Posted on 05/03/2011 2:50:25 PM PDT by 92nina
...There are two ways to interpret this statement. The first is to believe the Secretary is claiming the debt limit has never been raised in exchange for cohesive reform, as both Republicans and Democrats in Congress are currently requesting. This is simply untrue. The Congressional Review Act, which the administration has been so keen on flouting, was a product of the 1996 debt limit debate; the same is true for the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings budget reforms in 1985 and their subsequent revision in the debt limit debate of 1987. It is anachronistic, not to mention irresponsible, to consider a vote on raising the debt ceiling without first addressing the government spending driving the debt.
The second interpretation of this statement is that the cabinet member charged with safeguarding the country’s finances doesn’t believe the debt limit serves as an actual limitation on the country’s debt. Small wonder, then, the President keeps projecting economic catastrophe ahead of the debt limit debate - a serious debate on the debt limit is sure to bring the façade that his spending spree has no consequences to an end.
Read more: http://www.atr.org/treasury-debt-limit-constraint-a6118#ixzz1LKM6PPw3
(Excerpt) Read more at atr.org ...
Take this article and others I found to the fight to the Libs on their own turf; put the Left on the defensive at at Digg and at Reddit and in Delicious and Stumbleupon
“doesn’t believe the debt limit serves as an actual limitation on the country’s debt”
Funny how it’s called a “limit,” in that case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.