Don’t Journaljizzmers Have to Go to School Too?

Obviously not, as this retarded piece of ignorant hackery proves.

The breathless headline is:

Speaker Boehner: Failing To Raise Debt Ceiling Is Not Even A Question On The Table

Which, obviously, is enough to get anybody with an ounce of fiscal responsibility in their body all riled up, particularly those who might have thought that the ass-kicking of November ’10 was a promise of a return to sanity.

But then we get to read what Boehner actually said. Allowing, of course, for the fact that he might have said something else as well that fell victim to the merciless cutting room floor, but we only have the “article” to go by:

Speaker of the House John Boehner appeared on Fox News Sunday and Chris Wallace grilled him on the seriousness of threats to shut down the government or to not raise the debt ceiling. Perhaps scared of “playing with fire,” Boehner agreed defaulting on the country’s debt would mean a financial disaster and claimed “I don’t think it’s a question that’s even on the table.”

So what he actually did say was that “defaulting on the country’s debt would mean a financial disaster.”

Now somebody explain to us, kindly, how “failing to raise the debt ceiling” is, in every way, the same as “defaulting on the country’s debt.” Because otherwise that article’s headline makes no sense whatsoever which, we suppose, is what you ought to expect from morons who were too hopelessly under-endowed in the intelligence department to get a real degree and had to make do with “journalism” instead.

Thatisall.

32 comments

  1. 1
    LC PrimEviL growls and barks:

    Such headlines are generated as mind-grabs for headline scanners that don’t bother to read the articles.
    “I scan, therefore I know” is their modus operandi. Nevermind they actually know nothing.

  2. 2
    Gladiator growls and barks:

    3 things we could do to turn the country around pronto

    1) Require a measured IQ of 120 + to serve in elected office.
    2) Do not allow welfare recipients , convicted felons or illegal aliens to vote.
    3) Any state that goes bankrupt reverts to territory status until debt is made good. Thus losing congressional representation.

  3. 3
    irish19 growls and barks:

    The point is, each Senator and Congressional member should be allotted say, twenty staffers, earning no more than $40k per year. Don’t send them on trips, retreats, golfing meetings, or any of that crap.

    If we are serious about getting the nation’s house in order, we first have to get Congress’ house in order. I propose an austerity program for both the Senate and the House. Maybe we can get Sheriff Joe to build some more tent jails in the Arizona desert and we can sequester Congress there to take care of business for one month out of each quarter — out of the way of the cocktail parties, the fund raisers, and most importantly, out of the way of the lobbyists. Make them all wear pink underwear, eat the jail chow, and watch reruns of the Waltons on TV at night.

    I like it!
    On the other side, I don’t think Boehner is demanding an Air Force jet be earmarked & kept ready for his personal junketing as Queen Nancy did. I wonder what the bill for that came to.

  4. 4
    NR Pax growls and barks:

    DJ, not a bad idea but I have an alternative:

    One or two bedroom dorms. In SE D.C. And they have to use public transportation to get to work. Let them see how us common folk live.

  5. 5
    LC Jackboot IC/A growls and barks:

    Then the same article drops this bit of spin as well:

    Boehner also expressed no concern over his ability to deal with the emerging Tea Party caucus in the House and vowed not to curtail their attempts to pursue even more drastic spending cuts than what Republicans have already proposed.

    That’s another obvious typo that should read (in keeping with the rest of the piece): …”the emerging Tea Party threat…..”

    As written, this bit insinuates that the Tea Party is de facto at odds with the House. The verb “emerging” in common parlance is very often used with a pejorative noun. i.e. emerging violence, emerging threat, emerging terror.

    mheh….

