Skip to comments.Mark Levin Talks Budget Deal
Posted on 04/09/2011 2:34:10 PM PDT by FreeReign
Let’s pretend that O did not introduce billions more in spending that will not occur.
Evidently curtailing O’s spending is a bad thing, eh?
Are they cutting thin air??
As usual, Levin is the voice of honesty and common sense. Hacks like Reid and Boehner don’t even understand the language he speaks.
Well, I don’t agree. I heard him on Fox and he was mean and acerbic.
We need to embrace this as a victory, and go on to more victories.
Whining and blaming Boehner are easy if you are on the radio.
You must not have any children. MY kid’s grand kids are going to be paying this mess.
Our side is still stuck in the notion that if you don't get every single thing you want, it's a loss. Barbra Streisand.
Why the personal comment because we happen to disagree on this issue?
You’re right, even tho it’s not popular to say so here.
Ezra Klein wrote a pretty good piece for the WaPo saying that Dems have lost a lot more than they realize because this has solidified Boehner as a powerful Speaker who can rally his troops even when they don’t agree and deliver the goods. (Remember that as much as we disliked her, Pelosi was very good at her job). Moreover the cuts set a precedent that will lead to more policy defeats in the coming months, and policy defeats will diminish Obama and the Democrat power just as we’ve already seen happen as Obama has had to abandon most of his campaign promises (Gitmo, Bush tax policy, Bush anti terror policies, etc.
It will never register with many who post on FR but this is what registers with the center-right and independents. The more they see Obama and the Dems as losers, the better the chances of defeating them in coming elections and rolling-back their destructive policies.
You won’t hear Rush talking like Levin, because he knows this has always been about defeating Obama’s policies.
The Democrats didn't pass Obama's 2011 budget. They failed to do it while they were in the majority, all of last year.
You are using a budget that failed to pass as a baseline to define spending cuts.
Yes, strategy, this was a golden opportunity to do more, they were ill prepared to take full advantage of it. Next time, add more cuts if Democrats try to stop the bill.
Well I don't agree that it was a victory.
“Why the personal comment because we happen to disagree on this issue?”
It wasn’t a personal comment, it was a statement of fact. His grandkids and everyone else’s grandkid WILL pay (and pay) for the ongoing debt binge we’re still involved in.
The dollar is already well on its way to becoming worthless toilet paper as we, with reckless abandon, print ever more money to cover our deficits and buy our own debt.
The $30+ billion “victory” is laughable against the $1+ trillion we’re wracking up every year. If this is the best we can do, we are all in serious trouble to say nothing of future generations, who will rightfully curse us all.
levin is expressing his opinion - just as you are - except that he did not call your opinion "whining" like you did
levin did not take boehner's job - i assure you that if he did, this bill you like would not have been accepted
the above is not a personal attack - what follows is
for someone that twists language of others as a 'personal attack', you should consider not calling the opinion of others 'whining'
Levin is a public figure. I can characterize him any way I choose.
I am a private poster on Free Republic. My family situation is none of your business.
Anyone who thinks this a victory in any way must either be a Statist, a government worker, or incredibly naive.
Mark Levin was right on the money. $38B out of nearly $4 Trillion is a victory? It's nothing. Our Founding fathers are crying because our so called leaders are weak and unprincipled beyond words.
The Rep leadership deserves nothing but our contempt. Levin is brilliant, not mean or acerbic.
i don’t care about your family situation - no one asked you about it - but something must be wrong because you seem awfully sensitive about it
seeing how you chose to become a public figure here and all
I won’t pick on you...but you are wrong. The most important thing Levin said was if they fold from 100B to 61B to 38.5B (and 10 Billion of that is rumored to be the 10B in cuts from earlier CR’s then its no victory. The next two fights will be harder. His next point was more important, when we have no answer to being accused of starving old people and murdering women then we really have no real plan. Charges like this need to be answered.
I say all this with respect and of course your opinion is welcome.
Only time will tell who won what. Only time. The fact is I agree with people who like and people who dislike the agreement. If you understand that Dems still hold some power and they wanted to cave on nothing then this deal is amazing. But if you felt that the Repubs would go nuclear and demand for a heck of a whole lot more on first swing this was a let down. If you felt that the Repubs didnt win the senate back and that we still have a senate full of rinos anyways then this deal with socialist Reid was better than nothing. But if you favored a government shutdown because youd rather have the Dems do nothing and stalement in congress or you didnt want repubs negotiation with no one or you wanted 100 Billion in cuts or even 61 billion and not 38.5 Billion then this deal is a let down. It is is all based on your point of view. Being allowed to vote on Planned parenthood and Obamacare is one thing but actually having it defunded is another. So that is the situation.
If your like Michele Bachmann then your contradicting yourself because you wanted the GOP to win and get some concessions which are better than nothing and you didnt want a shutdown because the military would not get payed and refund checks wouldnt be sent out. Which she said this week on Greta Van Sustern. But then you didnt vote for the deal, oppose the longer term one yet to be voted on, and want Obamacare defunded. Which she said on a Cavuto special report today. And you are now ranting about cuts being too low and the big battle will be when tackling Paul Ryans 2012 budget. So it is what it is.
Would expect nothing less than some on our side to be upset.
Gosh, you sound like a liberal!
watch the name calling!
How about this history: from 1801-1808, Jefferson sliced one-third off the national debt. By comparison to GNP, our current debt is only a little higher.
From 1921-1928, Harding and Coolidge did the same thing (actually, the legislation didn't go through till about 1923, meaning we paid off one-third of the debt in five years).
It's not impossible, it's been done in the past, and what's important is movement. Where are we headed?
If Palin is the candidate, I fully expect Obama to win another four years. If Romney is the candidate, ditto. I'm not sure who will beat him as of today.
But a lot will happen in two years. If the Tea Party can muster another round of throwing the (right) bums out, and increase the Tea Party caucus, by 2012 there will be ongoing and significant cuts---especially if we take the senate as we seem poised to do. Obama won't be able to stop everything. They won't fund his nonsense (see, for ex, in the budget deal how they defunded the new IRS Obamacare agents!!) He will look, I think, much like Clinton in his last two years, talking about school uniforms and equally irrelevant stuff.
But that's IF the Tea Party can hang onto the current guys and weed out more RINOs and a few more Dems in the House and Senate.
I don't think it will matter particularly how conservative the presidential candidate is---Trump, for ex., isn't too conservative at all---but whether the person is perceived as a FIGHTER. I still sense that people are about to explode waiting for someone to really take on Obama and Reid. That's why Trump has such sudden appeal. (Has Palin has been silent on the birth certificate issue? I don't know.)
Right now, based on all the people I know who voted for Obama, it's VERY much like in 1998 where they do not want to admit they made a mistake, especially involving a black man, but they want to make him as irrelevant an impotent as possible. He would be hard pressed against a conservative who doesn't have such incredibly high negatives as Palin, I don't know, maybe a Pawlenty, or Rubio, or someone (I don't have anyone in mind). He would definitely lose FL and OH as of today, and MO would be difficult.
Nonsense. You didn't need "time will tell" after the Battle of Midway, or the Philippine Sea, or Kursk, or Stalingrad.
This is the same. Levin is right, Obama fought a holding action against weenie Republicans and won, clearly won. He won ugly, but the truth is in the numbers. One percent. The GOP "New Majority" with Captain Boehner at the helm got a one-percent deal.
Obama and his kitchen Politburo are destroying the Republic and looking forward to building concentration camps, and Boehner's acting as if Sam Rayburn were still Speaker of the House and all were still comity, light-hearted banter, and everyone seeking The Good, and the Rat Party hadn't been taken over by outright Stalinists determined to turn America into the new Gulag State.
And if Ronald Reagan, who was clearly unelectable (it was in all the news), had been the nominee, Jimmy Carter would just as easily been returned to office. Good thing we nominated Bob Dole instead.
You've got some 'splainin' to do.
I don't think it will matter particularly how conservative the presidential candidate is..... but whether the person is perceived as a FIGHTER.
I call b.s. on your "fightin' RiNO" b.s. call. Still hoping for a Judas horse to emerge, to lead all the Sarah fans back into the RiNO corral? You yearning to get the Tea Party to catch fire for Mittens or one of the other "anybody but Sarah" trimmer/nice-guy candidates? You like Chris Christie, for example? "We need RiNO's with Executive Experience, who Know How to Get Things Done" -- like our just completed one-percent budget deal. Yeah, thought so.
Lemme guess. You think the Tea Party is eaten up with "gestural politics" that has "no practical chance" and ought to just go home and content themselves with working for RiNO selectees who went to Yale and Georgetown and Know How to Trim --- err, Get Things Done with Compromise and Solid Legislative Work and Consensus-Building and One Step at a Time. Right?
You're just on fire to tag me as a Romney supporter (never have been in the past), or a Christie supporter (he's good as a governor, but that's all). I don't particularly see the candidate that I think best embodies conservative principles without alienating 60% of the electorate.
But it's pretty typical of Palin supporters around here to get hysterical without even reading the post. I do think Obama would beat her, probably handily. I don't know if he can beat several other candidates---perhaps Pawlenty, perhaps Trump. I don't know. But I do know that by now, after almost three years since she burst on the scene, she has consistently driven her own negatives up despite a best-selling book and a nice little TV show. If you think about that, it's actually kinda hard to do. But then again, I understand that just doesn't register with you.
Ah. The famous RiNO psych perquisite. The kind of crap you guys always pull on real conservatives, from Barry to Ronnie to Sarah, right down to today. Real conservatives, you're sorry to inform the NBC News cameras, are, well, just .... crazy.
I do think Obama would beat her, probably handily....
Like Jimmuh beat Reagan, good reason never, ever to let anyone like Reagan get the nomination. I mean, someone has to be the adult in the room, right?
You people make me sick. Knifing your moral betters, and feeling smug about it to boot, because you know -- you know -- that in a right-ordered universe, people like Reagan and Palin should lick your RiNO paws and kiss your Old School rings and offer eternal fealty to you and the Better Sort of People ...... whereas, of course, converse not true. Loyalty, after all, only works one way. Loyalty up, and patronization down.
The Eleventh Commandment only binds conservatives, not former Romney and McCain staffers and their henchboys.
....after almost three years since she burst on the scene, she has consistently driven her own negatives up....
No, she hasn't -- the menagerie has, and don't you feel good about it? Keeping topsiders topping, and all that. No challenges from below the salt.
I'll let your malice drip all over the thread. Anyone who wants to see what a malevolent RiNO looks like, can come look at your posts.
I think the Jews tried that one on Jesus, and it didn't work then, either.
And like I said, must have touched a nerve that your candidate of choice just won't get in the water. Hmmm. Why? Can't be she ever actually reads her own polls could it?
Oh, really? Touched my nerve? How could you tell, by my not bothering to speculate on your insinuating (and nauseating) little RiNOsceroid speculation?
Sarah has more touch than any Republican candidate since Ronnie. Period. I'll trust her to make her own calls on timing and whatever. If she stands up, announces, and asks the People for funding, you'll think Lake Agassiz had just cut loose.
She is a talent without peer, the liberals all know it and loathe and fear her like no other, and hateful little RiNO's like you are sticking razor blades in little wax dolls all over Connecticut. Way to go, clubby little Pubbies!