Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: reaganaut1

“the amateurism it displayed” suggested “an institution starting with a conclusion and shaping any arguments to fit it.”

What’s the old playground retort? “It takes one to know one?”

Sperling’s criticism is a pitch-perfect characterization of this administration’s approach to health care reform, Porkulus, Cash for Clunkers and dozens of other bone-headed ideas in which facts were never allowed to interfere with the headlong rush to adopt ideas that progressive “experts” felt certain America needed.

That every one of these ideas has produced “unintended” consequences (read: turned out the opposite of what was promised/predicted) has in no way tarnished them in the eyes of true believers. Quite the contrary, the most delusional (e.g., Paul Krugman) argue that we simply didn’t go far enough: we spend TOO LITTLE on stimulus spending; the health law would have been vastly better with a public option etc.

Thus, when any member of this administration alludes to “amateurism” and bending facts to fit preconceived conclusions, they are speaking from years of experience.


9 posted on 08/07/2011 6:23:11 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DrC

The more I hear Obama and his minions speak, the more it seems they all must have take a Hypocritic Oath as a condition of joining this administration.


12 posted on 08/07/2011 6:27:05 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: DrC

From Para-Ord.45, yesterday comes this quote, which needs to be stated often!

-S&P exec John Chambers,

“But $4 trillion would be a good down payment. We thought that..if policy makers could deliver the goods on that, then that would be a strong sign on our political scores and eventually on our projections on the fiscal side.”

S&P has already said it may slash the Triple-A rating if a debt ceiling deal is not accompanied by what it deems is a credible plan to cut the $14.3 trillion federal [debt] by $4 trillion.

S&P’s Chambers is saying the ratings agency wants to see at least a $4 trillion deal, one that would come with bipartisan support.

There was only ever one plan that did what S&P said was required — $4 trillion in cuts with bipartisan support. That’d be Cut, Cap, and Balance — a plan that cut $4 trillion and got bipartisan support in the House of Representatives.

As Democrats tonight, and some Republicans, lash out and blame the Tea Party for causing the United States to lose its credit rating, it is worth pointing out that only the Tea Party offered up a plan to avoid what happened.-


15 posted on 08/07/2011 7:07:55 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: DrC

Right on!


26 posted on 08/07/2011 9:50:23 AM PDT by Son House (The Economic Boom Heard Around The World => TEA Party 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson