, Bachmann’s press secretary, said the candidate decided to fly east last night after a phone call with House leaders.

    “It’s our expectation that the vote will be completed today and she’ll be back for events at the end of the week,” Stewart said.

  33. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Des

  34. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Bringing in Randy Travis :)

  35. thunder (Romney/Huckabee 2012) Says:

    # Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:
    August 2nd, 2011 at 12:36 am

    Thunder,

    Would you have said all that if Mitt had come today FOR the bill?
    ====================================================================
    Yes, Mitt is not perfect. I started liking the deal until I found out the details. It is an act of treason IMHO. You don’t put the military in jeopardy of getting it slashed that badly.

  36. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    TPMDC:

    Jon Huntsman: The Media Covers Michele Bachmann Because She’s Pretty

    – ?9 hours ago?

    Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has leaped up the polls and, wowed audiences, and dominated a nationally televised debate. She’s taken a strong stand on the central political issue of the day — the debt ceiling — drawn a frontrunner’s press attention.

    Or, as Jon Huntsman puts it, she gets coverage because she’s pretty.

    In a long story running in this week’s New York, Huntsman — who recently abandoned his lackluster Mr. Nice Guy campaign in favor of taking direct swipes at his opponents — suggested Bachmann, the only woman officially running for president, gets the attention she gets in part because she’s good-looking.

    “She makes for good copy–and good photography,” Huntsman told New York’s John Heilemann. The quote came in the context of talk about Bachmann being “more an object of media fascination than a plausible nominee,” as Heilemann put it.

    That may be true, but even Heilemann noted that Huntsman’s comments were “somewhat indelicate.” Especially when you consider that the uber-coiffed Huntsman gets plenty more national coverage than say Rick Santorum does, even though they poll about the same (read: near the bottom of the list.)

    Whether or not Bachmann’s got what it takes to win the nomination is certainly in doubt — she has a very extreme record to contend with and making the leap from Representative to nominee is a hard one for any candidate. But there’s also no doubt many Republicans genuinely love her, and a lot of that comes from the fact that she won’t take the centrist positions a guy like Huntsman will.

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/jon-huntsman-the-media-covers-michele-bachmann-because-shes-pretty.php

  37. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Thunder,

    That’s good to hear!

    Gov Romney / Gov Huckabee (2012, 2016)

    Gov Huckabee / Sen Rubio (2020, 2024)

    Sen Rubio / Gov Ryan (2028, 2032)

  38. Thomas Alan Says:

    36:

    Was there a televised debate I missed? Because she didn’t come close to dominating any of the ones I saw.

    Anyway, the more I see of this deal, the less I like it. I don’t have much problem with a “take the money and run” half-loaf strategy, but this doesn’t look like a half loaf to me. The military cuts were a valuable chit that we sold for frustratingly little.

  39. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Bachmann worships with Spencer congregation

    Tuesday, August 2, 2011

    By Randy M. Cauthron, Managing Editor

    Pastors Al and Barb Dean, along with the congregation at Living Word Outreach Ministry in Spencer, welcomed a special visitor to their service Sunday morning.

    Republican Presidential hopeful, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, started her morning off with the church service, before appearing at Spencer’s East Leach Park for a “Join Me in Ames!” rally in the early afternoon.

    “God has a plan for America. It starts with a church praying for its leadership,” Pastor Al told his congregation, prior to his wife’s introduction of Bachmann.

    The service included a patriotic musical audio/video presentation featuring quotations from America’s founding fathers regarding God’s role in the formation and foundation of the country.

    Bachmann spoke for approximately a half-hour, keeping her comments focused primarily on the power of God in her life from childhood to the present.

    “If I’m on the road on Sunday, I’m going to church in Iowa,” said the Waterloo native. “Church was the center our world growing up. This is a wonderful opportunity.”

    She took a moment to comment on a story shared with the church about a rescue mission to save an 11-year-old autistic Spencer girl from the Little Sioux River on Saturday.

    Pointing to the dramatic events of the preceding day, she noted how sometimes, “problems seem too big.”

    “For those six hours hours, going up and down that river …,” Bachmann said, “it’s a time all of us can relate to. It humbles us and brings us to our knees. There’s no way out but Jesus.”

    Getting back to a more national perspective, Bachmann told the group, “Our law is based on English law.”

    She continued, citing William Blackstone’s commentaries on English law, “You can reduce all of law to the 10 commandments.”

    The Minnesota lawmaker told the congregation of profiles of the “great law givers” that circle the House of Representatives. She took special mention of the fact that they are all side profiles – except one.

    Bachmann noted that directly above the main double doors into the House chamber, which welcome the President into the room for his annual State of the Union address, there is one more face.

    “The only face. A full-on face. The face of Moses,” Bachmann said, calling him the ultimate law-giver.

    “That is more than symbolism, that’s a statement from our founders. We’re a nation in which our motto is ‘In God We Trust.'”

    Bachmann stressed the importance of the life issue as she views it. “How we view the issue of human life will determine who we look at other issues,” she told the congregation.

    She and her husband have put their belief regarding the importance of life into action. Over the years, they assisted many unwed mothers and helped them through the pregnancy process. They’ve also taken in 23 foster children, providing them a home, while also raising five children of their own.

    “I’m extremely hopeful, looking to the future,” Bachmann said. “He is a God of hope and purpose … It’s not too late, we can be that city on that hill.”

    http://www.spencerdailyreporter.com/story/1748962.html

  40. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    TA,

    Michele will also dominate the Ames debate but even moreso than the last one where she dazzleed everyone in the building as well as those watching on electric television.

    It’s one pretty big reason Mitt is skipping Ames the next day. He’s getting out of Dodge!!!

