Those wacky liberals at NATIONAL REVIEW...

[brooklynite]

By the Bye, You Could Zero Out Discretionary Spending . . .. . . and you’d still have to raise the debt limit. That means no defense appropriations, no law enforcement appropriations, no highway appropriations. Nothing. None of it. And you’d still have to raise the debt ceiling. Or else default on interest payment. Or else decide which current beneficiaries don’t get their Social Security and Medicare checks.

...snip...

Again, I know it is incredibly unpopular to say this, but the debt ceiling has to be raised. The question is are we getting the best deal possible, given the current environment, in exchange for raising it? Reasonable people can disagree on the latter, but not the former, unless I’m missing something.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/272991/bye-you-could-zero-out-discretionary-spending-daniel-foster

[brooklynite]

1. This comment capture the Tea Party mood perfectly...

As one being forced, at the point of the gun, to pay into the bottom of the Social Security/Medicare Ponzi scheme, I favor eliminating all Social Security and Medicare Payments immediately. That will solve the problem overnight. no need to raise the debt ceiling.

Will this be hard on lots of seniors? Absolutely. Thing is, they deserve it. They voted themselves this scheme; they did not fix it when they had the chance; they rebuffed all efforts to privatize and instead invest that money in real assets instead of legally unenforceable promises. They took the risk of investing their retirement money into empty government promises and the investment failed. Boo hoo.

[villager]

2. I guess the Tea Party/Survivalists think they'll "Road Warrior" it out, before they grow old?

Hence their rage and vituperation against the elderly?

[sinkingfeeling]

3. I would guess the writer is less than 16 years of age.

[StarsInHerHair]

4. well stupid is as stupid does