America’s own rogue GOPachyderm, Sarah Palin, is such a consistent source of hilarity it seems impossible that she could keep up the pace any longer. But just when you think she’s exhausted her supply of inanity, she posts another Facebook column and reestablishes her crackpot bona fides:
“Apparently the president thinks he can furlough reality when talking about the debt limit. To suggest that raising the debt limit doesn’t incur more debt is laughably absurd. The very reason why you raise the debt limit is so that you can incur more debt. Otherwise what’s the point?”
What Palin is mocking as “laughably absurd” is known to those who have advanced beyond remedial economics as “the truth.” The point of raising the debt ceiling, which Palin goes out of her way to misunderstand, is to pay for debt already incurred. It does not, and cannot, authorize new spending. Only Congress can do that. So if Palin has a problem with the outstanding debt, she needs to take it up with John Boehner.
Palin continues by declaring that “It’s also shameful to see [Obama] scaremongering the markets with his talk of default.” I wonder if she would castigate the sainted Tea Party icon, Ronald Reagan, for saying (video here)…
“Congress consistently brings the Government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility. This brinkmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest rates would skyrocket, instability would occur in financial markets, and the Federal deficit would soar.”
But Palin hasn’t even begun to showcase her Olympian idiocy. Her Facebook drivel proceeds with a self-contradictory passage that begins by stating that…
“There is no way we can default if we follow the Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4, requires that we service our debt first.”
Actually, what the Fourteenth Amendment (Section 4) says is that “The validity of the public debt of the United States […] shall not be questioned.” It is a controversial clause that many interpret as authorization for the President to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling at will. So it appears that Palin is advising the President to take matters into his own hands. But her next paragraph puts an end to that sort of thinking.
“Defaulting on our national debt is an impeachable offense, and any attempt by President Obama to unilaterally raise the debt limit without Congress is also an impeachable offense.”
Huh? Palin just got finished arguing that the Constitution demands that the President take any and all measures to pay our debts. Now she says that if he does so he is guilty of an impeachable offense. And just to lock in the crazy, she also says that not doing so is likewise impeachable. In Palin’s twisted reality Obama cannot glance sideways without violating his oath of office.
Get Fox Nation vs. Reality. Available now at Amazon.
What is abundantly clear is that Palin wants to believe that whatever this President does is a justification for impeachment. Her perspective is so irreparably warped that it has lost any semblance of rationality. This is something that has been noticeable for quite some time with Palin, but what stands out as utterly incomprehensible is that there are still people who hang on her every word – including in the media. It’s a sad state of affairs, but one that is not irreversible. We just need to provide the proper educational support. So let’s start with something that Palin might be able to grasp.
15 thoughts on “Oh The Stupidity: Sarah Palin Wants Obama Impeached For Both Solving/Not Solving The Debt Crisis”
Oh look, fitch just announced they’re putting our aaa rating up for review for a downgrade.
YOU STUPID MOTHERFUCKERS!! Do you see what happens when you just fucking talk about not doing it??? Jesus Christ I will never trust your party of batshit dumbasses ever the fuck again!! YOU STUPID FUCKING ASSHOLES!!! That would be the second agency to downgrade us you fucking incompetent unqualified dickheads!!! FUCK THESE PEOPLE!!!!! They’re putting hate in my heart and I dont like it. FUCK THEM.
You’re overreacting – based on the current federal budget, the service on the debt is about 7% of the federal budget – the tax receipts can cover that no problem unless you choose to default – of course a significant part of the government would not be able to be funded and that would be a problem for some. I’m coming around to the idea of not moving the debt ceiling and seeing what happens. Given the desperation and the fear mongering, I’m sure we would survive – with some pain I’m sure, but we would survive. Debt owed to social security may suffer, but we could pay our debt service and NOT Default.
Youre talking about prioritization, what in the hell makes you think that could work?? You have no idea what you’re talking about…..what a fuckin shock.
You are so sad – you’re being played with fear just like the rest of us and, of course, you’re letting it get the best of you – I think you’re the one who has the blinders on, not me. Being afraid gives them all the power. Did you read what you wrote – honestly???? Prioritization is what adults and professionals do when faced with a problem like this – are you saying you don’t trust Barak Obama to make good choices? You prove why we’re so screwed up as a country. Have you ever actually managed a budget of any kind? In the end, yes, the treasury prioritizes and pays the debt service or it CHOOSES TO default – it’s all on them to do the right thing.
Steve in York,
What do you do in the second week of prioritization? Leave the same people off of the priority list? Just keep paying the chinese and other foreign nationals like Saudi Arabia? When do you get to the veterans? And the hospital workers who care for them? When do you pay for the new strike fighter? After social security or before. What do you pay in the second month? When you’re now 50 billion tardy? Idiot.
Hey, maybe I’m not giving you enough credit in my response above – is your concern the inherent need of our money supply to expand through debt to avoid a deflationary crash and to perpetuate this monetary system we have that concerns you? If so, I apologize for talking down to you and not giving you the credit you deserve. If your concern is about government only, then I got it right.
There are two different Social Security “debts” the government needs to pay: One is the interest on the trillions Congress has borrowed from the Social Security Trust Fund to cover their spending on other budget items, the other is the monthly total paid out to current recipients — not technically a “debt” until it isn’t paid. I think what you are saying here is that not paying the interest on past borrowing from Social Security isn’t all that important — it “might suffer” in the event of a failure to raise the debt ceiling. But, I’m wondering, are you saying that defunding “a significant part of the government” which could, of course, include stopping Social Security payments to millions who depend on them is simply “some pain” that you are willing to endure? Have you not been paying attention? This shutdown cost our economy billions, slowed our economic recovery and caused huge pain to a lot of people. Clearly, not to you, and I’m thinking that must be pretty much all you care about. Nice guy. Not an economist.
why don’t you say exactly what you think?? LOL, just kidding!!
You forgot to provide pikchurs, Mark. Now, how do you expect Stupid Sarah and John Bonehead to understand what you write?
Besides, I don’t see any moose mentioned in here, so obviously, Stupid Sarah will have no idea it was meant for her…
Louis Ghomert from Texas(where else);said the same thing as Palin. It is jaw dropping stupidity.
Does any of this really matter – we’ll get the debt limit increase and we, the US taxpayer, will continue to support the global monetary system that is design to concentrate wealth at the top only. And all that comes from this group is how stupid Sarah Palin or Louis Ghomert is because you’re so afraid of what might happen if the government and their partners – the banks – don’t get their way. We’re all being duped and all our individual wealth is being sapped from us with the inevitable creation of all that new currency that comes from every bond auction that will take us up to the next debt limit. You, me and everyone loses in this “fight”.
I think that you need to take a look at global economics and see what has happened to other countries who were unable to pay their bills because of default – Greece is a very good example. They have been in a financial mess for years, including youth unemployment at more than 60%. We also cannot “pick and choose” which debt to pay if the limit is not raised. The system is set up as a One-all and All-one. The checks cannot be written for only somethings and not for others. There is either money there to pay it all, or nothing for all. It would be wonderful if the politicians would allow Obama to stay on his course to fiscal sound policies. We would end up with a budget surplus very quickly and use that to pay down the debt. But that would mean raising taxes on people like the Kochs and Norquist – something many campaign bank accounts just can’t let happen.
So status quo for you and raise taxes to solve the problem – no thanks. We may want similar things in the end – but the means will always be a sticking point. Since you brought it up – how much do you think is reasonable for people to pay in taxes? Is there ever enough?
The top marginal tax rate when Eisenhower built the interstate highway system and the US built its middle class was 90%. The top marginal tax rate when Bill Gates created Microsoft was 79%. We did just fine with a progressive tax system. The economic truth is that the rich also do better when incomes go up across the board. A tax system that assures that a rising tide lifts all boats is the way we used to do it. We may have forgotten that because it’s been so damned long since working class incomes actually rose, but it’s the truth. If we tax appropriately we can have an America with an educated, healthy and housed citizenry with roads and bridges that don’t collapse when we try to use them. Why shouldn’t the wealthiest nation on earth do such a thing? So the rich can be totally out of reach in their private planes and yacht clubs and schools and limos? Ged outta here!
Well, we’re not going to agree on that and of course that is part of our issue as a society. When/if we ever get to an agreement on why there is such a disparity in income and wealth – then we may just get to an agreement on how to move forward. You and many progressives think it’s the tax system. I’m of the opinion it’s the monetary system – which is also different than what we had in the 1950s.
I guess we’ll just keep going in circles until we get most on the same page. You’re going to hate this – if we just followed the constitution with respect to money, this would not be an argument at all.
Comments are closed.