half of a shit sandwich

re-do it

the aug 2nd is not written in stone

better to keep working than shoot yourself in the foot

1 billion is pathetic.

re-enter cut cap and balance witha new house bill# and send it back

At this point I'm giving up any hope of getting any meaningful cuts.  I just hope they'll work it so they run out of money and have to face this issue again before the election and it robs the destroyer in chief of a second term.  But I don't have a lot of faith in that.  Maybe it's time to embrace the collapse and plan for the reconstruction.

Posted by: Waterhouse at July 27, 2011 01:06 PM (2sn+p)

Can't we talk about this after the 2012 election?

Someone remind me how the US got in this position in the first place?
Posted by: Waterhouse at July 27, 2011 01:06 PM (2sn+p)

We'll let the dems win this one and get 'em next time.  They probably mean well.  Plus, the MFM will like us then!

Harry Reid doesn't even deserve to be in the Senate.  Oh, right, my bad.

Same old same old.

Then:

"We gotta take what we can get on this continuing resolution. The real fight's going to be the debt ceiling."

Now:

"We gotta take what we can get with this debt ceiling. The real fight's going to be the 2012 election because we need the Senate and the House."

Two years from now:

"We gotta take what we can get with this budget. The real fight's going to be the 2014 election because we need 60 Senators to break the filibuster."

Repeat ad infinitum.

Repeat ad infinitum.

Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at July 27, 2011 01:15 PM (JxMoP)

Well, until the collapse, at which point people will be able to accurately say that both parties were at fault.

I used to try to argue with people when they claim that both parties are equally responsible for our current mess.  I would bring up Fannie and Freddie and Dowd and Bawney Frank and all that, try to make the case that while both parties weren't helping, the Dems were doing much more to screw us over.

I'm tired of making that argument.  They're both equally guilty.

If I were in the Senate now, I'd put a curse on the Democrats.

Because I could, you know.

Boo!

AMEN SGT YORK!!!!!!

There's politics and there's reality.

The politics of the situation demands an increase in the debt ceiling to keep the checks going out, to kick the can down the road past the election, and to enable both sides of the debate to point fingers.

But the reality of the situation is that we are talking about enabling $1 trillion in NEW spending, and enabling it immediately after Obama signs whatever the Congress comes up with.  And that's the reality that is at odds with the politics...because while people are talking about raising the debt ceiling as something that must be done, that requirement exists so Democrats and Republicans can keep winning elections, not out of some kind of fiscal requirement.

Look...federal debt has long ago passed into creepy territory.  The answer here is not to assume more debt and hope a future Congress deals with the spending part.  The answer is to stop taking on more debt and deal with the reality of uncontrolled spending.  Years of paying attention to the politics of the situation have reduced the choices to just that.  Sure, maybe years ago there could have been a better range of choices, but not now.

For that reason, any plan that includes an increase in the debt ceiling is fundamentally unserious.

Gabe, there has been talk that the ratings houses will downgrade our rating even if the debt ceiling is raised, assuming we don't cut enough to get a real handle on our debt. 

----------

Gabe has more than conveniently continued to ignore this. He keeps pretending that if the Boehner plan passes that somehow the AAA rating will remain, despite all of the evidence to the contrary. He does this so he can continue to pretend that a failure to the raise the debt ceiling will be a catastrophe that could have been avoided had we only been reasonable. If he admits that the credit rating is shot either way, it takes away a large portion of his argument.

Furthermore, Gabe continues to wishcast. Despite what the President and Reid have said, he's still pretending that they didn't actually say they wouldn't vote for Boehner's plan. He pretends that it's the only legit option while totally missing the fact that the Senate Majority leader has declared it DOA. It's hilarious to me that CCB is dead and buried, but a bill that is declared DOA, now THAT has promise. Exactly how does one come to this conclusion?

Anyway, Gabe yet again fails all over himself throughout this entire thing. He mis-represents those of us who would rather hit the ceiling then pass this plan.

Let me spell it out for you, Gabe. We would rather hit the ceiling because we believe passing this Boehner plan WILL ULTIMATELY BE MORE HARMFUL TO THE ECONOMY, FREEDOM, AND THIS ENTIRE CIVIL SOCIETY THAN NOT RAISING THE CEILING WOULD. Got it?

