The Spending Fight (Republicans are winning)

The Wall Street Journal ^ | April 1, 2011 | Editorial

[LRoggy]

“..if the GOP can’t win this little skirmish, fresh off the HUGE 2010 win, then how can we expect them to win the BIG ones..”

By electing a conservative Senate, keeping the current House makeup and electing a conservative President.

The progressives have spent decades pocketing small, incremental gains at all levels of society. It’s time to do the same.

Rome wasn’t built in a day, neither is this mess.

[foreshadowed at waco]

I agree. The 2012 budget is key.

[Nonstatist]

A deal like this would prevent a government shutdown—at least for now—which could jeopardize the GOP's ability to win future budget fights that are more consequential. Next week, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan will release his fiscal 2012 budget, which we are told will contain more than $2 trillion in savings over the next decade. ....

. We hope freshmen Republicans don't mistake this early budget compromise for Armageddon and refuse to vote for it. That could weaken the final deal by forcing GOP leaders to move left to get Democratic votes. Republicans are winning the spending debate because they have methodically kept their focus on spending issues rather than on extraneous policy riders. ...

Sounds like a smart strategy.

[Mariner]

Pablum.

Has the WSJ been leading the enemy class?

[Mariner]

"We hope freshmen Republicans don't mistake this early budget compromise for Armageddon and refuse to vote for it. That could weaken the final deal by forcing GOP leaders to move left to get Democratic votes. Republicans are winning the spending debate because they have methodically kept their focus on spending issues rather than on extraneous policy riders. ..."

The GOP leadership will accomplish nothing besides a monumental split in the GOP Caucus.

I can see it now...75 republicans vote no and the GOP leadership picks up 40 dim votes.

Boner and Cantor are not fit to held the offices to which they've been elected.

[zeugma]

I’m sorry, but anything less than $200B is a joke, and $500B is still not low for what is needed. I can’t believe we’re even talking about $30-40 billion in comparison to a multi-trillion dollar spending spree.