The Debt Ceiling Fight Reveals True Intent of Politicians



Expect to see a lot more commentary on the Debt Ceiling fight here in the Liberty News Network. We’re assembling a blogger team to keep on the subject as often as possible starting the 1st of July. In the mean time, here are some of my personal thoughts.

  1. My sources believe, unfortunately, there is likely some sort of deal being negotiated that would provide “political cover” for Republicans.
  2. Most House Republicans refuse to suggest they won’t write the Fed a blank check under any circumstances. With the exception of a small handful, both GOP and DEM House members who don’t support a raise really only mean they don’t support it under current deals being proposed.
  3. There is compelling evidence suggesting it’s not wise politically to refuse an increase in the debt ceiling.
  4. Others are hearing there is a deal underway and we’re all being taken for a ride.

The debt ceiling fight is where the patriot movement will truly learn who is with us and who is against us. We’re about to get an authentic look at which members of the House and Senate make their decisions based on what is right for the future of our nation, and what is right for the future of their political position as a member.

I have no doubt in my mind that any politician who supports an increase in the debt ceiling is doing so for fear of the beating they may get via the Democrats in 2012. It won’t be because they sincerely believe it’s what is best for America.

I would encourage movement activists and voters to stand your ground. Get your phones and faxes ready and gear up for an all out battle on this issue.

It’s going to be one hell of a fight.

-Eric Odom

  • Daniel Schultz

    I will stand with you and fight !. I am an 82 yr old veteran who is shakeing mad about how our country is being destroyed for our kids, grandkids and great grand kids by the revolving door politicians whose only interest is feathering their own nests and remaining on the dole. We must clean house and force term limits NOW. There will be a day of accounting for these TRAITORS to our Constitution and those who they supposedly represent and serve.

    • Robert Young

      Yes Daniel, I am 72 and I will stand with you. I also vote and I want anyone from the House or Senate who votes for Raising the Debt Ceiling Limit to realize they are also voting to end their jobs. We, the People, the Voters and American Citizens, DO NOT want the Debt Ceiling Raised. Just vote NO. No Compromises. A Yes vote guaranties that you will have an opponent in your primary for your next bid for reelection, probably a Tea Party Conservative Constitutionalist Candidate. We have had enough of both the Liberal and RINO lies.

  • Richard

    The solution is quite clear. Why is it that these congressional idiots place a higher value on their jobs than they do on their country? The Founding Fathers risked their lives and their fortunes to form this Country and this way of life. They would surely spit on our leaders if they were alive today.

    • e.g.

      Not only do they think their jobs are more important than their constituents, they think their jobs are more important than their own children, grandchildren and all children of America!

  • Steve Spinks

    Eric, I think you are right on the money on this. The Establishment Republicans really want to raise the ceiling to keep the Dems quiet in the fall… But they don’t realize (yet) that those same Dems will find another issue to clobber them with regardless. Good grief, if they’d only stick to principles, We the People would have their backs! Doing what is right can seem lonely. In the end, though, the people who do the right thing will be rewarded.

  • Dick Mxwelll

    Being a life long Republican turned Tea Party supporter I am not surprised at the sellout by Republicans. I hope I live long enough to see the Tea Party one of the two major parties in our country. II am 69…will I see it happen? I think so. Dick Maxwell

    • Steve

      It is exactly for reasons such as this that the founders warned about ever having policy parties.

  • Jack

    You people are dangerously irresponsible. Raising the debt ceiling doesn’t enable new spending, it prevents defaulting on current responsibilities. It has to occur.

    By the way, if you Tea Bagging hypocrites cared so much about the deficit, where was your outrage at VP Cheney when he declared your patron saint, Ronald Reagan, proved deficits don’t matter. The Bush administration squandered a budget surplus and you said nothing. The Bush administration doubled the national debt and you said nothing. President Obama takes the white house in the midst of the worse economic crisis in almost a century, causing revenues to plummet, the deficit to widen and the debt to climb. Some of the spending came from auto econ stabilizers (e.g., unemp insurance, food stamps, etc.), none of which did President Obama create. Yes, the stimulus added to the deficit/debt, but it also stymied the economic free fall he inherited.

    • Jack

      I bet this doesn’t survive moderation. Debate isn’t you all’s cup of tea, hea?

      • Colleen Monson

        Jack you need to quit drinking the koolaid!

        • Jack

          Ok, Colleen. I will. Thanks.

      • Ron

        Jack’s comments appear to be right out of the liberal media play book. He could work on the editorial staff at the New York Times. You can always identify the use of the liberal play book because it starts with one or more clear misrepresentations that are set up as the “facts.” The lie is then used as the basis for justifying the point of departure on a goal to obfuscate truth, common sense, logic and reason. Typically liberals will accuse those who will never be inclined to drink their cool aid as being “dangerous” followed by defamation of group intelligence, capped by charges of hypocrisy. Jack got them all. Let’s unlock his code: “Tea Bagging hypocrites” is liberal spin for: those who believe that the rule of law is firmly based upon unchanging Constitutional principles. The Bush administration squandered a budget surplus and you said nothing. This tactic of course incorrectly assumes that the president has some control over spending and the budget. Without a line-item veto the president ultimately has to deal with the excesses of a congress controlled by liberal spenders, most of whom are Democrats. I would lover to hear Jack explain just exactly what Bush did to squander surpluses. There were of course some major issues like 9/11 and Katrian that the president had to deal with. Jack then appears to blame Bush for the corruption of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Charley Rangel, Jim Johnson, Jamie Gorelic and Franklin Raines whose actions precipitated the destruction of the housing market. One might note that these are all liberal Democrats. Obama then doubled down and started the printing presses in process designed to simply throw enough money out the window that all those who picked it up would immediately feel richer. The process of course devalued everything in the economy, which was reflected by the response in gold and silver prices. To argue that Obama was forced to stimulate the economy because of the economic free fall he inherited is such a bold lie that it it is breathtaking in its arrogance or stupidity. Democrats have controlled congress for most of the past 50 years and only under the leadership of Ronald Reagan was there a brief period where fiscal responsibility and sanity improved. You may recall that Ronald Reagan actually wanted to get rid of one of the many worthless but expensive agencies of the federal government, the department of eduction. The Democrats of course would not hear of that. Government and power are synonyms and you can’t reduce the former and maintain the latter. Jack starts out with, “you people are dangerously irresponsible.” If that comment were focused at liberals there certainly is evidence to support the statement.

        • Marti

          Amen! So well stated that even Jack should be able to understand!

        • Jack

          You said, “‘Tea Bagging hypocrites’ is liberal spin for: those who believe that the rule of law is firmly based upon unchanging Constitutional principles.”

          WRONG

          ‘Tea Bagging hypocrites’ is righteous spin for those who believe the rule of law is firmly based upon their interpretation of the Constitution, and then only when a Democrat is in the White House.

          You said, “This tactic of course incorrectly assumes that the president has some control over spending and the budget. Without a line-item veto the president ultimately has to deal with the excesses of a congress controlled by liberal spenders, most of whom are Democrats.”

          FALSE

          During the first two years of the Bush Administration. When President Bush took office, the Senate was split 50-50 between the Democrats and Republicans. With VP Cheney’s tiebreaking vote, the Republicans controlled the Senate until Senator Jim Jeffords from Vermont switched from a Republican to an Independent in June 2001 and sided with the Democrats, which controlled that Chamber until November, 2002. The Republican Party kept control of both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate until 2007. The Democratic Party wrested control of both houses of the 110th Congress, although by a very slim margin, especially in the Senate.

          You said, “I would lover to hear Jack explain just exactly what Bush did to squander surpluses. There were of course some major issues like 9/11 and Katrian that the president had to deal with.

          NO PROBLEM!

          First, yes, 9/11 and the two wars the 9/11 terror attacks led to–right, wrong or otherwise (I’m an Army Infantry/Desert Storm, by the way)–did lead to increased spending in support of those wars. But given the financial situation at the time, we should have implemented a war tax to pay for it. If we’re going to war, we all need to put a little skin in the game. We can’t all go fight, but we can all contribute to its cost.

          Second, Katrina contributed little to the growing deficits under Bush. If you’re going to include that natural disaster as contributing to our debt problem, then Pres. Obama gets a pass for a number of costly disasters since he took office (tornados, oil spill, etc.).

          Third, there are three Bush items that contributed significantly to our current debt crisis:

          1) Tax cuts of 2002
          2) Tax cuts of 2003
          3) Medicare prescription drug plan

          Neither of those tax cuts produced significant job growth and neither of them increased revenues. Job growth was largely stagnant through his administration, and revenues fell, widening the deficit and growing the debt.

          You may not like this, but it’s true.

          You said, “Jack then appears to blame Bush for the corruption of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Charley Rangel, Jim Johnson, Jamie Gorelic and Franklin Raines whose actions precipitated the destruction of the housing market. One might note that these are all liberal Democrats.”

          ABSURD!

          Now you’re just make stuff up. Please tell me what I said that suggests I “blame Bush for the corruption of [evil liberal Dems] whose actions precipated the destruction of the housing market?” No where because I don’t blam Bush for the housing crisis. If you don’t believe me, read my college paper on the subject at http://knol.google.com/k/jackie-dewayne-reynolds/the-great-recession/cbftoks8fz2e/2#.

          You said, “Obama . . . started the printing presses in process designed to simply throw enough money out the window that all those who picked it up would immediately feel richer.”

          UNTRUE!

          Obama is not authorized to start the printing presses and monetary policy is set by the Fed, not the executive branch.

          You said, “The process of course devalued everything in the economy, which was reflected by the response in gold and silver prices.”

          IDIOTIC!

          That’s right! Nothing in the economy has any value any more because of Obama and his printing press. The rise in gold and silver prices reflects the rights efforts to undermine your confidence in the economy, not reality. Thay have a financial interest in convincing you that the dollar is weak and gold (and other commodities) is the only truly safe investment. The more right-bots that heed this advice, the higher the value of those commodities climb. Keep up the great work!

          The rest of your post is irrelevant and even sillier.

        • http://LiberalPlaybook Robert Cave

          Well stated, Ron. Now that the true facts are in place, Jack, on cue from the Liberal Playbook, will turn to character assassination.

      • Robert Young

        Sorry Jack, but you write like just another Liberal wanting to instigate an argument.

    • Mike S

      Who left the door open for the trolls? We already defaulted in 1971 when we abandoned the gold standard and let the currency be backed by nothing. Raising the debt ceiling will allow us to default by hyperinflation which will destroy the middle class. Sorry there is no free ride by printing money and anyone with a basic understanding of economics would understand that.

      • Jack

        Wrong! All of that is hyper-paranoid quackery. I am an economist and you are a nutjob.

        • Steve

          There’s your problem Jack. Don’t you find it strange that in recent years anyone having an unusual idea about anything is tagged as a a conspiracy theory nutjob, yet we give control of this countries well being into the hands of economists that spend their careers in a field which is theory based?

        • http://LiberalPlaybook Robert Cave

          Jack, I thot you promised to quit drinking the “Kool Aid”..

      • Jack

        That’s right! Who left the door open? We don’t want to debate our ideas. Either agree with us or shut the hell up!

        EDIT: Welcome to the banned list, Jack. This is what happens when you lose your cool and start calling people names.