And, finally, just like his last post he continues to pretend that Republicans aren't going to get the blame anyway. Tell me, Gabe, when Moody's downgrades the AAA rating after the Boehner plan passes, who do you think gets the blame then big guy? You think the media is going to be honest all of a sudden?

And what happened to the two specters of credit downgrading? We've been talking for weeks about these. The first is the official ratings downgrade. The second one is just as dangerous, because it's even more real. China and PIMCO are already shedding our debt.

And neither of these plans seems to meet the requirements set by the ratings agencies. This is a false choice, and presents nothing new from your last post.

I get that you don't like the lack of acceptance. If this situation was so easy that a blog post could provoke understanding and consensus, it would have happened.

What can be achieved politically cannot begin to satisfy what MUST be done fiscally. This is like the monster movie where the character (victim) has a gun and realizes that the monster is immune to bullets but can be drowned in blood or some other precious commodity. These people are coasting until the austerity owrd can be used and can say that we as a nation are forced to do this. No useful solution will be employed until then.

Posted by: Ben at July 27, 2011 12:32 PM

Actually it doesn't.  Reid simply included the cuts to the spending on the wars which had already been factored in. If Boehner did the same thing his plan would have more cuts.  More smoke blown up our a$$es by Reid. 

This is ridiculous.

At what point do we say enough is enough? At what point do we stop the bleeding in this country? We've run up the credit card bill to the tune of 14 trillion dollars, and the only thing that will save the economy is to increase our credit card limit to 16.5 trillion? I thought we mocked Biden here when he said you have to spend money to save money.

The. spending. has. to. stop.

The President is Amy Winehouse. And she wants heroin and cocaine and pills and meth and ketamine. Boehner's response is "Well, that would be irresponsible, but we Republicans will give you all the pills you want." The dem response is "Those mean Republicans, trying to keep you from your fun. We're fair. We'll give you all the heroin you want instead."

The country is a junkie for spending, and it's going to die. Your just quibling over the method it uses to OD.

we only hold one half of one third of the federal government

Another, less pussy-whipped way to look at it:  By my count, they hold 1/2 of the federal government, barely.

The Supreme Court is largely irrelevant (or should be, in this instance) - if anything, it's split/GOP-controlled.  That's 1/3 right there that's neutral.

The House is ours.  (1/6)

The Senate is barely theirs, and could be won over if we even fucking tried *ahem-CCB-ahem*. (1/6)

The President is theirs (2/6)

Partial government shutdown ¹ end of the world.

Default on debt = financial catastrophe.

Law degree ¹ knowledge of economics or anything else, except law..

The country will easily cope with a Federal Government shutdown, but not with an actual default.

A genuine default would raise interest rates drastically and that would be the beginning of end. Even if total debt remained constant or actually started to decrease, government bonds mature and roll over in cohorts, and would necessarily have to be replaced  with bonds paying much higher interest rates.

A government shutdown should be on the table, with a full political strategy and public relations operation to put it onto the Democrats, especially the highly-visible, somewhat unstable Obama. Freeze the target and personalize it. WeÂ’ve seem what a government shutdown looks like before, in the 1990s - it was never a complete shutdown and life went on just fine. The only problem was the GOP getting blamed for it by Slick Willy, when the blame properly belonged with President Clinton himself. Fix the blame thing and do it. When Obama shuts down the government heÂ’ll get stuck with it, because heÂ’s no Bill Clinton. The silly inflexible bastard is already laying the groundwork for getting the blame with his press conferences and clumsy lying.

The Congressional Democrats are not going to allow a default. They believe that they can only get elected by spending money. If it becomes difficult or impossible for the government to borrow new money because of sky-high interest rates, then there will be a sharp contraction in the political bribery funds that they count on.

Obama can do an end-of-the-world, Shickelgruber-in-the-bunker act if he pleases. Democrats in Congress are not committed to seeing the world burn and will override his veto to save themselves.

@17 Holy shit, it's Ken Begg!

<Kathy Bates voice> I'm Jabootu's Bad Movie Dimension's number one fan!</Kathy Bates voice>

Posted by: cherry ð at July 27, 2011 01:27 PM (OhYCU)

Why?  What makes you think that the American people would ever vote this asshole back into office?  Blaming the GOP worked wonderfully in 2010, and it's doing wonders for Obama's poll numbers right now - why would it be any different in 2012, after the economy not only goes over a cliff, but then rapes itself on the way down?

