Posted on 10/08/2013 9:32:32 AM PDT by Cyber Liberty
OK, it's a vanity. Deal.
I haven't heard this possibility brought up, but that might be because I haven't read every post. It's been a very busy week, and Obastard is doing his best to overflow the piss-off bucket. But, a thought dawned upon me yesterday when I was reading a story in IBD about the next big scary deadline coming up, the Debt-Limit that we're supposed to hit on 10/17.
I think Obastard is being a total pr**k about shutting down parks, landmarks and private property because he's building up cred for a threat he intends to pull next week. He's lost a lot of credibility with his threats recently because, at least on the foreign scene, he's been shown to be rather, uh, "toothless."
What's the big threat? We're all expecting it so I don't think I'm shocking anybody when I say he intends to deliberately default on our bond interest payments. It's well known that he doesn't have to do that, and any normal business would ensure the bond-holders get serviced first, but I think he's planning to stiff the folks holding the debt, and that's us. Yes, the Chinese will take it in the shorts, but I think the Fed holds the biggest chunk of the debt these days. At least, they're the only fools buying it lately, since the S&P downgrade.
He's infuriating everybody right now for the same reason a battleship bombards an enemy before an invasion: To "soften us up." He would rather create mayhem the likes we haven't seen in my lifetime than try to get spending under control. He wants to deliberately crash the economy, and this is his big chance, all the while blaming the Republicans, especially TEA Partiers. We're all Emmanuel Goldstein now.
I see a golden opportunity to put troops in the streets, and dissidents in jail.
Earlier this year, House Republican Tom McClintock and 106 co-sponsors introduced the Full Faith and Credit Act, which would protect the payment, principal, and interest on U.S. Treasury securities, including those held by Social Security funds, even in the event that the federal debt reaches the statutory limit. In other words, by law, no default. Two years ago Senator Pat Toomey introduced similar legislation. And more recently, House Financial Services chairman Jeb Hensarling renewed the campaign for that bill. But Obama and the Democrats have always opposed it. And how bizarre is it that Obama opposes the one piece of legislation that would make it impossible for him or anybody else to make Treasury-default accusations?
Larry speculates that Zero is trying stir the pot by provoking a massive stock market sell-off.
It’s been suggested here the 14th Amendment already requires “full faith and credit,” so why would a law be necessary?
I’m sort of leaning away from the notion Obastard’s planning on defaulting, but I think he’s eying the opportunity to just write his own budget where he can screw the people he doesn’t like, like the military and the banks. I also think he’d like to simply ignore the debt limit. He’s already said many times there shouldn’t be one.
Hmmmm. I'd believe this, if it wasn't said by Beck.
I stopped listening to him some time ago; got tired of hearing "This is BIG! HUGE! You Won't believe it when you hear it!! Just tune in tomorrow and....." and "it" would wind up being something like a new radio station was carrying his program.
Just too much hyperbole. My stomach just isn't strong enough to put up with it.
I will give the man this, however. When he's right, he's usually *very* right. Hard to separate the wheat from the chaff, though.
Frankly, in reading this thread, I'd be more concerned that two very sharp FReepers (Travis McGee and Laz) are thinking along the same lines and independently reaching the same ugly conclusions. That's worrisome, IMO.
I don’t think Laz has posted on this thread.....but Travis sure has.
Dude, I gotta tell ya, I'd be relieved if that's ALL he does. Personally, I think he's going for all the marbles.
And he does so before November 15 is past.
Cyber, I've been watching the thread, if not posting.
However, I did read one of Laz's previous FR threads where he outlined a bunch of the same concerns. It's been in the last week.
I'm thinking that this will not end well. FR can be very much an echo chamber, but not in this case, I think. Having multiple people - sharp, independent, self-aware people - thinking in the same direction is disconcerting, especially when the conclusions being reached are particularly unpleasant.
It's rather like herding cats, then suddenly having all the cats start moving together over a cliff.
Zero doesn't particularly like the Constitution, you know. He's said so on various occasions in the past.
Section 4 of the 14th Amendment reads:
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
That would prohibit Jack Lew from failing to pay bond holders in order to fund EBT cards.
And, just to make sure, there is Section 5:
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
The House's Full Faith and Credit Act is pursuant to Section 5. It's most instructive that Dingy Harry has blocked it in the Senate and Zero has threatened to veto it.
Zero's trying to up the ante with his talk of default. He wants a crisis. He thinks it will break his way with the MSM's help.
The only difference I have with your scenario is that EITHER WAY he’s shutting off EBT’s. He wants the cities to burn. It’s his Reichstag moment.
All due respect, sir: I disagree with both of these sentences.
Agreed. Beck blew his credibility some time ago.
Well... there was some collusion there. We discussed this together. So this is not an 'independent conclusion', if that increases or decreases your concern....
Thanks. It's been in interesting one. I didn't know at first if I should post it.
I think it's more like the movie, Willard.
If, for whatever reason, the system comes crashing down and we don't get the chance to say it: I have always considered you a dear friend since we first met, and my life is richer for having known you.
We’ll just have to wait and see on that. It depends on how much Obastard wants massive violence, and how he expects it turn out. He’s on the side with 12-13% of the population. BLOAT, just to be safe my FRiend.
How am I going to explain this to Mrs. Liberty??? ;^)
If, for whatever reason, the system comes crashing down and we don't get the chance to say it: I have always considered you a dear friend since we first met, and my life is richer for having known you.
Dittos.
The barriers were bought ahead of time, as were the bullets, food and trucks. Das bunker was started a couple of years ago.
If you search thehill.com for ‘government shutdown,’ you find stories that conflate this situation with the debt ceiling and how the Democrats were confident. Those stories were from mid-Sept.
The longer this keeps going, this non-shutdown shutdown, the harder it will be to open it up. People are getting burned right and left already.
But yes, he wants the cities to burn. Oct 25th is the anniversary of arriving at and taking the Winter Palace—the October Revolution. I’m thinking 0bama’s jealous. I am also thinking this is why the election went the way it ‘did.’ All this was planned.
And...remember, Kerry signed the UN arms treaty, so if the US Constitution is rendered null and void, 0bama can play that card, too.
Oh. I also think at least some of our public lands are pledged as assets in the event of default. This is why they were all closed—the parks and forests—to hide the transfer of title.
My own conspiracy on the last bit, though.
Ditto that!
I think my chances of winning the Power Ball lottery 5 times in a row stand better chances than this. Boehner would simultaneously wet his panties & cry at that same time, before he would ever propose impeaching the untoucheable, muzlim, commie pig 0dumb0. And I am convinced that only 10-12 Repub congressmen would sign onto this, and only Senators Cruz & Lee would support it in the Senate.
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.