    The stories in the media were praising her for her very presidential performance. You must have been watching another show that night ;)

  41. Thomas Alan Says:

    I saw stories praising her performance in the last debate. Not one of them said that she dominated. Matter of fact, consensus was that Romney actually won (with Bachmann putting in a good performance) and Pawlenty lost.

  42. PabloZed Says:

    Count me among those who think this deal represents a small (I won’t go so far as to say insignificant) curb on spending. I am at a loss as to the crying and whining of some liberals. Indeed, I wonder if its not a show to make republicans think they are inflicting real pain.

    But what really galls me and ruined my sleep is that congress -yes the republicans in the house – held the economy hostage for nothing and then went on a five week vacation. It would be like kidnapping Bill Gates for a copy of windows. I guess taking long breaks during an economic crisis dues not offend the tea party. Its an outrage.

    I wish Obama were mean and nasty and added the names of every person in the house to the terrorist watch list so they couldn’t fly.

  43. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Franklin,

    “If this country is downgraded anyway then these people are going to look like fools and there is going to be a lot of anger.”

    It’s not really about the credit rating. It’s about the government paying its bills.

    “There are a lot of tea party traitors that will need to be dealt with in the next election.”

    Did these people run on a platform of not raising the debt, and slashing spending 40% overnight?

  44. Matt "MWS" Says:

    I head someone on the radio (forget who) who made an excellent point in defense of this bill, especially contrasted with all the automatic, pain free ceiling raises of the past…..

    It sets a precedent now that debt ceiling increases have to be matched with deficit reduction, at least dollar for dollar. If we keep that principle going, the budget is balanced inside 10 years, which is even faster than the Ryan Plan.

  45. SixMom Says:

    #42 I agree with Pablo on this:

    “Count me among those who think this deal represents a small (I won’t go so far as to say insignificant) curb on spending. I am at a loss as to the crying and whining of some liberals. Indeed, I wonder if its not a show to make republicans think they are inflicting real pain.”

    There is nothing significant about that bill. It is a superficial, phony bandaid. It averted a default, but nothing more. Now all the entitlement checks can keep coming and we’ll all breathe a sigh of relief as we fall back to the status quo.

    The critics who understand it best said it was just smoke and mirrors. It won’t really cut anything since the cuts are scheduled way down the road and the next Congress can vote them out.

    Great.

  46. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jonathan,

    Yes, Huntsman scored a major victory over Romney and TPaw on the Grownup half of the bracket.

  47. Franklin Says:

    “It’s not really about the credit rating. It’s about the government paying its bills.”

    This exercise was partially to preserve our AAA credit rating. This deal was not even close to what was suggested would be needed.

    “Did these people run on a platform of not raising the debt, and slashing spending 40% overnight?”

    Slashing spending? A 40% cut would amount to a $5.6-6 trillion increase over future spending increases. There apparently is also a GAO report on trillions in overspending and overpayments that have not been stopped because of special interests.

  48. PabloZed Says:

    “This exercise was partially to preserve our AAA credit rating. This deal was not even close to what was suggested would be needed.”

    While that is true America is not a Greece, Spain or Italy. We can afford to pay our bills AND we are still the safest place to park large (trillions) in investments. What we lack is political courage and will, which only comes in times of crisis. That is partly due to our political system. But the most important fact is that we can and will pay our bills and that should keep our AAA rating. A downgrade would be politics driven and not economic.

  49. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Franklin,

    I was referring to the fact that the Federal government only takes in taxes about 60 cents of every dollar it spends. If you immediately cut off the ability to borrow the difference, and they can only spend what they take in, that means an immediate 40% spending cut.

    Can you show me where you’d cut the budget 40% immediately and NOT cause major societal disruption and economic calamity?

  50. Freddy Ardanza Says:

    We’re watching a schizofrenic meltdown in Hobbit Town.

  51. Franklin Says:

    Can you show me where you’d cut the budget 40% immediately and NOT cause major societal disruption and economic calamity?
    =================================================
    That would be totally up to the Democrats and the supposed moderates. The fact is that the Republicans do not have the spine to take on Democrats and get their lunch handed to them. If the Republicans were negotiating the surrender of Japan during WW2, the Japanese probably would hae wound up with half of the Pacific.

  52. SixMom Says:

    #49

    And can you show me how we’ll keep going at that rate? We’re borrowing agains our children’s and grandchildren’s future. The debt doesn’t die with us, the mess gets passed on to someone else.

    We shoulder our own hard cures or we pass the problem onto our posterity and live in the delusion everything is OK.

    There was no leadership in promoting the status quo. Hooray nothing for the deal.

  53. Franklin Says:

    We’re watching a schizofrenic meltdown in Hobbit Town.
    ============================================
    We’re witnessing a concern for where this country is going. You can take your hobbits and task and shove it down your liberal throat.

  54. PabloZed Says:

    Chuck Todd showed a clip of Huntsman taking a shot at Romney for taking a position only after deal was signed, saying “that’s not leadership.” Todd also said something about a “Mittness protection program.”

    The media’s attention is obviously going to shift to the politics of the debate deal and in particular how it affects the GOP primary. I think opposing the deal will reap some benefits in the primary for Bachmann, who opposed it from the start, and maybe for Pawlenty. Caucus/primary voters in IA and SC are likely to appreciate taking a more conservative stand and Bachmann and TPaw can effectively position themselves to the right of the establishment republicans. Hunstman is aligning himself with the leadership, which I think benefits him in NH where a grown-up view probably prevails.

    Romney probably will benefit the least, if at all. He’s not competing in IA where opposing the bill might have helped and its not clear it will benefit him in SC even though DeMint will oppose the bill. But where it could hurt Romney is in NH, where the two leading newspapers will remind voters that Romney only took a position after the deal and will ask whether he had a feasible alternative.

  55. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    The Senate must pass this bill. It is hardly a perfect bill, but there is no more time on teh clock to negotiate for a better agreement. Priority #1 must be maintaining the AAA credit rating. We’re just going to have to come back in the next few months and work for more cuts.

    But fair or not, the credit rating agencies are holding us hostage to passing this bill. we must pass the bill.

    The next challenge is going to have to be sparing the Pentagon from damaging cutbacks.

  56. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Franklin,

    #51. Except we haven’t beaten the Democrats into submission like we had Japan in 1945. In fact, the Democrats still control 2/3 of the relevant bodies- that being the Senate and the Presidency.

    We got spending cuts, no tax increases, and a vote on the BBA. We set the precedent that future ceiling raises have to be matched with deficit reduction (that’s a first).

    I’d say that’s not too shabby for only controlling 1/3 of the process.

  57. Franklin Says:

    The Senate must pass this bill. It is hardly a perfect bill, but there is no more time on teh clock to negotiate for a better agreement. Priority #1 must be maintaining the AAA credit rating. We’re just going to have to come back in the next few months and work for more cuts.
    ==============================================
    But this bill does not do that. Allof this huffing and puffing does not do that.

  58. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “I’d say that’s not too shabby for only controlling 1/3 of the process.”

    While I completely agree with this, I’m not convinced we didn’t give away the farm through these automatic reduction triggers. It seems to me that Democrats stand a good chance of putting tax increases into the defficit panel recommendation, knowing that the alternative is a huge cut to the Pentagon.

    What the hell is a Republican to do?

  59. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Mom,

    “We’re borrowing agains our children’s and grandchildren’s future. The debt doesn’t die with us, the mess gets passed on to someone else.”

    Yes. I daresay nobody on this board is more “hawky” when it comes to the debt and deficits than me, but we have to be smart about it. If you wreck the economy (and that is what will happen if you instantly cut 40% of the federal budget) they won’t be inheriting much of a future either. In fact, with the wrecked economy, revenue would plunge, and we’d have to cut even MORE, creating a viscious cycle of falling revenue, a contracting economy, and budget cuts.

    The fact is there is no “good” way out of this mess. The magic formula is Time x Austerity X Growth.

    That’s pretty much the only way we get it done.

  60. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “But this bill does not do that.”

    Yes it does. S&P might be a cry baby on this one, wanting more and more and more.

    But Moody’s will comfirm the AAA rating as long as this agreement passes, and that allows us to write off any S&P downgrade as bickering and overcompensation between the ratings agencies.

    As long as we can say “the United States is perfectly capable of making all required debt servicing payments” and as long as at least some of the ratings agencies confirm that through keeping AAA, then we are safe.

  61. Franklin Says:

    Except we haven’t beaten the Democrats into submission like we had Japan in 1945. In fact, the Democrats still control 2/3 of the relevant bodies- that being the Senate and the Presidency.

    We got spending cuts, no tax increases, and a vote on the BBA. We set the precedent that future ceiling raises have to be matched with deficit reduction (that’s a first).
    ==============================================
    The Republicans couldn’t beat the girl scouts into submission. Probably the girl scouts would win. To coin a phrase, republicans need to learn to fight like a girl. This means that we spend 6-8 trillion dollars more maybe over the next 10 years. Don’t spike the football yet on tax hikes. I have no doubt that Democrats will push tax hikes on the panel. I have no doubt republicans will cave like a cheap suit. Or you face crippling defense cuts.

  62. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Franklin,

    “This means that we spend 6-8 trillion dollars more maybe over the next 10 years.”

    What do you mean by this????

    And if Pubs were going to cave on tax hikes, they would have done it already. Even with the Dems controlling 60% of both chambers in the lameduck session, they didn’t rescind the Bush cuts on the wealthy.

    As for defense cuts, I don’t think the levels they’re discussing over 10 years would even approach a “crippling” of our defense. That budget is so larded up with pork and waste it isn’t funny. At any rate, we don’t need a budget larger than the rest of the galaxy combined.

  63. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “At any rate, we don’t need a budget larger than the rest of the galaxy combined.”

    Just because our military is the most expensive doesn’t mean its the largest – it just means we have that unfortunate obligation to pay soldiers enough to, you know, eat and live once they are discharged…to say nothing of supporting family.

    china and other nations have no such burden, and accordingly, enjoy a larger military than ourselves at 1/4 the price.

  64. jerseyrepublican Says:

    Matt, that’s the problem…they don’t cut the lard and the waste…that’s how they grease the pockets they need greased…they close bases, they take money away from research and development of new and better weapons, and they take benefits away from the enlisted man/woman.

  65. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Good morning, Vietnam! 8)

    New Quinnipiac poll out of PA this morning..

    GOP 2012 primary:

    1. Romney 21% ..congrats, not a bad poll number :)

    2. Santorum 14% ..splittin’ the conservative vote

    3. Palin 12% ..splittin’ the conservative vote

    4. Bachmann 11% ..splittin’ the conservative vote

    5. Perry 8% ..splittin’ the conservative vote

    6. Ron Paul 5% ..the libertarian five

    7. Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain 4% ..don’t forget us

    9. Tim Pawlenty 2% ..good news, no straw poll in two weeks here in PA :)

    *******

    And in the Penn general. everyone holds BO under 50!

    a. Mitt Romney 44% Barack Obama 42% ..Rombots will happily take it!

    b. Barack Obama 45% Rick Santorum 43% ..Hometown cooking!

    c. Barack Obama 47% Michele Bachmann 39% ..MB with low name ID here, not too shabby!

    d. Barack Obama 45% Rick Perry 39% ..See Michele’s note

  66. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “That budget is so larded up with pork and waste it isn’t funny.”