Man those CO, NV and DE Senate seats might sure come in handy about now...

------

So would Charlie Crist and Bob Bennet. Oh wait....that's not what you were going for.

Boehner's plan has a fatal flaw.  It's $1 billion in cuts next year is less than the $2 billion in cuts Democrats once proposed (along with spending cuts).  Pass the Boehner plan as is, and all next year, we will hear how the Democrats wanted to cut the deficit twice as much as Republicans. 

Sure, we need a plan (for the kneejerks, we can argue about a ceiling increase but we need a plan), and we are unlikely to get $100 billion or $30 billion in cuts next year.  But the first year still needs to exceed $2 billion.  A 3% across the board cut gets you $100 billion in savings. Can we not handle a .3% cut across the board?

we only hold one half of one third of the federal government

Yeah, but in that 1/6 of the government there's a valve they can turn.

"Who run Bartertown?"

Well I suppose it could be worse.  We could be democrats.

Led there by HotAir

"I know that's hard to hear, but it's the truth. Drew writes a lot of things below. What he doesn't write is how opposing Boehner is going to translate into a victory for conservatives rather than a victory for Obama"

if all you care about is racking up political points for your side, nothing is ever going to change.

i'm not staying in that box anymore, i want real change not a bunch of blithering idiots droning on and on about how great they are. Boehner is nothing, he can be replaced in a heartbeat, all of them can be replaced, none of this has to stay this way, all we have to do is choose to behave differently ourselves, choose to think for ourselves instead of accepting the "wisdom" of the Elites, we own this motherfucker and we change it anytime we want!

 Math, Gabe.

 Think: Basis points.

 Downgrade on credit will soon be felt on how much it costs everyone to borrow. Including folks with adjustable rate mortgages, among others. Jump the rates fifty to a hundred basis points - or more - all at once?

 ...and that's only a part of the negative impact on the economy.

 The real problem is, you haven't done the research. You're blowin' smoke, Gabe. The math doesn't care about your ideology, left, right or center. Except for placing blame and killing one another over it, ideology no longer matters. The reality is that we're screwed. Doomed, as the saying goes. All we can realistically do now is to limit the chaos and destruction. We can no longer prevent it. ...unless you still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, that is.

 Start reading The Market Ticker. Yeah, mebbe you think that Denninger might be a jerk, but he often does the math for you. He's making more sense than the people you've been listening to, anyway.

We are blamed. Obama gets 4 more years, comrade.

-----

Enough of this. Instead of just repeating it over and over, give me a scenario in which the AAA rating isn't lost and/or the Rs don't get the blame. Go ahead.

Before reading the comments, two responses:

Okay, supposing that it turns out that running into the debt ceiling doesn't cause much of a problem, why in the world do you believe that this result is going to lead to Cut, Cap, & Balance and the Balanced Budget Amendment?

If we keep and adhere to the current debt limit, that is a much greater victory than CC&B. We will have cut, now, without counting on hypothetical vicotry of a bba.

This second group of folks who don't mind pushing past the debt ceiling deadline are not evil. They recognize that this is going to hurt a lot of people. They're just cynical enough to believe that by hurting so many people, Obama and the Democrats can be leveraged into agreeing to conservative demands

No, what they believe is that pain is inevitable short of massive change in our politicians priorities, which this debate proves is unlikely, and therefore it is better to have the slightly lesser pain now than kick it down the road, let it gain momentum, and crush our children.

This is an easy issue for people to understand. Except for those willing to kill the host to fatten their bellies now, people understand not borrowing more to cover operating expenses. We should have all the leverage here, and should be getting something huge out of this. Repeal Obamacare, close some cabinet level departments, and at the least make the f'ers come begging again next Summer.

@17 Holy shit, it's Ken Begg! <Kathy Bates voice> I'm Jabootu's Bad Movie Dimension's number one fan!</Kathy Bates voice>

Hey, what're you doing with that sledge hammer?

Posted by: Paul at July 27, 2011 01:22 PM (DsHk0)

I'm kinda leaning towards Gabe on this one. Lets bring the plane down on the river and NOT in the side of a building. Minimize the deaths.

Posted by: cherry ð

Option 4: We raise the debt limit and the credit rating is downgraded because we refused to even attempt to deal with our debt.

We are blamed because our plan is the one on the table and we're dealing with the ssame MFM as in option #3. Obama gets four more years tovariche.