    • Chris Quackenbush

      Jack, Simple economic theory explains how the elites who were taught Keynesian economics (both Rs and mostly Ds) led us down the path of destruction. They said the GDP = Consumption +Investment and interest + government spending+ the difference of exports minus imports. If this were so, we could spend our way out of a recession. It is not and never has been true. The Austrian economic model shows that this same equation should deduct for government spending, not add it. Historic analysis shows this model is correct. Government spending drains private industry of investment capital and stultifies growth of jobs. Please try to look at the facts instead of reacting emotionally. This is no time for political diatribe. We must know what works using historical facts and change our direction, or face extinction.

      If we STOP SPENDING on our bloated government, we might have a chance to work our way out of this hole. Continuing to increase the debt ceiling will guarantee even larger failure in the future.

    • Roger

      @Jack, please stop calling people names, trashing people’s comments through defamation of character, and calling your rants a debate. This is a civil site. Either act with civility or leave.

    • Steve

      Jack, you need to educate yourself better instead of swallowing everything the left and media say. Some of it you are right about, but you need to look at and analyse all available information before making your biased statements. There is and has been way more going on than what’s on the surface.

  • Colleen Monson

    How do we open people’s eyes? We are being thrown under the bus and no one even sees the bus coming. Boehner’s hobnobbing with BO and flip flopping on his promises to us. What will it take to make our representatives understand that they work for us, employee/employer relationship. Not royalty/servant relationship. These guys are living it up our dime. I don’t know about you, but I’m fed up, mad and ready vote them ALL out of office.

  • Spiking

    Indeed these are the front lines. Will it be country? Or will it be party?

    The Tea Party Patriots are voting against any Representative who hikes the debt limit. In the general, and in the primary.

  • Gary Lothrop

    The term “Debt Ceiling” in and of itself is a complete joke when every time we reach it we simply raise the bar!
    In real Credit Lingo we have reached our “Credit Limit” and are completely maxed out. This is when my credit card issuer says NO and this is exactly what should happen now.
    Raising the limit this month will simply allow for more irresponsible spending and another of these debates down the road seeking yet another raise in the ceiling.

    Our political leaders are failing us and still we continue to elect failures again and again. Neither party is without sin here and both parties honestly believe “We, The People” are too stupid to read between the lines and see their games for what they are. Sadly, they are right.

    • Jack

      Wrong! The debt ceiling is not like your credit limit and does not mean we’ve reached the max. It means we have (sadly) exceeded our credit limit and failure to raise it will result in defaulting on our obligations. It’s a fact. It’s not a joke and it’s not a political weapon. You are wrong.

      I agree with you, though, that both parties are to blame. I resent the hell out of the fact that it’s President Obama and the Dems being blamed for it. Maybe–I don’t know fur sure, I’m just spitballing here–maybe if you folks weren’t so hypocritical and had stood up to the previous administration and held them as accountable as now hold Obama, maybe we wouldn’t be in this spot. Maybe it’s not just the two parties that’s to blame. Maybe it’s completely our own fault.

      • Steve

        Now you’re getting somewhere. Yes, it is our fault as well as generations past. We can’t do anything about not standing up in the past, but we can stand up now.

        Michelle Bachman is right. We will not default if we pay interest first from revenues. Then decide what can be paid with what is left. No one says or thinks it will be easy but the foot has to be put down now. No more raising of the debt limit.

      • NatalieD

        ONE LAST TIME JACK. There is no reason for us to default. We have enough money coming in to avoid defaulting on the loan. Pay attention. WE DO NOT NEED TO DEFAULT AND WE CAN REFUSE TO RAISE THE DEBT LIMIT AND AVOID DEFAULT. The only reason the democrats want to raise the limit is to A.)avoid cutting the wasteful programs that would need to be cut and B.) because they can’t buy poor folks votes and get re-elected, if they let the welfare programs get cut. If you are really an economist then look at the debt, the insterest and the amount of money coming in. It does not take an economist to do simple math. I recommend you put the koolaide down and pick up a calculator.

      • http://LiberalPlaybook Robert Cave

        Jack, why is it with Liberals it is always someone else’s fault.

  • Washington76

    The administration has warned that if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling, it could mean the first U.S. financial default in history . That did not happen in the 90′s and would not happen now. Simply, the Democrat’s need to take their adult pill for a change, and quit playing childish games. We see trough their non sense.

    No way they should get away with this kind of rhetoric. Any sane person would respond with a suggestion that maybe we spend too much! The only ones in favor of raising taxes are the ones who pay no taxes at all – you know, the “little people” (er, entitlement people). Of course 95% of those are Dems.

    • Jack

      This is the real problem with modern conservatism. Because you’ve been programmed to believe you can’t trust the media, the government, education, science, the fed, ad finitum, you only get your news from conservative sources. They now control what you hear and what you see because you choose to let them. Let me give you some facts!

      Here’s the reality. The reason income taxes are statistsically skewed toward the rich is because there’s so little to tax on the bottom. Approximately 70 million Americans split $1T (this is the bottom 50%–average of $14K). That same number of Americans (the top 50%) split more than seven times that amount or $7.4T (average of $106K).

      The top 5% own 34.73% of the nations total adjusted gross income and paid 58.72% of all income taxes in 2008. Sounds bad, right? But the average tax rate on that group was 20.7%, which isn’t bad. Here’s the problem: 50% of Americans make less than $33,048. That group, the bottom 50% only own 12.75% of the countries total adjusted gross income and accordingly only pay 2.7% of all income taxes. Their average tax rate is 2.59% (NOT zero). Here’s the problem with that: Income taxes are NOT the only taxes paid!

      But income taxes only tell a small part of the real story. Income is just money earned, usually from work but not necessarily. For the rich, only 19% of the income reported in 2008 by the 13,480 individuals or families making over $10 million came from wages and salaries. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth (wealth is defined here as the value of everything a person or family owns, minus any debts). That is up from only 33.8% in 1983. The next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, up from 47.5% in 1983. This means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers), down from 18.7% in 1983.

      When you consider all of the taxes that people pay, from sales taxes to property taxes to payroll taxes (in other words, not just income taxes), the lowest 20% of earners (who average about $12,400 per year) paid 16.0% of their income to taxes in 2009; the next 20% (about $25,000/year), paid 20.5% in taxes; the middle 20% give 25.3% of their income to various forms of taxation, and the next 20% pay 28.5%. The next 10% (about $100,000/year) pay 30.2% of their income as taxes; the next 5% ($141,000/year) dole out 31.2% of their earnings for taxes; and the next 4% ($245,000/year) pay 31.6% to taxes. As for the top 1% — those who take in $1.3 million per year on average — they pay 30.8% of their income to taxes.

      • http://LiberalPlaybook Robert Cave

        Jack, where, or what is your authority for all you demographics?

    • Jack

      You say, “The only ones in favor of raising taxes are the ones who pay no taxes at all – you know, the “little people” (er, entitlement people). Of course 95% of those are Dems.” This is patently false. There are plenty of others–including Reagan’s own budget director and Alan Greenspan and Bill Bates–who agree.

      But this attack on “entitlement people?” You are against entitlements, yes? Fair and not altogether unreasonable. Here’s my question. What’s the solution. My wife and I lost our only child. Because we have no children we don’t qualify for any govt assistance. The only people who get food stamps or TANF are people with kids. That’s almost universally true.

      My question is how do we feed these kids? I wish people who weren’t able to afford them would stop having them, but we all know that’s not going to happen. So what’s the solution. As a Christian, I cannot abide starving children in a country this wealthy. Can you?

      • Steve

        Jack, foodstamps are based on not just the number of children but also income. I know plenty of childless people that are getting food assistance.

        We all hate to see anyone go hungry Jack. How many could have been fed with the 3 billion Obama gave to Brazil.

