Skip to comments.Sarah Palin's Vague Debt Threat
Posted on 07/28/2011 11:37:18 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
This afternoon Sarah Palin issued a vague threat to freshman Republicans just ahead of the House vote on a bill to reduce the deficit and raise the debt ceiling. Does Palin want Republicans to vote it down? She wouldn't say precisely. On her Facebook page, Palin cited quotations from a 2010 letter she issued to Republicans reminding them that they "campaigned on a promise to rein in out-of-control government spending... promises that you must keep." She punctuated her reminder with an ominous post script: "P.S. Everyone I talk to still believes in contested primaries."
So does that mean she's threatening to run hard-right candidates against Republicans who vote for the bill supported by House Speaker Boehner in the next election? A number of conservative Republicans were upset that the GOP's Cut Cap and Balance bill was abandoned. But those left puzzling over her Facebook postings were just as confused as we are.
Sheila Marikar at ABC News writes:
"That could be a threat -- suggesting that she wont support members of Congress who vote to raise the debt ceiling or a reference to her 2012 aspirations."
CNN's political unit:
"Palin, who is considering a bid for the White House in 2012, has said raising the debt ceiling is inevitable, but that Republicans "better get something out of it." She has also been a proponent of the "Cut, Cap, and Balance" pledge passed through the Republican-controlled House and failed in the Senate."
But Jim Geraghty at National Review has it all figured out:
"If she were any clearer, they would have woken up with horses heads in their beds this morning."
For Geraghty, it's clear she's asking them to vote against the Boehner bill. Giving Boehner a little support, he justifies the speaker's position.
Of course, in the eyes of John Boehner and his allies, his plan is the best remaining option to stick to the principles that propelled their campaigns, rein in out-of-control government spending, and so on. And its not like Boehners plan is generating much pats on the back from the Left in the media.
Obama, under a suddenly balanced budget, will have some extremely hard choices to make. Given his track record, I think he will fail badly. He will be faced with the choice of funding the likes of ACORN, Planned Parenthood, & bogus green energy projects vs sending SS checks to seniors & unemployment checks to the jobless.
At current spending rates & debt ceiling increases - they are sure to rise - Boehner’s plan would cut $1T+ while the total debt increases $20T to $35T in 10 years. It wont take 10 years though as we will be in REAL, unavoidable default before then. I figure we wont get thru Obama’s second term w/o default. This is when martial law will be declared.
What I want to see is real, substantial, spending cuts that occur before any increase in the debt ceiling. I have ZERO respect for 10 year cuts, which are easily ignored in future budgets. I have ZERO respect for a Balanced Budget Amendment at this point. It is a fairytale to believe it would pass & be ratified in time to save this country.
Obamacare could easily be repealed & vastly improve the budget outlook, AND be welcome relief to employers & the job market. The less than useless Dept. of Education could be closed.
Finally, I ask: Why do you think Rats are so opposed to ANY spending cuts at all? Why are they determined to raise the debt ceiling w/o ANY cuts or limits?
My answer: Rats & RINOs desperately need this money to finance their (Obama’s) reelection & to maintain their hold on power. Any gutting of the Federal gov’t will fall overwhelmingly on Obama’s rank & file support. For gov’t workers, unions, contractors, & partisan NGOs, the money will stop flowing. This means that far less money will flow back into Obama’s & the Rat's campaigns & the leaches will have little incentive to support Obama. Without that money they cannot buy the election.
I see a lot of Freepers assume the Pubs will make substantial gains in the Senate & House in 2012. But if Obama & Co. buy the election, it is likely the Rats will retain the Senate & may make gains in the House. That puts us in exactly the same position in Jan. 2013 as now, only $2.7T deeper in debt, & has no pending election to limit his insanity.
"But with respect to future debt; would it not be wise and just for that nation to declare in the constitution they are forming that neither the legislature, nor the nation itself can validly contract more debt, than they may pay within their own age, or within the term of 19 years."
--Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, 1789
Whatever, its a free country, maybe.
They will take to the streets. That is practically a given. I just hope we are ready for it because I agree with you. The winning at any cost has to end. Oversized government has got to end. I suppose if there MUST be a showdown, it might as well be now before our childen have to fight this fght years from now. Just do it and get it over with.
I believe Palin spent one day back in March 2010, in Arizona, making a campaign appearance, making a radio commercial and doing a TV interview.
If you have any further evidence of support since then, please document it.
This made me laugh out loud.
No, CCB would raise the ceiling 1.1 trillion.
Washington, Jul 19 -
Congressman Paul Broun, M.D. (GA-10) today released the following statement after voting against the Republican Cut, Cap, and Balance bill:
I gave my word to my constituents in Georgia and to the rest of the American people that I would not vote for any bill that increases the debt limit. Although the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill is a step in the right direction, it still raises the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion, and we simply cannot afford it.
Also missing from the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill is the urgency to pay down the debt by immediately reducing the outrageous spending levels to which Washington has become so accustomed. Unfortunately, the cuts outlined in Cut, Cap, and Balance take effect over a period of ten years. We no longer have ten years to spare its too little, too late.
Undoubtedly, we have to cap spending and we must enact a balanced budget amendment, but Congress can get these tasks done without raising the debt ceiling. I have introduced bills to both lower the debt ceiling and to balance the budget.
Weve been down this road before. Administrations of the past have agreed to raise the debt ceiling on a contingency that cuts would be made in future budgets but those cuts never materialized. Its long past time to stop obligating our constitutional duties along with our budgetary problems to both future Congresses and future generations.
I wish Sarah would come out for freezing all spending at current levels and completely eliminating some programs.
The term “cutting” means different thing to congress than it does to you and me. In congress it means increasing spending by a lower percentage in the future. We need reduced spending now.
Governor Palin folded her cards along with most all of the so-called “conservative” Republicans and supported the “Cut, Cap and Balance” bill, which would have raised the debt ceiling by $2.4 TRILLION dollars, the exact amount Obama has been after all along.
She doesn’t even advocate ending the Dept. of Education, much less anything else.
What we need at this point is for Palin to take up Ron Paul’s solution to the immediate “crisis,” which is simply for the fed to forfeit its imaginary bond debt of approx $1.7 trillion.
This will work.
>> “Some info please. If a Balanced Budget Amendment ever goes through, whereby (spending = revenues), do you ever need to borrow money again?” <<
No, there will be automatic tax increases each year, in whatever amount it takes to balance the budget.
That is why I know that eventually there will be a BB amendment, so that they can raise taxes automatically.
Shhhh! Don't confuse them with facts!
Stay alert, prepare and fight for freedom in any way you can. These are the times they will write about hundreds of years from now. Are we ready for the fight?
Your PDS will just have to simmer a while longer while Gov Palin slowly unveils her strategy...and the Dept of Ed is no doubt on her hit list.
Laugh all you want. The last one will be on you.
"The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."
Just as you did here?! LOL
Since you issued a challenge I decided to just do a cursory look at a Google search and look what turned up on the very first look. Take your pick of a number of separate articles on how much Palin has supported McCain.