Option 5: We raise the debt limit and the official credit rating is left alone, but the trend to shed and/or avoid US debt continues, with the same result as #3 and 4.

Notice how Gabe and his ilk still refuse to be honest enough to admit this? The lying and fear mongering isn't occurring only in DC.

I agree. The GOP needs to take the high road here even if it's a nominal victory at best. In the eyes of the public, we are the adults in the room.

That said, once we take the Senate (and I am sure the WH) who's to say that we can reopen this whole can of worms again and get what we want... real deficit discipline!!!!!!

In other words, small victory with a short field punt. Pin them inside the 5 yard line.... then sack 'em for a safety -- or better yet Pick-6.

So...

option 1: Go for it on 4th and 20 from the 40..... OR...

option 2: Pin them within the 5yard line and defensive score? 

I say pin them back.

I'm kinda leaning towards Gabe on this one. Lets bring the plane down on the river and NOT in the side of a building. Minimize the deaths.

------

Oy, people out there still with this idea that there isn't going to be massive pain.

Posted by: cherry π at July 27, 2011 01:36 PM (OhYCU)

My favorite political (not economic) outcome would be that the debt ceiling not be raised and "Blank Check" Obama Lone Rangers additional borrowing citing the fourteenth amendment.  If that were to happen, the Democrats would have bought the debt and the deficit for the foreseeable future.

Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at July 27, 2011 01:39 PM (IoUF1)

Hey!

we only hold one half of one third of the federal government

OK, so in that argument we cannot do anything until we have, what, two thirds of the government?  More?  Less?  How is this an argument to capitulate?

From a more practical standpoint...at a certain point the minority has all the power.  For instance, in a situation where a unanimous vote is required, the lone holdout has all the power.  So it is in this situation...nothing can be done without the House's acquiesence.  You're suggesting throwing away a position of strength because of some moral calculus that because Dems control the Senate and the Presidency that the House must go along?

Very odd.

It is already too late. There is little philosophical difference in the current Democrat and Republican parties. The only thing our fearless, feckless leaders in D.C. can do now is to buy us a little more time to prepare for the inevitable collapse. We have passed the point of no return. We can not pay our debts and hyper inflation will follow the downgrade and interest rate increase

.Believe it or not, some days I don't think I'm cynical enough.

I'm kinda leaning towards Gabe on this one. Lets bring the plane down on the river and NOT in the side of a building. Minimize the deaths.

Posted by: Max Power

Shooting atropine into someone or something without bothering to stop the bleeding or heal the wounds isn't minimizing anything. It merely prolongs it. Ask the PIIGS. They are simply farther along in the cycle than we are

Hey Gabe, look at Italy for pity's sake. They are ALLOWED to accrue more debt. They don't have a ceiling, and they don't have republicans hiding under desks. But they cancelled their August bond sale. Because they have exceeded the PRACTICAL debt ceiling. No one is interested in buying their debt at a rate that they can offer. That's less painful how?

Posted by: 80sBaby at July 27, 2011 01:36 PM (o2lIv)

So, our debt will jump from unpayable to beyond unpayable.  So what.  Might as well hit reset now and start the long, painful rebuilding process sooner rather than later.

Posted by: KISS at July 27, 2011 12:32 PM (T6ZSK)

WHAT? None of these plans are cuts from current levels?

Let's just go with plan phoenix, then.

So...

option 1: Go for it on 4th and 20 from the 40..... OR...

option 2: Pin them within the 5yard line and defensive score? 

I say pin them back.

------

Yes, because a billion in reduced growth (that's right, not cuts, slower growth) is really going to pin them back. No clue how the dems can recover from such a blow.

The APPEARANCE of victory is, in this case, every bit as important as the FACT of victory.

-------

Unless, of course, you're actually concerned about the effect these two terrible plans would have on the country. As long as your not worried about that, then yea, rah rah go team etc.

Posted by: Ben at July 27, 2011 12:32 PM

Can our economy wait until 2012 until meaningful steps to debt reduction can be taken? Is that really a rational position to take? Debt already exceeds GDP for the 1st time in our lifetime with even larger debt levels coming in current years, even with Boehner's modest proposed cuts. Baseline spending has been jacked up by $800 billion/yr. We're on the edge here due to the debt levels, not the debt ceiling.

Gabriel says it's either/or situation, yet Congress is not obligated to pass Reid's stinkbill, so let's stop pretending that they do. We're at a serious crossroads right now. Now is not the time to give in to a 'deal' which doesn't substantively reduce our debt which is already about to take us over the falls.

Let America "default" which would force Obama to prioritize spending - exactly what he and the Dems do NOT want to happen. Let Obama defend not sending out Social Security checks in favor of spending $$ on Planned Parenthood or defend his sending out of govt pension checks 4X the size of SS checks sent out to 53 year old federal retirees instead of paying Medicare bills. That's a debate conservatives will win if it comes down to it.

Interest rates would likely rise under a quasi-default, but the flip side to that point is that they've been artificially held lower through Fed actions, which have penalized seniors with low rates on their CD's, seniors who saved and played by the rules. By interfering with the free market, the govt. has penalized savers while rewarding those who took excessive debt.

Posted by: Less at July 27, 2011 01:40 PM (PGXeZ)

totally, completely, 100% WRONG!

the TEA Party folks are on to that bullshit and aren't buying it for a minute anymore, what you just described is a perscription for disaster. But it is the exact kind of thinking that goes on in GOP circles and that's why the TEA Party exists.

Option D:

"Hey look over there, its a giant purple flying sandwhich!"

(run away and hide)

BTW:

What about somekind of worldwide debt forgiveness? It would also be catastophic, but maybe the "recovery" would come sooner? Right after WWIII.

Please just give us 2 weeks at the debt ceiling to see what happens.  I think I know.

1.  We save $4B X 14 days = $56B.
2.  These guys will scramble to raise it, because their phoney baloney jobs depend on passing out your childrens and grandchildrens piggy banks to lazy worthless slobs and african junk washing researchers.

That's a great point. At $4 billion per day we'd cut more money in one day than Boner's awesome plan would cut in one year.

the TEA Party folks are on to that bullshit and aren't buying it for a minute anymore, what you just described is a perscription for disaster. But it is the exact kind of thinking that goes on in GOP circles and that's why the TEA Party exists.

-------

But when you tell them this is when they pipe up and tell you to stfu and just be quiet, the big boys are talking. You see, they only want you to pay attention and stay informed when it's the Dems effin up and playing tricks, but when they do it, it's because they HAVE to, don't you see? So please, please, please just let them get away with their budget gimmickry just one more time, because they are on your side and once they have the power, they will really, truly be different. Promise.

Nothing can stop either of those things.

Post-2010-election legislative votes are (and have been) only messages to GOP-inclined voters. They either say "You sent us here to say 'no,' knowing that's all we can really do, so we'll do that," or "Eat shit, crackaz." And they all say eat shit.

In this case, the country is 2/3 on the side of the shit-eating crackaz, but reminding the crackaz once again that it's their place to eat shit, and only ever to always eat shit, no matter how many not-crackaz they can assemble on their side (2/3!), is more important than taking a chance to notch some goodwill with 2/3(!) of the country in one move.

The Party has its priorties. Losing in '12 is one of them.

Monty made a very good point a few days ago, that the whole scheme of Entitlements is the hill that the Democrats will die on.

Without the ability to pass out money to the various factions in their party, the Democrat coalition begins to fall apart, and will be in disarray.

So ask yourselves something :  What strategy is the best course for the Republicans to win the 2012 elections, both in gaining a majority in th eSenate and winning the Presidency?

Forget the debt ceiling for just a minute, forget the competing bills from Reid and Boehner, forget the CCB and the Balanced Budget Amendment.

Just what strategy will break the Democrat unity and divide the factions in the party?

Okay, backt to the Debt Limit and back on your heads.

There's politics and there's reality.

... blablabla ...

For that reason, any plan that includes an increase in the debt ceiling is fundamentally unserious.

Maybe the U.S.govt. doesnt deserve a AAA rating.

We are in freefall and reality is coming with a vengence.  Nothing this congress and president are capable of doing is going to stop that. Better we get to the pain and deal with it in a sane manner.

I suckered you morons into thinking this debt ceiling deal is important.

I suckered you morons into splitting the party and pissing on Boehner.

I suckered you morons into taking charge of the (doomed) economy.

Happy days are here again.

- Barky the Wonder President

-------

You still haven't told me how the Rs are getting out of this w/o taking blame.

And btw, if we are just in this for political games, then pass Reid's plan and then when the credit rating gets cut, we can blame it on them. That's how your saying it will work, right?

"my guess is there will be a bigger retrenchment of bigger more oppressive govt."

That's the plan

Please just give us 2 weeks at the debt ceiling to see what happens.  I think I know.

1.  We save $4B X 14 days = $56B.
2.  These guys will scramble to raise it, because their phoney baloney jobs depend on passing out your childrens and grandchildrens piggy banks to lazy worthless slobs and african junk washing researchers.

That's a great point. At $4 billion per day we'd cut more money in one day than Boner's awesome plan would cut in one year.

Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater

As a fundraiser, we can start a dead pool on pet projects and departments that get it in the neck. I have dibs on the coked up cowboy monkey poets.

So many commenters here seem to think politicians are the root of the nation's problem.

They're not.

The problem is the people who vote (or don't vote) for the politicians. The problem is the people who want something for nothing. The problem is the people who don't understand that "government money" isn't free money conjured out of thin air. The problem is the people who are too goddamn stupid or apathetic to inform themselves about how our government works. The problem is the people who don't understand that their progressive, tolerant, environmentally-friendly lifestyle is only possible in a prosperous and strong Western Democracy. The problem is the people who think that prosperous and strong Western Democracies are the rule rather than the exception in human history.

It should have been obvious that the Boehner plan wouldn't actually cut a damn thing. No bill that cuts so much as a majority of the projected spending increases from the previous baseline would ever pass both houses and be signed into law. This debate has never actually been about raising the debt ceiliing or cutting spending. It's always been about politcal maneuvering to pin blame on the other side. Specifically, the president, his party, and their media water-carriers have conspired to use this manufactured crisis to demonize their opponents and resuscitate Obama's chances of winning a second term.

Don't blame John Boehner or Mitch McConnell. It's not their fault. Don't blame Barack Obama or Harry Reid, either. It's not truly their fault, either.

Blame that stupid asshole who lives across the street from you who doesn't pay attention to the news because "it's too depressing and, anyway, all politicians are the same." Blame the legion of 26-year-old college nitwits who get their news from comedy shows and internet forums. Blame the guy who rails against government spending as long as their own entitlement checks aren't affected. Blame the racist son-of-a-bitch who votes for candidates based on skin color. 

The politicians are just the symptom. The citizens are, unfortunately, the disease.

The politicians are just the symptom. The citizens are, unfortunately, the disease.

Posted by: Lurk Ness Monster at July 27, 2011 01:59 PM (Ce4EH)

Quite often, the most effective way to fight a disease is to treat the symptoms, until you figure out how to deal with the disease.  See: cholera

Posted by: WalrusRex at July 27, 2011 01:48 PM (Hx5uv)

You and your McCarthyist budget witch hunts.

Via Instapundit, Obama would currently lose to basically anyone.  Tell me again why we're swallowing our balls trying to bail him out on this?  He can blame the GOP all he wants - 15% unemployment and a credit downgrade gets blamed on the President, period.

Not passing Boehner's porkulus spending plan does not = passing Reid's porkulus spending plan. Show me how that works. Either a plan emerges that actually cuts debt, not simply cutting the rate of debt increase.. or we 'default' and Obama can justify his spending priorities in full view. 

Republicans can easily justify this course of action by providing a couple of examples on how households have to live within their means or default on mortgage and credit card debt.

Those who claim that a quasi-default = Armeggedon, are the same ones who told us that if TARP wasn't rushed through, our economy would go down in flames. Sure there probably would have been more short-term pain if TARP bailouts didn't happen, but we would have had less debt, and a more solid economic foundation to build from.

>>The politicians are just the symptom. The citizens are, unfortunately, the disease.

Posted by: Lurk Ness Monster at July 27, 2011 01:59 PM (Ce4EH)

Without a complicit commie media and education system the average citizen would figure it out just fine, so unbiased info flow and your premise are both "compromised" from the get go.

Real default means that your debt disappears.  Sissy-defaults make your debt jump.
But then no one would loan to us anymore... genius!

Wow this analysis is a massive, heaping pile of BS.

It reminds me of the joke about Soviet elections.

You enter a sealed voting booth and can pull one of two levels.

Lever one is for the communist party.

Lever two releases the  gas.

Take your pick.

I reject all you RINOs and vampire allies.

REJECT BOEHNER.  WE NEED A NEW PARTY.

REVOLT you have nothing to lose but two mafia factions.