  • Mike S

    We are being played for fools by big government progressives in both parties and the end result will be some kind of political deal that cuts spending some time after the next election. Our political leaders are printing money to pay the bills from Washington and they are shifting the blame for inflation to anyone but themselves. This will all end badly with an economic collapse that may be followed by actual spending cuts or shifting of even more economic power under a central government authority. The hope of an easy way out for main street does not exist. We will either get a much needed depression to restructure the economy according to market forces or destruction of the middle class with hyperinflation. Honesty cannot be expected from our political leaders so we must tell the political elites that we are onto their game and we will hold them accountable if they vote to raise the debt ceiling.

    • Jack

      Bullshit!

      • http://LiberalPlaybook Robert Cave

        Jack, isn’t that a Liberal platform you just stated?

  • william e zimmerman

    boehner needs to join the democratic party
    or just marry obama that he is in love with

  • Gary Lothrop

    Jack, Are you sure there is not an OFF at the end of your name?

    You need to get a life and re-direct to the liberal station you are clearly tuned in to.

    I never said that the right is right but I know for sure the left is wrong and this is why we are where we are.

    My suggestion to you is get out of the way so we can fix this mess created by all these fools we continue to elect. You are as much of the problem as the rest of them and have no credibility here spewing the garbage you think you know.

    Call me a tea bagger but thank us all later when we spank all of this idiocy!

    We were warned of this centuries ago by our founding fathers and I am fully capable of making my own decisions where the future of my country is concerned.
    You are in the camp of the devil they warned us of and totally off your rocker on this issue and all that can and will repair what is wrong. Following your path will take us off a cliff.

    Glenn Beck wrote a book titled “Arguing with Idiots” and although I have never read it I suggest you should!

  • Truth

    I am for freedom from all government laws. Love is the only real solution not the anger that these comments bring about. Get rid of the government and all the corruption involved with politics.

    I let go of the law,
    and people become honest.
    I let go of economics,
    and people become prosperous.
    I let go of religion,
    and people become serene.
    I let go of all desire for the common good,
    and the good becomes common as grass.

  • Wayne F

    This may sound like a liberal comment, but I am as fiscally conservative as it gets. The reality we face is that with a $1.4 trillion annual deficit, unless we are prepared to slash $1.4 trillion in annual spending, there will have to be some increase in the debt ceiling. I think a more attainable goal would be to cut spending by about $500 billion in the first year, leaving a deficit of $900 billion. Congress should strive to get that amount of spending cut and raise the debt ceiling by $900 billion. Then the next year, they should go for an additional $500 billion. In this fashion we could stop the red in 3 years.

    The notion that we can go without raising the debt ceiling at all is nonsense and pure political spin.

  • Dick Hamer

    Jack’s liberal rant is symptomatic of the typical “zero-sum-game” concept that liberals can’t discard in favor of reality. It ignores the simple fact that the job creators make GROWTH, as well as employment of the masses possible. The sometimes disproportionate gains of wealth that are EARNED by such job creators are an inevitable and understandable result of the process, a desirable and potential-stretching outcome. However, libs hate this, as it flies in the face of their deity known as equality of results. Believing their “correct” handling of the constitutional issue means providing for such equality, they completely miss the point of America’s great experiment in equality of opportunity, liberty and freedom. American exceptionalism is very real, though strongly threatened and opposed by the deeply unpatriotic Obama’s of the world, who want to globalize a la the failed European model. In truth, our only hope for survival and for continuing to be the shining light on a hill for all the world is to defend, support and appreciate true American exceptionalism. Value that which has made this nation great to ensure teh future of our children.

  • http://TheCandyStore Kevin H

    If you elect people with little ethical standards what do expect will happen?

    While America was at work and play they were giving away the candy store…and now we are headed for bankruptcy…but of course they will simply call it a reorganization… but the people holding the bonds will end up just like the GM bond holders… while the people that brought the problem about just get more candy.

  • http://www.moneydailynews.com/ Gretchen Prout

    As President, my plan would have produced a budget that was cut, capped and balanced – not one that opens the door to higher taxes.