    Concrete examples? Or are you going to try and write off the F-22 as “waste”?

  67. Franklin Says:

    New Quinnipiac poll out of PA this morning..

    GOP 2012 primary:

    1. Romney 21% ..congrats, not a bad poll number

    2. Santorum 14% ..splittin’ the conservative vote

    3. Palin 12% ..splittin’ the conservative vote

    4. Bachmann 11% ..splittin’ the conservative vote

    5. Perry 8% ..splittin’ the conservative vote

    6. Ron Paul 5% ..the libertarian five

    7. Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain 4% ..don’t forget us

    9. Tim Pawlenty 2% ..good news, no straw poll in two weeks here in PA
    ==============================
    Since Pennsylvania is later, obviously the conservative vote will not be splintered. Sum it up and you get 51% conservative, Romney 25, Paul 5.

  68. Matt "MWS" Says:

    MK,

    From a conservative group:

    http://www.fiscalaccountability.org/index.php?content=07272011po#

  69. Matt "MWS" Says:

    MK,

    From the center-left, though mainstream New Republic. You can’t argue with the math:

    This year, the United States will spend at least $700 billion on defense and security. Adjusting for inflation, that’s more than America has spent on defense in any year since World War II—more than during the Korean war, the Vietnam war, or the Reagan military buildup. Much of that enormous sum results from spending increases under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Since 2001, military and security expenditures have soared by 119 percent.

  70. Matt "MWS" Says:

    oops. link for #69

  71. Matt "MWS" Says:

    try that again……..

    http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/79066/waste-defense-spending-america-pentagon

  72. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “cutting weapons systems” and “Reducing the number of troops in Europe” are cuts of substance, that is, we aren’t simply eliminating waste or streamlinging management, we are impsosing a real and adverse change on the strength of our military, international presense, and role in global affairs.

    No, you cannot argue with the numbers of how much we spend.

    But since when does spending more mean the spending is unnecessary.

    As I said, its not like we’re walking around with a military 10x the size of anyone else.

  73. Matt "MWS" Says:

    MK,

    It’s wasteful for us to have troops in Europe, or weapons systems whose cost outweigh their likely benefit.

    I guarantee you that if you gave the Pentagon $2 trillion a year, they’d find a way to spend it, and you would call it all “necessary.”

    After all, the government only spends what is necessary, right?

    Right?

  74. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    No wonder Mitt was AWOL during the debt ceiling debate…trouble in paradise a comin’.

    Pro-Life Group Seeks Repeal of Individual Mandate in Romneycare

    | Boston, MA | LifeNews.com | 8/2/11 9:32 AM

    A statewide pro-life group in Massachusetts is starting an effort tomorrow designed to target the repeal of the individual mandate in Romneycare, the government run health care program Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney instituted.

    The effort could be highlighted by Republican candidates seeking to criticize Romney on the issue many political observers say will be his biggest obstacle to wining the GOP nomination to face pro-abortion President Barack Obama.

    Massachusetts Citizens for Life informed LifeNews earlier today it is holding a press conference tomorrow at the state capitol to announce that it is dropping off papers with the Massachusetts Attorney General for an Initiative Petition to repeal the individual mandate in Romneycare. MCFL president Anne Fox told LifeNews that the petition will “draw attention to the fact that Massachusetts, the prototype for Obamacare, is not happy with Romneycare.”

    “It will make health care an issue in the 2012 elections, when the petition will be on the ballot,” Fox said, and will “get the repeal Ronmeycare process started.”

    http://www.lifenews.com/2011/08/02/pro-life-group-seeks-repeal-of-individual-mandate-in-romneycare/

  75. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Matthew,

    Even if you take out the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Defense budget is up 68% (inflation adjusted) since 2001.

    Even Tom Coburn has called for cuts in military spending.

  76. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    Right?

    China is building up its military. Russia is building up its military. The former recently obtained an Aircraft carrier, and has plans for more. To say nothing of the next-generation fighters that both countries have been developing.

    Yet we killed off the F-22, AND have talked about reducing our procurement of F-35s.

    Is that a comforting thought to you?

  77. welby Says:

    Matt “MWS” Says:
    August 2nd, 2011 at 7:22 am

    Jonathan,

    Yes, Huntsman scored a major victory over Romney and TPaw on the Grownup half of the bracket.

    Maybe tonight but I am not sure it will be long term. I believe the only people who will remember which way you voted on this in 2012 will be the Tea Party. I think this was strictly a political move by Romney, a principle move by Bachman and a “I am reasonable” vote by Huntsman.

    Unfortunately you need a little of all three to win the nomination. If the economy gets any worse by 2012, the election will not be about being “reasonable”, it will be about who can make significant change to reverse the course.

    I believe Romney did this politically to ensure NH and possible bring back Demint. It’s a primary move.

  78. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    #74 –

    You don’t like RomneyCare. We get it. How about doing the hard part…and putting forward an alternative proposal that achieves universal coverage without a massive government takeover?

  79. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    Matthew,

    Even if you take out the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Defense budget is up 68% (inflation adjusted) since 2001.

    Even Tom Coburn has called for cuts in military spending.

    Then someone better offer up a clear idea of how we can make these deep cuts, including reducing personell, operating with out-of-date weapons, and pulling back, all without reducing our global power or presence.

  80. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Matt,

    If we reduce military spending, there goes the $600 Army canteen bottle, $2016.50 Air Force pair of pliers, and $8200 Marine toilet seat market.

  81. CF Says:

    The media is trying to manufacture a “Romney/Perry” feud this morning. This is such BS – the MSM will stoop to any low to pit Republicans against Republicans and take the attention of their buffoon-in-chief Obama.

