I don’t want the Federal government to have a credit limit at all. I don’t want anyone in the world to ever loan the US Government any more money. (I’m not sure anyone is any more, it’s likely that 100% of the debt is being bought by the fed)

Go ahead and default, yeah I know they don’t have to and Obama will do it in a fit of rage…OK I’m good with that. This isn’t about winning a political battle, it’s about whether the country exists at all in 10 years; the odds are overwhelmingly against. Going for broke is our only chance.

Of course, Republicans remember all too well that they attempted to force a budget victory in 1995 over Bill Clinton with a government shutdown, and ended up losing the political war.

Contract with America was a very Conservative Message.

But the GOP quickly abandoned it after they won the 94 elections using it. The American People saw this an punished the Republicans for abandoning the Contract. That is what hurt the GOP it had nothing to do with the Debt Celling Debate.

Conservative messaging always works. GOPe message always loses that is what lost.

The result of this fight though was an actual balanced budget. America actually took in more than it paid out for four years. Only GOPe reactionaries would consider this a political loss. It proves smaller spending is possible with great results. It is a political loss because the GOPe made it thus. The GOPe hated the Contract and did all in their power to make it a loser so Conservatives would not win in 1996 they cared less that meant Clinton would get a second term. They eventually forced Newt out of Congress a complete disgrace after he gave us the House. The GOPe is the problem.

NO MORE CREDIT UNTIL THE SENATE PASSES A BUDGET.

NO MORE CREDIT WITHOUT BIGGER CUTS IN FEDERAL SPENDING.

oconp88 on January 15, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Clearly we are thinking alike.

The left has been slowly eroding certain aspects of our country by plaing the long game for years now. While we are getting a late start, it is time for the right to look at its issues the same way.

If the Democrats approve it, great.

If they refuse, the debt limit will instantly force spending to the same level.

This is an easy win…if the Republicans want to win. Which they don’t.

But that raises the question: If the goal here is to turn this into a traditional government shutdown, why not forget the debt ceiling and use the expiration of this year’s allotment of federal spending in March as an opportunity to shut down the government and extract cuts?

The debt ceiling with any type of appropriations legislation in effect allows, by law, the prioritization of certain work by the Executive branch, like, say, having Treasury show up for work daily to pay the interest on the debt.

By law, letting appropriations legislation expire does not allow Treasury to show up at work daily to pay the interest on the debt.

Of course, the Executive might request people to show up for work with payments delayed, with the promise to convince Congress to pay the debts accrued. But does the President have the authority to do that, and why should the Congress expect the President, especially this President, to do that?

The U.S. government makes 80 million payments a month. Figuring out which to pay first could be a logistical nightmare…

As soon as practical, all payments/expenditures need to be classified on a tiered prioritization scheme.

Mandatory, ‘servicing the debt’ payments would be Class A, and never touched.

But, Classes B, C, and D payments would be lower priority expenditures and during these kind of situations Treasury can cut off payment:
i.e., All Class D payments are cancelled. If the situation isn’t resolved by (fill in date), Class C payments will be cancelled.
Et cetera.

PolAgnostic on January 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM

+ $16 trillion

That was like, wow, many, many hours ago. Time does fly.

Exit question: Which option does the “let it burn” crowd favor here? The point of LIB is to force Democrats to fully own the fiscal mess they’ve made and to force voters to live with the consequences of electing those Democrats, so presumably you guys want the GOP to vote “present” on the debt ceiling and let the Dems keep borrowing until the whole budgetary facade finally collapses, yes?

The first stage is Denial

And it applies to the enablers (RINO’s, AP, National Journal, etc) as well as the Spenders (SCOAMF, liberals, RINO’s, etc)

The Federal Reserve is currently BUYING all UST’s 10 YR and longer in duration to keep debt servicing costs from becoming hyper-inflationary.

The Federal Reserve is ALSO buying effectively all Mortgage Backed Securities as a means of preventing another 30% leg DOWN in housing prices.

Take the Federal Reserve’s QE off the table (and they are now talking about doing just that) and this whole facade crumbles overnight.

The correct answer is what is called Tough Love.

and that requires an INTERVENTION

You DO NOT get to vote ‘present’ at an intervention – that path means you will keep enabling the problem.

You vote “NO!” on raising the debt ceiling.

You vote “NO!” on a continuing resolution.

You MAKE the SCOAMF, the liberals, the MSM, RINO’s, etc FACE THE PROBLEM NOW !!!

Every additional day you put it off, the problem is going to be exponentially worse.

Seriously, AP, have you never been involved first hand in an intervention?

Or are you just too comfortable with the Denial?

The part of this that makes me angry is that I have not seen a coordinated media rush from the Rs to get out if not infront of O or at least even with him.

They have to start learning to use the Ds tactics. No more turning the other cheek or whatever they think they are doing.

CoffeeLover on January 15, 2013 at 10:49 AM

It’s tough to get your message out when the media doesn’t cover you.

As Jeb Hensarling and a few others pointed out two years ago, if you make the cuts then you don’t need to borrow. Why is this so hard?

We were promised… “Oh let’s cave on the fiscal cliff issue so we REALLY REALLY fight on the debt limit!”

How is that working out?

The GOP has once again been placed on the defensive on an issue that should be a no-brainer? Refusal to raise the debt limit unless the Obama Admin. propose or accept real spending cuts?

Does anyone here think we will be debating semantics or legal workarounds if Dems were the ones threatening a shutdown? We would be crying “Uncle” and asking how much we should cut.

Why is our weak RINO leadership refusing to step aside? It is obvious they are unwilling to stand up to the Dems and yet would rather burn down the party than cede to conservative leadership.

*Fuming*…

The U.S. government makes 80 million payments a month. Figuring out which to pay first could be a logistical nightmare…

as Elvis said, it’s now or never

Did you get promoted, or fired?

Trade a one time debt ceiling raise for a budget and a balanced budget amendment.

Squeeze hard and long, in fact don’t let go until the papers are signed, no matter how long it takes, no matter what happens.

In my opinion the Defense Department, the National Intelligence Department, the Justice Department, and the Home Land Security department must not be cut more than 5% each…

mnjg on January 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM

These entities can cut 5% without any problem at all. Heck, they could probably just dissolve their diversity programs and save 5%.

they’re saying the GOP should pass something that lets Treasury continue to borrow only for the purpose of paying interest owed to creditors.

I LOVE this idea. It makes it clear that default and the debt ceiling are NOT the same thing.