  6. 6
    LC PrimEviL growls and barks:

    Another way to save big, would be no more Government credit cards!!
    Then, no more Government vehicles as perks. All Government employees own and drive their own cars, and
    pay for their own gas, maintainence, ect. Reduce Congressional salaries to Fifty grand a year, and no
    expense accounts. Make them use the same health-care we have to. Reduce staffers to ten per, and cap salaries
    at Thirty-five grand; and ditto on expenses and healthcare.
    Reduce the Bureaucracy by 50%, cap salaries at Forty grand a year. No credit card, no car, no expense
    account, and again, ditto on healthcare.

  7. 7
    LC LittleRott84 Imperial DJ growls and barks:

    Response to LC PrimEviL @:

    Sounds like a great plan.

  8. 8
    LC Old Dog growls and barks:

    Response to LC LittleRott84 Imperial DJ @:
    Second the motion on PrimEvil’s plan!

  9. 9
    LC Jackboot IC/A growls and barks:

    Response to DJ Allyn, ITW @:

    I will be willing to bet that two years from now the Tea Party will like The Boner about as much as they like Nancy Pelosi.

    Agreed, 100%. I have little doubt this ‘new’ bunch, as a whole, will succumb to “Swamp Fever” as those before them have. They might do it a bit slower, but in the end they will become infected. There’s no doubt in my mind that a few will emerge as sticking to principles, i.e. “actually doing the will of the people” but collectively, no chance.

  10. 10
  11. 11
    LC TerribleTroy growls and barks:

    I’m pretty sure that in the past Ive written that that all the representatives (this includes House & Senate) salaries should be based on the median income of their constituents, paid by their respective states. The states could also purchase and maintain their representatives housing along with providing a medical benefits plan. Transportation is the reps problem, just like the majority of us have to cover the cost of transportation to and from work. Staffers? Again, it’s the states that should cover the cost. And while we’re at it, TERM LIMITS!

    Wanna save some more money? Eliminate ALL bonuses for govt. employee’s. A few years back I worked a temp job where I assisted in databasing the Feds employee files. I’de say at least 50% of the files I handled received bonuses every year and it was rare to see a employee of more than five yrs who had not received a bonus. These bonuses ranged from 500 to 75K per person, just for doing their job. And here’s the kicker. I did this job between ‘gigs” so I did this for about 30 working days. The majority of files I handled were from the US Forest Service. I read a number of bonus documents and it wasnt unusual to see that so and so “did an excellent job while working on building TRAIL’S” or some other bullshit like, “so and so only missed 10 days of work this year” so they should get 1500. I NEVER saw a bonus denied.

  12. 12

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    Boner will just take the private jet flights provided by his corporate lobbyists

    I’d go easy on calling him boner, being that your party has a Weiner……

  13. 13
    LC Gunsniper growls and barks:

    Let the congresscritters keep their salaries and shit can the rest of their perks and bennies. Anyone pulling $174,000 can afford their own health care and transportation. For that matter shut down their D.C. offices and let the buggers work and live in their own districts. It’s not as if these goofs can’t teleconference.

  14. 14
    LC Anniee451 growls and barks:

    I’d actually like an answer to the question too – I’m told by leftists that defaulting on what the government owes would be a disaster of unprecedented proportions, along the line of “Day After Tomorrow” – you know, global tornadoes and temps so cold that helicopters freeze on contact and we all have to burn books? Like that. I say you get in a hole you stop digging, but hey, that’s me. I’ve devoted a fair amount of time to economics, but this one I don’t have an answer for. So…who does?

  15. 15
    LC Anniee451 growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    Jaybear, Colonel of Imperial Ancient Artillery says:
    I’d go easy on calling him boner, being that your party has a Weiner……
    I don’t have a Party, but yeah, weenies and a franks. As far as The Boner, remember “When Two Vowels Go Walking?”

    LC Sir Intellectual Conservative 5th Columnist says:
    Obamacare tossed .. the whole law ruled Unconstitutional
    Good, although it still doesn’t mean anything yet. It still has to go through the appellate process and then on to the Supremes.
    In the mean time, I like what Vermont is doing. This ought to warm the cockles of any of you who are into that state’s rights thing. Let the state put together their own health care plan and be done with it.

