[John Galt's cousin]

“The entire debate revolves around the fact that future Congresses are not bound by any spending mandates done by prior congresses.Only taxes transcend new congresses.

No agreement to bind a future Congress to cutting is enforceable. But any tax increase continues until a future congress passes a bill through both houses, and the President signs. Similarly, debt incurred today will need to be paid in the future.
A Constitutional Amendment IS binding (more binding than one Congress “promising” to cut future spending,as if that’ll ever happen) They should try again to pass the “Cut Cap Balance Act” “

___________________________________________________________

That is the most succinct explanation I have seen.

The Dims sound like Wimpy in the Popeye cartoons:
I'LL GLADLY PAY YOU TUESDAY, FOR A HAMBURGER TODAY.

[John Galt's cousin]

Here is an Adult Swim video of Wimpy’s effect upon the economy:

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=wimpy++i’ll+gladly+pay+you+tuesday&mid=0C6FDE17B95E4719D0690C6FDE17B95E4719D069&view=detail&FORM=VIRE7