What's The Real Threat Of "Default?"
I DVR'd Sunday News programs while at church yesterday, as I have recorded back through VCR days, watching them in the afternoon. Default default default. EVERYONE is talking about "default." Even Chris Wallace on the supposedly conservative (it isn’t) FOX News Sunday program opened with a statement about the looming threat of "default." It's a bunch of crap.
As with so many things, people like Chris Wallace in this case, pick up the language because it's how everyone is talking. But in the event that an unprecedented "default," a failure to pay the interest service on the debt or even to pay obligations already taken on with money collected like Social Security and Medicare, there will be only one human being responsible: Barack Obama. That is crystal clear. Though rapidly rising, the percent of debt service payments is around 10% of the tax revenue that is monthly coming in to the government, CURRENTLY. A failure to increase the debt-ceiling would only restrict the government FROM BORROWING AND SPENDING MORE THAN IT ALREADY IS.
As chief executive of the nation, the President has the deference of prioritizing the funds that are there to expend. SO, only if he wants to spare the country and the world the consequences of a default that he has been politically wielding as the ultimate calamity (for which Republicans would be at fault of course), will he not make payment of our fiscally assumed obligations THE FIRST PRIORITY of the more than ample store of available tax funds? The Republican-controlled House of Representatives has passed a bill to make such priority law. But Democrats have rebuffed it like everything else. If it were passed into law, they and Obama could not frighten the nation with the prospect of “default.”
The first reflex is to say as we always have, that there is no way that that could be permitted to happen. However, after watching the irresponsible, but resolute, pursuit of constant government expansion of this president, which more than a few have only been able to attribute to indifference if not intent to critically diminish The United States, I can't be absolutely certain that Obama won't go there if he suspects he can sell blaming Republicans for it. And it's almost certain that the traditional media would help him do that. Recent years have proven Americans gullible. We are told the majority of the public blames Republicans for the current shutdown of the government, though they’ve modified their offer at least four times while Democrats have not budged an inch. Then could Republicans be "reasonable" only by offering nothing but to surrender anything they believe the country needs and kneel and kiss Obama’s feet, as appears to be his goal? Does that American gullibility have no limit?