  82. Matt "MWS" Says:

    MK,

    Our debt situation poses a FAR greater existential threat to this country than the militaries of China or Russia. They are many years away from catching us technologically (even if we froze) and even then neither would want war with us.

    If we are going to get this debt thing under control, it isn’t going to happen with one side dictating the terms (sorry Franklin). Huntsman is right. There can’t be any sacred cows.

  83. PabloZed Says:

    #74 – Wow, not unexpected given that there are healthcare initiatives proposed in other states, but this is more significant because its in MA.

    Romney has so far defended it as a states right’s issue so I doubt he change. I suspect he will attempt to ignore this attempt.

    Boy, there are so many tricky issues that the debate should be good if we have intelligent moderators.

  84. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Craig,

    And well connected contractors will then have to resort to fighting for Cook County contracts here in Illinois….

  85. Freddy Ardanza Says:

    (Franklin-53)…You can’t be too concern of the way this country is going if the only thing that The Schizophrenics Hobbits wants is cut, cut, cut. We need cut spending but we need raise taxes.The Government is spending over 25% of the GDP, revenues are 18.5% of the GDP. The debt is now over 16 trillion. We need to find an equilibrium between cuts, taxes and paying the debt. The Tea Party (and the GOP)only offer one thing, the democrats only want to spend and raise taxes and spend more. If we are serious about the economy we need to put everything on the table.

    http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/08/02/the-necessity-of-the-fight/

  86. mac Says:

    77. Have you seen the reaction from the left? It’s every bit as strong as the tea party right.

  87. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “They are many years away from catching us technologically (even if we froze) and even then neither would want war with us.”

    That doesn’t mean we wouldn’t see them taking a far more active role in other nations, promoting their interests and their (lack of) ideals over our own.

    Suppose it had been China or Russia that had intervened in Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan. Do you think the resulting government would have looked anything like the democratic systems supported by the USA? Of course not.

  88. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    78.

    You mean like ObamneyCare?

  89. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “You mean like ObamneyCare?”

    Do you actually have substance, or are you perfectly happy with freeloaders and having millions of Americans uninsured?

  90. CF Says:

    The Double Dip is here. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43946055/ns/business-us_business/

    If there is person living on Earth who can get us out of this mess, it’s Mitt Romney!

  91. AJNolte Says:

    You can make responsible defense cuts, but you’ll have to do civil service reform to make it happen. The use of contractors for everything is a huge expense, but a necessary one so long as it is as difficult to fire USG employees as it is today (DOD uses contractors because they can be fired at will). Civil service reform, and a return of lots of DOD functions in-house, would allow us to substantially cut some of the increases in spending without impairing our capabilities, IMO. The public employee unions would howl, of course, as would defense contractors (many of whom are ex-military who get rehired to do the same thing they did in the service through contracts).
    As for Huntsman’s statesmanship, his desire to completely bail out of AfPak is highly questionable, IMO.

  92. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    “If there is person living on Earth who can get us out of this mess, it’s Mitt Romney!”

    CF,

    Take your idol fanboy worship elsewhere. That’s Obama’s playbook. You’re not helpng Mitt at all. You are making him a target of ridicule. We know you’re in love, but tone it down.

  93. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Matthew,

    You dodged the question. Why?

    Again..

    Do you mean like ObamneyCare?

  94. Matt "MWS" Says:

    MK,

    “Suppose it had been China or Russia that had intervened in Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan.”

    Then they’d be a trillion in hoc, and not us.

  95. Massachusetts Conservative Says:

    You know what is a sad statistic? Only 20% of the federal budget is defense. I’m not saying we need to spend more on defense. I’m saying we need to spend less on everything else.

  96. Jack Says:

    Palin’s the ONLY one of the GOP POTUS contenders who effectively made a positive difference on the debt ceiling deal.

    She intervened at just the right time to force Boehner back to get a better deal at the end of last week, leading, with Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin & Tea Party, and then she smartly knew this week, to NOT oppose the final deal.

    (“Know when to hold em, know when to fold em”)

  97. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Matt,

    They’d rather loan us the money and we take the casualties of wars.

  98. Jack Says:

    … while Romney DID THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF PALIN, in both instances (above)

  99. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “Do you mean like ObamneyCare?”

    I dislike juvenile characterizations of government policy by whiny-ass, third-tier candidate governors trying to make a name for themselves.

    I support the individual mandate, because its the only way to guarentee an end to the freeloading problem. I support assistance to the poor to help buy insurance, because it shouldn’t cost an arm and a leg to see a doctor when you get a headcold.

    Does that mean I support Obama’s witchhunt against insurance companies? No.
    Does it mean I think we should automatically seek to repeal his policies without any idea of how to replace it with something better? No.

    If states want the freedom to design healthcare solutions, I fully support that – but then there needs to be some enforcement of their responsibility to do so.

    You know as well as I do that without people like Romney driving the debate and actually demanding real solutions, half the GOP would be content to repeal Obamacare, return millions of Americans to the uninsured population, and turn a blind eye to those who willfully refused to buy insurance while still turning up in emergency rooms when they got sick.

  100. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “They’d rather loan us the money and we take the casualties of wars.”

    …and in exchange for those casualties, we set up a reasonably stable, largely democratic government (in Iraq at least – Afghanistan was not a war we had a choice to enter, one way or the other) that reflects our ideals and values that people should be able to elect their leaders and hold them accountable.

    Do you believe China would have set up any such system?

  101. CF Says:

    92

    Can you dispute the fact that Romney is best qualified to become our next President?

    Romney has the most life experience, the most education, and the most motivation to fix our ailing economy. The most important thing is that his life has been in fixing economic and business problems. He’s definitely got what it takes to fix things, if anyone can.

