If the debt ceiling is mechanically lifted without any debate over spending, then it doesn’t really exist. If you want to spend without any limit, just say so. But even The Times concedes that Washington is “living beyond its means.” So, then, why is it more “reasonable” to negotiate the slowing of spending now, when the ceiling is in view, than a month from now or a year from now when there is no incentive to do anything? …

Democrats spend their time blaming GOP administration for the preponderance of our debt — most of which Joe Biden has voted for as a senator or helped shepherd through in the executive branch. No one is innocent on that front, of course, but most of our debt is propelled by constantly expanding entitlement programs, which are treated with a reverence by the left that the Constitution can never attain.

But even if the GOP were culpable for every single dollar of debt and were engaged in blatant hypocrisy, it wouldn’t change the fact that they are objectively correct today in arguing that we need to slow spending and mitigate debt. The arguments used to oppose even a modicum of responsible budgeting do not make any sense.

[It’s not supposed to “make sense”. They’re supposed to provide cover for Biden with the media, which has been successful so far in that the media keep painting Republicans as obstructionist even though the House has *actually passed* an increase in the debt limit. That success from Kevin McCarthy has flummoxed the White House, which advanced a laughable argument that the House needs to return to “regular order” when it’s the Senate that won’t take up the bill. It’s idiocy, and idiocy has a short expiration date. The media can’t sustain this argument, and they’re a lot smarter than Biden. — Ed]