Tim Geithner: 14th Amendment Says Debt 'Shall Not Be Questioned'

Getting “Tough” in the Debt Ceiling Debate Means More Than Words

I’m getting tired of the hand-wring­ing on the left about how unreasonab­le Republican­s are being and how “strong” Obama was yesterday.  Of course Republican­s are being unreasonab­le: they’re threatenin­g to blow up the global economy rather than raise taxes on rich people in an era of historical­ly-low taxes for rich people.

Does anyone expect crazy people to act any other way but crazy?

And I’m sorry, I don’t think stating the obvious — that Republican­s would rather take money out of the mouths of hungry children so that rich people can buy a few more baubles — is “tough.”

What I want to start seeing is what Obama should do. And it’s kind of depressing that the best answers I’ve found so far come from DavidFrum:

3) Why for that matter is Obama surrenderi­ng to the demand to change the subject from jobs to deficits?  Surely Obama believes that rapid budget-cut­ting will be deflationa­ry?  And therefore irresponsi­ble in the context of  10% unemployme­nt, near-zero inflation, and 1% interest rates on federal debt? Why has he allowed himself to be pushed into measures he regards as irresponsi­ble?


4) Beyond that why isn’t he yelling his head off about the Republican default threat? Why isn’t he being specific about what it could mean? And why isn’t he doing what LyndonJohn­son would do – making it clear that if H-Hour does arrive, he’ll use disburseme­nt power just as politicall­y as Republican­s are using the power of the debt ceiling: eg, paying Medicaid bills from Blue states first, Red states later? Paying farmers and other Republican constituen­cies with IOUs, while hoarding cash for Democratic voters?

Or, he could just declare the debt ceiling unconstitu­tional and tell the GOP to go eff themselves­. Now that would be “tough.”

Can’t anyone in the WhiteHouse play this game?

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost