If you vote to increase the deficit, you vote to borrow money. So doesn't that mean you are required to pay it back?

There is something that mystifies me. But knowing the ways of the clowns who run our government, I guess it shouldn't be surprising. 

The Speaker of the House today wrote in an op-ed in USA Today that he would not support an increase in the debt limit unless certain spending cuts and policy changes are attached to it. Now, this is where I am confused:  this same Speaker voted back in December for a tax package that raised our deficit.  It extended some tax cuts and created more. He also has voted repeatedly for spending bills that he knows requires the government to borrow money. 

But, the way Washington is set up, there is another vote required that actually stipulates that we'll honor our debts. 

The debts are real. We have borrowed the money. We have borrowed it quite consciously and we know that our revenues don't come anywhere close to our expenses. The whole thing with raising the debt limit is actually just a sham. Every time Congress spends any money at all, they are adding to the debt. It's utter nonsense to say that we are "raising the debt limit."  All we are doing is affirming our promise to pay those debts back. 

The Republican recklessness on this issue is truly astounding. The Speaker is actually out there leading the charge saying he'll quit paying our debts if he doesn't get his way about certain things. 

These guys are as close to being traitors to their country as anyone can possibly be. It's time we brand them for what they are:  subservient oligarchs, living to serve their corporate masters and plotting subterfuge against their own people. 

Comments

[Cameron Scott]

And the phrase "raising the debt limit" is an illusion of sorts. By raising the limit, you'd give the illusion of having lesser debts, and that is bad for an economy struggling to maintain its place at the top. A similar forecast would also throw businesses off-track.