  102. CF Says:

    99

    Just ignore Craig, he’s just a troll. He’s always been a troll on these boards, spamming crap all day. He’s just butt hurt by the fact that his idol, Huckabee, took the cowardly way out of the race.

    See, Craig has nobody left in the race to really root for, he’s just bitter and angry because Romney stepped up to the plate when his own guy ran away for the cash prize.

  103. Watchinitall Says:

    If we default, we can’t be trusted to manage our affairs in a consistent and predictable manner. Unpredictability costs a whole lot of money . . . investors charge a premium for untrustworthiness, ask any PayDay loan what interest rates they charge the credit unworthy for the privilege of credit.

    If we abuse the privilege, it will cost us more. Tea Partiers with their passion about the debt are pointing the way to fiscal sanity, but they somehow have lost the capacity to factor any other variable into the equation, which in itself is a type of insanity.

  104. CF Says:

    102

    Along with Craig, I could say the same for Pablo, MWS, TEX, teledude, and AdamX too. They’re all bitter and angry all the time. The common thread between them is the fact that they don’t really have a candidate to root for.

    There are two groups on Race42012: the Romney supporters, and the anti-Romney, I don’t have a candidate, whiners.

  105. Jack Says:

    CF:–

    Romney’s track record here is not so good.

    Palin’s the ONLY one of the GOP POTUS contenders who effectively made a positive difference on the debt ceiling deal.

    She intervened at just the right time to force Boehner back to get a better deal at the end of last week, leading, with Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin & Tea Party, and then she smartly knew this week, to NOT oppose the final deal.

    (“Know when to hold em, know when to fold em”)

    … while Romney DID THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF PALIN, in both instances

  106. asparagus Says:

    Its Aug 1 and no Palin announcement. Palindrones got to be getting nervous.

  107. Matthew Kilburn Says:

    “Just ignore Craig, he’s just a troll”

    Sadly, those who only spew s***, still stink.

  108. CF Says:

    105

    Sarah Palin who?

  109. Jack Says:

    asparagus and CF:

    that’s the best you can come up with???

  110. Jack Says:

    (while not touching on the substance of what I said vis a vis Palin vs. Romney)

  111. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Rick Perry to be Republican Presidential Nominee in 2012

    Last InTrade Price: 31.9 UP 1.3 :)

  112. asparagus Says:

    109 – its still early. Give me some time.

  113. teledude Says:

    104. “I could say the same for Pablo, MWS, TEX, teledude, and AdamX too. They’re all bitter and angry all the time.”

    No anger or bitterness here.

    I can’t stop smiling! :-)

    Perhaps my tone gets a little harsh in dealing with the haters and liars who wrongfully demean my chosen candidate. I apologize to others who may be offended by that.

    But there are going to be no free shots. Governor Palin does not deserve the venom and ridicule she gets, it tends to engender a response. Sadly we have a few trolls on here who do this just to ‘stir the pot.’

    But I am probably the happiest poster on this site.

    It’s like I know the secret, and even though I am terrible at keeping secrets, no one wants to believes me. How lucky can I get?

  114. Massachusetts Conservative Says:

    Jack, if you think Sarah Palin’s mere whims expressed in her twitter updates and faacebook posts are ground-breaking and change the entire political landscape at the drop of a hat, you are insane.

  115. teledude Says:

    106. “Its Aug 1 and no Palin announcement. Palindrones got to be getting nervous.”

    I vote for this to be the most clueless post of the year.

    Governor Palin said her time frame for announcing was August or September. So we should be nervous on Aug. 1st?

    Clue. Less.

    I am being kind.

    Imagine what I could say if I weren’t so happy and upbeat!

  116. Franklin Says:

    You can’t be too concern of the way this country is going if the only thing that The Schizophrenics Hobbits wants is cut, cut, cut. We need cut spending but we need raise taxes.The Government is spending over 25% of the GDP, revenues are 18.5% of the GDP.
    =========================================
    We could cut $9 trillion over the next 10 years and we would be spending the same amount we are now. The fact that that taxes have tended to stay in the 18-19% range even when taxes are raised. The reason why is that taxes affect behavior. For a action there is a reaction. People shelter their money, they may work less so that they make about the same in take-home pay, or defer their income. We see companies refusing to repatriate income overseas due to high taxes.

  117. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    The latest with under two weeks to go.. 8)

    Winner of 2011 Ames Straw Poll (Aug 13th)

    InTrade Contract Bid Ask

    AMES.2011.BACHMANN
    Michele Bachmann to win 2011 Ames Straw Poll M Trade 68.0 69.9

    AMES.2011.PAUL(RON)
    Ron Paul to win 2011 Ames Straw Poll M Trade 14.0 19.5

    AMES.2011.PAWLENTY
    Tim Pawlenty to win 2011 Ames Straw Poll M Trade 10.0 12.9

    AMES.2011.ROMNEY
    Mitt Romney to win 2011 Ames Straw Poll M Trade 1.0 2.9

    AMES.2011.PALIN
    Sarah Palin to win 2011 Ames Straw Poll M Trade 0.3 0.5

  118. Jack Says:

    “whims” … “insane” ???

    (that’s the best you can do, was “death panels” merely a twitter “whim”)

    Fact is, Palin IS THE MOST CLOSELY TIED the Tea Party as leader, and other commentators have written on her effect here — are they insane too??

  119. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    CF,

    LOL!

    Who’s not happy? You must be kidding. I’m on cloud nine. :)!

  120. teledude Says:

    Anyone ever been to a Manhattan cocktail party?

    http://www.amac.us/manhattan-lefties-talk-palin/

    Last week I attended a cocktail party on Manhattan’s Upper East Side. It’s an unfortunate part of life every now and then for this prefer-a-basketball-game-and-soft-pretzel New Yorker. With that being said, any opportunity to mingle with members of New York City’s left-wing elite serves to provide both a wealth of amusement and—quite often—column-worthy entertainment.