    Cockles warming. And now I actually know what a cockle is!

  16. 16
    LC PrimEviL growls and barks:

    Response to LC TerribleTroy @ #13:

    “so and so only missed 10 days of work this year” so they should get 1500.

    Only missed ten days??? I’ve worked places that would fire anyone that missed that much time.
    Hell, just being two minutes late was practically a firing offence. These bums have got to go.

  17. 17
    LC TerribleTroy growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    I fired a Grip last week that was four minutes late. He had already had his warning a week earlier.

    CORPORATIST OPPRESSOR!!

  18. 18
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    Since we’ve strayed from the original topic of “just when exactly did ‘not raising the debt ceiling’ come to mean ‘having to default on your debts?” which I’ve yet to see answered in any even remotely logical sense, we might as well go on to the subject du jour of Congress Critter salaries and the propriety of cutting them down to size:

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    Ironically, you are asking the government to cap salaries, benefits, and set quotas, and bypass the free market — in this case, the labor market.

    I see where you’re trying to go with this, but you’re wildly off mark because you miss an elementary point:

    Demanding that government cap government salaries is not, in any way, the same as demanding that government cap private salaries.

    You see, there’s this fundamental difference between public “servants” and private sector employees, and I’m not talking about the fact that the latter are the only ones actually creating something, and it’s this:

    Public “servants” are employed by We The People, so it’s entirely appropriate that We The People get to set their salaries. We pay them, we get to decide what they get paid.

    It really is that simple.

  19. 19
    Radical Redneck growls and barks:

    Response to DJ Allyn, ITW @:

    I fired a Grip last week that was four minutes late. He had already had his warning a week earlier.

    You seem proud of counting it down to its minimum. While it’s your right, it also looks awfully capricious and petty.

    Now he can’t pay taxes into the Collective™! :cry:

  20. 20
    Light29ID growls and barks:

    Response to DJ Allyn, ITW @:

    Most government employees already make less than their counterparts in the private sector — even with their unions.

    Please tell me that you don’t actually believe that horseshit??? Living in DC I know getting a government job is the Holy Grail that people go after like an over sexed chimpanzee hopped up on meth.

  21. 21
    LC PrimEviL growls and barks:

    Since we’ve strayed from the original topic…

    Misha, so what else is new? :em01:

  22. 22
    LC TerribleTroy growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    Couple those cuts with raising the tax rate on the top one percent

    And there it is boys & girls. The standard “raise the tax on the rich” solution that spews from the progs. Way to think outside the box DJ. As a person that espouses that the “Corporations” are in control and considering that the majority of this “1%” are probably heavily involved with the Corporations, what makes you think that raising the tax on this group would stand a snowballs chance in hell of happening in the first place? After all, They are in control right? Oh yeah, thats what I would do if I was in control, raise taxes on myself.

  23. 23
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    That is pretty elementary. Failing to raise the debt ceiling means that no more money can be spent — and here is where the crux is — that includes interest payments on our outstanding debt.

    Actually, the government has more than enough money coming in to service our debts. What they can’t do is service our debt and continue spending like Valley Girls at the mall with daddy’s credit card.

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    It would be like you trying to make your house payment. Your income is already flying out of your hand to pay for this, that, and the other. You’ve been living off of your credit cards, and only paying the minimums every month. Now your cards are maxed out, you have no more cash to spend, and the credit card company will not raise your credit limit any further. So now you end up defaulting.

    It’s like this, if you want to use an analogy, which is a good idea in this case: You have a monthly income of $1,000. Your debt payments are a minimum of about $500 a month, and you like to spend an additional $700 on other stuff, but you can’t get your credit extended (raise the debt ceiling). What you do then is to pay your debt and make do with the $500 that is left over for “discretionary spending.”

    No “inevitable default” there.

    For what you said to be true, the government would have to have interest payments higher than their collective monthly intake, which simply isn’t the case. If it were the case, no amount of spending cuts would help, we’d be fucked already, debt ceiling raise or not.

    The only reason we keep being subjected to that economically illiterate bullshit is that the government doesn’t want to stop throwing money out the window to buy votes from their favorite constituencies.

    Tough shit, I say. Time to take the crack pipe away from the whores in DC.

  24. 24
    LC Gunsniper growls and barks:

    So you would allow for two classes of people?

    Why not? You do.

    Couple those cuts with raising the tax rate on the top one percent

    Want some alternatives to that? How about scrapping NAFTA. How about doing away with WTO? How about taking away Most Favored status from China and charging a tariff for goods manufactured outside of the US?

    Hell yeah!!! Throw in kicking out and defunding the UN as well.

  25. 25
    LC Wil, S.C.E. growls and barks:

    Just like the white house claiming that sutting spending to 2008 levels will mean the FBI will have to fire 2700 agents. (Jan 22).

    You can debate the merits of firing FBI agents seperately (particularly the Hostage Burning team), but the assertion amounts to stating that the FBI has hired 2700 NEW special agents in the past 2 years. I’m sorry, but I don’t quite believe that.

    The level of hyperbole coming from the left since November is simply remarkable.

    ——————

    Economic activity is not, on whole, promoted by higher levels of big brother nanny statism. Higher taxes are a brake on the economy. The accelerator pedal is the one on the RIGHT!

    Yes, some level of taxation is necessary to pay for the things the federal Governement is required to do. For years, while debating the 16th ammendment, we were sold the idea that the level of direct taxation would never go above 2 percent,as the Federal Government had “Constitutional Limits” of it’s permissible actions.

    Fuck Woodrow Wilson and all of the lying “progressives” that followed him.

  26. 26
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    So you would allow for two classes of people? Those who work for the government and have to be regulated, and those who don’t?

    Erm, not to bust your bubble, but those who don’t work for the government DO have their wages regulated. By the owners of the company, i.e. their employers. The employers of government workers are the people since we pay their wages, ergo it’s quite logical for the people to “regulate” their wages.

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    You would like to let the “market” determine wages, right? Labor is a market. It is also a commodity. On one end of the equation you want to do away with the bottom cap — the minimum wage — and let the employer decide how little to pay a worker, but you want to add a cap at the top end to prevent that employer from paying more?

    OK, Deej, now I know that you’re just fucking with us :em93:

    Government workers aren’t part of the market in any shape, form or fashion. They’re specifically exempt from it. You see, in an actual labor market, the wages are determined by how much the company can afford to pay the workers without going bankrupt and, of course, by how little they can pay them without having them leave for greener pastures.

    The first one doesn’t apply to government workers since they’re not dependent on a bottom line. The government will just raise taxes to cover any “shortfalls.” The second one doesn’t apply in the current market or there’d be a huge pool of government jobs that can’t be filled because opportunities are so much better elsewhere.

    Once the government starts having trouble with vast numbers of unfilled positions, we can apply the second part, but not before.

    More specifically, the government labor market is not a part of a “free market” since it’s not governed by the forces that govern a free market. They have no bottom line restrictions or most of our government agencies would be filing for bankruptcy and they sure as hell don’t have a problem with people fleeing their cushy government jobs because of better wages elsewhere. Again: Give me a list of government jobs that simply cannot be filled because of a lack of applicants and we’ll talk.

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    Like I said, let the labor market decide. If they don’t want to work for We The People because We The People don’t want to pay what the prevailing wage is — then fine. Have fun finding qualified employees.

    Again: Once that is a problem, we’ll talk, but so far I don’t know of any positions that the government can’t fill because the private job market is “soooo much more lucrative.” I’d give my left nut at this point to get a government position, and it’s not because I’m unhappy in my current job, it’s because I like the thought of a job where it doesn’t matter how fucked up I am, how much I screw up, how little I actually do, I’ll never have to worry about being fired unless The Four Horsemen arrive to declare the beginning of the End Times.

