Sarah Palin is smarter than NRO's editors

"What had looked like a modest success now looks like a sodden disappointment."
*
In an editorial mea culpa Wednesday, National Review Online's editors admitted that they were wrong to praise the Boehner-Obama budget compromise so quickly:

"We initially supported the deal House Speaker John Boehner cut with the White House to cut $38.5 billion from the rest of the fiscal year 2011 budget. It was only a pittance in the context of all of Washington’s red ink, but it seemed an acceptable start, even if we assumed it would be imperfect in its details. What we didn’t assume was that the agreement would be shot through with gimmicks and one-time savings. What had looked in its broad outlines like a modest success now looks like a sodden disappointment."

Unlike the NRO punditocracy, Sarah Palin did not fall for the deception. Asked by Judge Jeanine Pirro on Fox News about the deal Saturday, the 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate replied:

"When you consider that we just saw an increase in government spending by about 28% and saw a little chip out of that to the tune of 1%, I would say that no, the tea party and Americans in general who are concerned about the fiscal health of our country did not get what they wanted. We have a lot of work to do to help educate Congress when it comes to the expectations that we have when we send our politicians to DC to do the job of making sure that our country is solvent."

Heh. Mama Grizzly is smarter than the average bear... and a lot smarter than your average NRO editor.

- JP