    This particular party happened to occur the same day it was revealed that Sarah Palin will be keynoting a tea party rally in Iowa on September 3. So, Palin came up quite a bit. What did some of Manhattan’s finest lefties have to say about her?

    Here are the top five sentiments that were expressed throughout the two hours I lasted (special thanks to the veggies and dip for keeping me there long enough to overhear this fun):

    5. SHE’S SCARY BECAUSE SHE’LL ACTUALLY DO WHAT SHE SAYS. That’s right, folks. They know she’s the real deal. They know that if she says it, she means it. And that scares the living daylights out of them.

    4. SHE’S WAY TOO LIKABLE. They admittedly fell in love with Barack Obama’s charisma, and they know darn well that the only person in the GOP field who can match that—or, dare I say, surpass it—is Palin. P.S.—When someone brought up Mitt Romney, many found that awfully funny.

    3. SHE’S NOT AFRAID TO SPEAK HER MIND. Palin’s fearlessness is what unnerves them the most. This group was all too excited for a “more subdued,” “less nervy” 2012 Republican alternative.

    2. SHE’S “ANNOYINGLY REGULAR” AND PEOPLE LOVE IT. The fact that Palin would never fit in at their cocktail parties is a plus, and they know it.

    1. SHE CAN WIN. “What do you think would’ve happened if Palin had been calling the shots in 2008?” I asked. One poor gentleman looked like he’d seen a ghost. “I think we could very well have had a President Palin,” he replied.

    Interesting, isn’t it? Now of course they repeatedly retreated into their left-wing, media-fed talking points about how she’s “inexperienced,” how she’s “a quitter,” and how she’s “just not smart enough to be president.” But it was clear to me that they didn’t actually believe an ounce of it. Sure, they had to say those things. That’s their job—to echo left-wing talking points. But those talking points provided them with no comfort whatsoever.

    It showed on their faces.

    It showed in their voices.

    And it showed in their panicked need to follow up so many of their statements with, “She could win. She could really win.” On that last point, I’d have to say I agree.

    #GameOn

  121. Franklin Says:

    Rick Perry to be Republican Presidential Nominee in 2012

    Last InTrade Price: 31.9 UP 1.3
    =================================
    So what. Interesting that Perry has been more closed mouth than Palin and his advisors seem to be pushing him. Another bubble.

  122. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Who started the Tea Party Caucus in Washington, DC?

    Look it up.

  123. teledude Says:

    117. Easy money.

    short Bachmann and go all in on T-Paw.

    It’s easy to make money in America!

  124. Ben (One of those MittWitts) Says:

    #113 –

    “Sadly we have a few trolls on here who do this just to ‘stir the pot'”

    LOL – and yet you don’t consider yourself and TEX pot stirrers.

    That’s rich. I can’t stop smiling about that. :D

    Palin is not to be touched – but Romney is fair game to ridicule – slander – mock – lie about – twist around – spin anything out of his mouth negatively.

    Should we just give Sarah a 2 mile head start in this marathon so that we make it “fair”?

    Get some thicker skin tele. that smile will wear thin if you don’t.

  125. asparagus Says:

    Which occurs first? Palin announcing, or the rapture? Both dates have been postponed this year.

  126. teledude Says:

    122. That isn’t ‘the Tea Party’

    That is a Washington insider trying to co-opt the Tea Party. That’s why most of the Tea Party candidates who won in 2010 didn’t join her little caucus.

    She’s a fraud.

  127. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    And the Tea Party movement loves Rick Perry to death!

    If you ask me, Bachmann and Perry are the Tea Party’s favorites. Hands down.

    And Romney does better with them than Palin, too. Fact.

  128. Massachusetts Conservative Says:

    118

    “Death Panels” didn’t stop Obamacare from being passed, did it?

  129. Jack Says:

    “Craig For Huck” morphed into “Craig For Huck, Baach, Rick, or Mitt” which is really “Craig for Anybody But Palin”

  130. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jack,

    Could you please tell Sarah that for the past several weeks, the Sun at my house has been rising later every morning, and setting earlier every evening.

    Thanks.

  131. Jack Says:

    It certainly delayed it and focused the debate having very significant political effect — and certainly making Palin the Anti-Obama as opposed to the RomneyCare/ObamaCare candidate.

  132. Jack Says:

    Matt “MWS”, ooohhhh, you’re so clever

  133. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Jack,

    Seriously.

    She’ll know what to do.

  134. Matt "MWS" Says:

    I wish Sarah would twitter something about world peace, or ending hunger……

  135. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Telly,

    You’ve been at this site the shortest time of all by far. Most of us have been here for several years. So who’s the new troll around here supporting a 30 month governor who quit on the great state of Alaska when she was a little stressed out by the liberals there to go watch Dancing With the Stars?

    Initials are S.P.

    I quote Sarah Palin a year before she quit, “I so hate my job!”

  136. asparagus Says:

    If Palin doesn’t announce, she will redefine the word “tease” when it comes to politics. She will have to announce at least to save face. But it will be a token run. Don’t get too excited Palindrones. A Palin run will be like a rollercoaster. You’ll stand in line, get a few thrills, and then it will be over.

  137. teledude Says:

    135. Does lying on a political forum reveal anything about a person’s character?

    I wonder.

  138. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    CF and Jack have something in common. How weird is that?

    They each think if you back any other candidate besides their ______ and only love, you must be an “anybody but ______” commenter.

    How dare we offer up someone other than Willard the Savior or The Arctic ‘Cuda? Wow, the nerve of Matt, Mac, Pablo, Adam, Texas Conservative, Waterseeds, Granny T, David, HuckRubio, Others, or me.