    I mean, seriously. Imagine having a job where you get paid to sit in a “rubber room” doing absolutely fuck all because you can’t be fired due to pressure from the unions.

    I’m not lazy, I don’t really want a job where I don’t have to actually, you know, work to get paid because it would drive me nuts, but the security of knowing that no matter how badly I screwed the pooch on a bad hair day, I’d still be guaranteed a monthly income and a nice pension…

    Try finding THAT in an ACTUAL free labor market, and let me hear about it when you do.

  27. 27
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    Less people are paying into the system and those that are are paying less because they are earning less. Corporations have for the most part off-shored their operations to escape taxes also, while raking in record profits.

    And, of course, the BEST way of making them stop off-shoring their operations to escape taxes is to tax them even MORE!

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    We need to bring back the protectionist system of tariffs in order to keep our economy up.

    Because Smoot-Hawley worked so very, VERY well!

  28. 28
    Grammar Czar growls and barks:

    Emperor Misha I says:

    Erm, not to bust your bubble, but those who don’t work for the government DO have their wages regulated. By the owners of the company, i.e. their employers.

    And the customers. If we the customers don’t want to pay what’s being charged, we don’t. The employer then has to adjust his pay for his employees. We don’t get to decide what gummint employees get paid; we just get it extorted from us.

  29. 29
    LC Anniee451 growls and barks:

    Llew Rockwell is still hanging around Mises? How do they put up with that guy? He jumped the shark like ages ago.

  30. 30
    LC TerribleTroy growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    As opposed to the standard cut taxes and borrow money and spend like a drunken sailor like the Right has been doing ever since Reagan came into office?

    Funny I dont recall being a advocate for “cutting taxes”.

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    hat makes you think that raising the tax on this group would stand a snowballs chance in hell of happening in the first place?

    I don’t think it will happen. That ship has sailed a long time ago.

    Then why do you continue to propose a unrealistic solution?

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    Troy tried his ridicule routine when I said that perhaps the only way we are going to get out of this mess is to raise taxes

    No suh, I ridiculed you for proposing a solution that is never going to happen. I also find it interesting that you chose to leave out your original proposition which only identified raising taxes on 1 %. Then you go into the “I’de raise taxes for everyone. Well which one is it? And why didnt you clarify your position to begin with? Your backpedaling is so good you could drive a bicycle backwards.

    One of the things that troubles me about the whole “raise taxes” on the rich is that it reeks of laziness and envy. The Progs see the rich as having more than they “need”, which somehow makes it OK to take more from them than anyone else.

    DJ Allyn, ITW says:

    Believe it or not, there was a time when only one member of the family unit was the bread winner, and he made a wage that allowed him to buy a house, have two cars, save enough money to put his children through college, and actually have a pension when he retired.

    Yeah, Yeah, I used to watch Ozzie & Harriet and Leave it to Beaver too.

  31. 31
    ebrown2 growls and barks:

    DJ Allyn,

    ” Believe it or not, there was a time when only one member of the family unit was the bread winner, and he made a wage that allowed him to buy a house, have two cars, save enough money to put his children through college, and actually have a pension when he retired.”

    Yeah, after the rest of the industrial world was blasted into oblivion and women were forced from the job market to artificially raise the wages of the men returning from WWII.

    I didn’t know DJ was such a violent, ethnocentric and sexist individual! Typical SD “lib” :em41:

  32. 32
    Grammar Czar growls and barks:

    Believe it or not, there was a time when only one member of the family unit was the bread winner, and he made a wage that allowed him to buy a house, have two cars, save enough money to put his children through college, and actually have a pension when he retired.

    My dad was white-collar, and I didn’t know anyone who had two cars. There weren’t too many parents back then who put their kids through college. Most college kids put themselves through. Even with his white-collar job, we had enough for a decent living, but we weren’t considered rich or well-off. I suppose it could have depended on where you lived, but that’s the way it was for us.