Posted on 04/10/2011 4:38:57 PM PDT by smoothsailing
OPINION
APRIL 10, 2011
The Tea Party's First Victory
Obama opposes spending cuts right up to the time he calls them historic..
This is getting to be a habit. President Obama ferociously resists tax cuts, trade agreements and spending cuts—right up to the moment he strikes a deal with Republicans and hails the tax cuts, trade agreements and spending cuts as his idea. What a difference an election makes.
This is the larger political meaning of Friday's last minute budget deal for fiscal 2011 that averted a government shutdown. Mr. Obama has now agreed to a pair of tax cut and spending deals that repudiate his core economic philosophy and his agenda of the last two years—and has then hailed both as great achievements. Republicans in Washington have reversed the nation's fiscal debate and are slowly repairing the harm done since the Nancy Pelosi Congress began to set the direction of government in 2007.
Yes, we know, $39 billion in spending cuts for 2011 is less than the $61 billion passed by the House and shrinks the overall federal budget by only a little more than 1%. The compromise also doesn't repeal ObamaCare, kill the EPA's anticarbon rules, defund Planned Parenthood, reform the entitlement state, or part the Red Sea.
On the other hand, the Obama-Pelosi Leviathan wasn't built in a day, and it won't be cut down to size in one budget. Especially not in a fiscal year that only has six months left and with Democrats running the Senate and White House. Friday's deal cuts more spending in any single year than we can remember, $78 billion more than President Obama first proposed. Domestic discretionary spending grew by 6% in 2008, 11% in 2009 and 14% in 2010, but this year will fall by 4%. That's....
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
You could contact the WSJ, they may have the answer for you....
http://help.wsj.com/customer-service/
I’m no fan of Scott Brown; he ran against ObamaCare and won. The TEA Party isn’t anti-abortion, but only against government spending on it. Conservatives are projecting themselves onto a movement based on a tax revolt, ascribing other conservative positions to it that aren’t relevant.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."
Shoot, if it's not pro-life it's not even truly American at all.
The impact of Scott Brown’s election is unclear, but the fact that he won as a liberal against ObamaCare versus a liberal who supported ObamaCare should be something the TEA Party should glean some hope from.
Christie has already capped our property tax increases, no small feat in a state with among the highest property taxes in the nation. The number of government workers ALREADY laid off in NJ probably is incredible; when the cities of Paterson and Camden lay off ONE THIRD of their police officers (Newark & Jersey City also laid off many, but not 1/3), and many other public employees (teachers, firemen, town clerks, etc.) are also being laid off, that is incredible. Unless you’ve lived here a little while, you can’t understand how bad it had become, and how significant his election was.
At this point, our annual school budget votes go something like this: if the voters approve the budget with it’s increases, we lose 3 teachers; if the budget fails at the ballot box, we lose 8. Since many un-tenured teachers have already been let go, they’re starting to cut into the tenured teachers with the least seniority - life-time employment that accompanies tenure is no longer the way of the world here.
The TEA Party is a tax revolt; anything else attributed to it is debatable. Citing the American Revolution isn’t relevant beyond the fact that it, too, was a tax revolt. It isn’t the “American Tea Party”; the “tea” represents Taxed Enough Already, and they happen to be in the United States and proud of it.
FWIW, as far as freedoms, most colonies kept slavery after the revolution.
I don’t believe him.
Scott Brown was the lesser of two evils. More importantly, he gives the TEA Party a chance to demonstrate to all politicians, "we can put your butt in power, and we can remove it as well."
I agree; on the whole I think it was a positive thing for the movement, and flexing of muscle in a notoriously expensive part of the country.
A total misreading of history.
The sum total of the thoughts of the revolutionaries, as expressed in the work of the Committees of Correspondence and ultimately in the Declaration, make it clear that what it was really about was the restoration of respect in law for the natural rights of the people.
-----
"Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature."
Hey, if you think electing evil is a victory for America, just because some politician has an R by his name, I seriously doubt there is much I have to say that will make much difference to you.
But, I will say this, for the sake of any readers: If the "Tea Party" thinks this is all about money, it's already part of the problem.
Yeah... funding NRP, Planned Parenthood and Obamacare is a Tea Party victory - and cutting defense spending?
Yeah, sure. The GOP delivered a budget the Democrats could love!
Its business as usual in Washington.
I think he’s got it just about right.
I also liked this exchange between Paul Gigot and Dan Henninger during the Journal Editorial Report on FNC earlier today:
GIGOT: Dan, do you think the — we’ve got the debt ceiling debate coming forward here and that’s a big, big fight.
HENNINGER: Right.
GIGOT: Does the victory — I think you called it a victory that Boehner got on this current budget. Does that increase the momentum and political capital on the debt ceiling fight and the Ryan budget?
HENNINGER: I think it does very much. What John Boehner proved here, I think, was that he can govern. It’s important for the general public to think that someone in Washington can govern.
Now the debt ceiling is going to be a huge challenge because I think it’s a bit of a political distraction.
Having said that, I do not object to the people on the right or the Tea Party pushing all the time against the Republicans in Congress to keep cutting spending. These are politicians, after all. They’ll back slide eventually. They’ll break your heart eventually.
Excuses. We’ve heard them all before.
There is NO conservative movement in Washington. They may talk tough but they ALWAYS cave to the Left when the going gets tough.
God forbid they explain to the American people why we should have $100 billion in cuts.
We can’t have that because the Democrats will call the GOP mean names!
Rush said it before: compromise is for losers. And the GOP is a party of RINO losers!
Yup... vote for Republicans and you get Democrats!
I warned about this last November but no one listened. Now reality is setting in.
We have cross dressing Democrats in Washington and they are called Republicans!
Yup... vote for Republicans and you get Democrats!
I warned about this last November but no one listened. Now reality is setting in.
We have cross dressing Democrats in Washington and they are called Republicans!
I’m not sure which of those items was any different after independence than before. The British colonists saw no point in sending tax revenue to London if they could collect & keep it here (which is exactly what they did).
Here's a news flash, there was nothing even remotely resembling a Conservative in the race. We didn't have a Miller or an O'Donnell (Note; had the GOP supported the voters' choices, they might have won). Brown is too far to the left to even be called a "RINO." However, by beating the DNC darling and killing their Camelot-Dynesty dreams and seizing the seat they claim belongs to the Kennedy's, we bloodied their noses.
The don't respect us; but this made them fear us. That's good enough for me.
They'll fear us more if we get a conservative candidate and we can throw Brown's butt in to the gutter with the rest of the trash.
Not me. Just one more liberal in the Senate wasteland.
And if Massachusetts should have taught us anything over the last decade, it should be that a liberal with an R by their name can actually do more real damage than a liberal with a D by their name.
Think Romney. Socialized medicine. Taxpayer-funded abortions. Gun bans. The homosexualization of state government and the government schools. Sodomite fake marriage. Etc.
You warned us?
What did you offer for the alternative?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.