  139. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Telly,

    She didn’t say she hated her job? Better check your facts at Cons4Palin.

  140. Ben (One of those MittWitts) Says:

    Craig –

    I can agree to a point. But when you put as your name moniker “Adam (Anybody but Mitt) for quite some time and like Pablo – submit nothing but anti-Mitt material then you come off as just an anti-______ commenter.

    I wouuld agree that most here have a “favorite candidate” and that is who they support most of the time. But there are a few folks that frequent these posts that have an anti-candidate agenda. Adam has been swaying more towards Perry lately though so he at least comes off as having a “for” goal and not just an “anti” goal. Pablo and Marque – not so much.

  141. PabloZed Says:

    #104 – “Along with Craig, I could say the same for Pablo, MWS, TEX, teledude, and AdamX too. They’re all bitter and angry all the time. The common thread between them is the fact that they don’t really have a candidate to root for.

    There are two groups on Race42012: the Romney supporters, and the anti-Romney, I don’t have a candidate, whiners.”

    Actually, what we usually have in common are opinions supported by facts, not choices driven by identity and emotion. I personally look for ideas and a candidate with good ideas attracts my attention. Rombots, in contrast, have chosen a candidate and attempt to mold his views and actions to fit a particular problem or situation. That’s intellectually dishonest and frankly transparent. But its ironic that Romney inspires that in his followers because he himself changes to fit the particular situation. Liberal in MA, then socon in IA, now fiscal conservative in NH. What in the world would he become in DC?

  142. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    And if you hate and get sooooooooooooooo stressed out at the job of governing such a mini populated state as Alaska, how can you be trusted to handle 307,006,550 folks yelling at you?

    Answer: Palin can’t be trusted so she is doing the best thing for her family by not running for the time being while dragging her paying fans along for The Ride.

  143. Dave Says:

    Just a few facts:

    1. This deal gets us a vote of a balanced budget amendment. The Dems are going to have to go on record as opposing balanced budgets. This is something like an 80/20 issue for us nationally.

    2. This deal gets us Caps on spending for the first time since the early 90’s. Fiscal discipline in embryo. It had to happen, and the ratings agencies will look favorably on this.

    3. For the first time, we will have back-to-back years of real cuts in discretionary spending. While this isn’t where most of the problem lies, this is the portion of the budget that Democrats use to lard up their hostage constituencies.

    4. Because of this deal, Obama is disaffected from the Left enough to possibly engender a Primary against him next year.

    Nobody on our side likes this deal in the sense that we think it went far enough or solves our debt problem. But this is more than we could have expected in exchange for raising the debt limit.
    When we control more than just the House, we can do better.

  144. Dave Says:

    BTW, even though Mitt was wrong to oppose this plan, he’s still, far and away, the best potential President in the Party.

  145. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    134.Matt “MWS” Says:
    August 2nd, 2011 at 11:03 am
    I wish Sarah would twitter something about world peace, or ending hunger……

    ===

    Oh, she will, Matt. And what a glorius day that will be at Cons4Palin.com :)

  146. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    Of couse he is, Dave. Whatever you say.

  147. Matt "MWS" Says:

    Dave,

    I’m completely on board with #143, except point #4. Obama is hitting a low point with liberals (and even blacks). This was true even before he “caved” on the debt ceiling. They are even more ticked off now. But I don’t think there is any chance of him getting a remotely credible challenger in the Primary; not unless something truly scandalous or cataclysmic happens.

  148. Dave Says:

    Matt,

    I didn’t say anything about a “credible” challenger, but any primary challenge from his Left flank will hurt his turnout. If Chicago, or Detroit, or Philadelphia doesn’t turn out BIG-TIME for him, he loses Illinois, Michigan, or Pennsylvania. Especially if his opponent is Romney.

    BTW, I appreciate your efforts on behalf of realism on this thread. Kudos.

  149. Dave Says:

    Craig For…..,

    Now that Mitt’s one of your favorites, you might want to tone down the sarcasm a tad. Aside from that, I appreciate the sentiment.

  150. Huckarubio....returns Says:

    Holy crap…Obama sounds like a republican right now! LOL….cut taxes? What? Cut red tape? Huh? Wow….of course he already mentioned raising taxes on the “rich” and that they should “pay their part” even though the top 1% of earners pay 95% of the taxes paid in the United States….oh yeah, and they are the ones creating the jobs.

  151. Craig For Huck, Bach, Rick, or Mitt Says:

    *glorious

    No prob, Dave. I’ll be his biggest supporter in every way if he gets the nomination.

    But he’s gotta start working. This MIA Mitt stuff is pure laziness and a lack of bold leadership.

  152. PabloZed Says:

    #143 – Interesting. My commentary:

    1. You will be surprised that many dems will vote for it. What will kill it is that there are some safe dems who will vote it down, giving those up for reelection a free pass to vote for it.

    2. Fitch has announced that deal is consistent with AAA rating. That is good news.

    4. Yeah, there is disaffection and anger on the left among core constituencies, which helps explains the president’s poll numbers. That is why I think they are fools’ gold. Those votes will come home, as they always do. Question will be the intensity. And there’s not going to be a primary challenge. Who can compete with him money-wise? The reason he could make this deal is because he is worried about his right flank not his left.

  153. Dave Says:

    Pablo,

    The Senate’s already passed it.

    BTW, what happened to point number 3?

  154. TEX Says:

    Craig For Losers

    “I quote Sarah Palin a year before she quit, “I so hate my job!”
    =======================================

    Show us the link,you down in the gutter liar!

Join The Community


Sponsored Ad

Meta

Recent Posts

Sponsored Ad

Categories

Archives

Search

Blogroll

Site Syndication

Main