Should Rand filibuster raising the debt ceiling?

[Jandrsn21]

My answer is going to be yes, if not to have it actually work, but to expose those who break his filibuster, who campaigned on the promise of tackling the debt. Also to help push more unworthy candidates out in 2012. The media may make him out to be a villain, but the people would see a strong principled person trying to stop the runaway debt. Your thoughts?

[Travlyr]

I would like to see Rand filibuster raising the debt ceiling.

The debt system of money is going to fail. The dollar of 1913 would buy @ $22 worth of goods today. Someday it will be much higher. Putting the demise of the fiat dollar off until the borrower has to borrow the interest to pay the interest, seems foolish.

[RonPaulCult]

I just asked this question in another thread but - I'll take an answer anywhere I can get it. Can't the fed just step in and prevent this no matter what Rand or the rest of the government does?

[low preference guy]

I just asked this question in another thread but - I'll take an answer anywhere I can get it. Can't the fed just step in and prevent this no matter what Rand or the rest of the government does?

yes, but that will show that Congress has no power. which should piss people off. unfortunately, i don't know if it will.

[itshappening]

yes he should absolutely do it and put those who vote to break it on the record

[Elwar]

Why play their game?

They should be wondering if they can filibuster a balanced budget.

[sailingaway]

It is one strategy. He's going to be talking to others and they'll decide what strategy will be best, overall.

[durden0]

It is one strategy. He's going to be talking to others and they'll decide what strategy will be best, overall.

what are the other options?

[sailingaway]

what are the other options?

I'm not sure what he's considering, I'm just saying what he said on Good Morning America, yesterday. Progressives are trying to pretend it is a 'test' of his principles if he doesn't filibuster the debt ceiling he is selling out, but it only takes 60 to overcome a filibuster and raising the debt ceiling is often done by unanimous consent. Progressives are really just using Rand as a boogie man to try to get rid of the filibuster. Getting rid of the filibuster is their big agenda item they want to try to do in the lame duck session or convince people to do first thing in the new session, so the GOP can't block Obama's agenda.

I just don't want us playing into their hands because we are COUNTING on the filibuster, as is the entire GOP. Rand is having discussions to see what level of support he will have and what options there are. However, he may not want to signal what he will do before he does it.

[obijuan]

what are the other options?

Voting against raising the debt ceiling, which will put the House to the test (GOP House means the measure should fail if they're serious about the debt), followed by trying to get a balanced budget amendment.

[skyorbit]

RAnd should fillibuster raising the debt ceiling.
Rand should filibuster EVERY BUDGET that isn't balanced.
Rand should fillibuster EVERY new law that is unconstitutional.

Rand litterally has veto power. He'll side with the dems on libertarian social issues, he'll side with the Republicans on economic issues.

In a split senate, he could and should singlehandedly prevent all new bills from getting passed.

Tracy

[BenIsForRon]

I don't think he should, because it really could launch us into another depression. I'd rather have Rand find a way to get congress to cut spending quickly and drastically.

[sailingaway]

RAnd should fillibuster raising the debt ceiling.
Rand should filibuster EVERY BUDGET that isn't balanced.
Rand should fillibuster EVERY new law that is unconstitutional.

Rand litterally has veto power. He'll side with the dems on libertarian social issues, he'll side with the Republicans on economic issues.

In a split senate, he could and should singlehandedly prevent all new bills from getting passed.

Tracy

A filibuster can be overcome by the vote of 60 Senators. It only means there does have to be a vote. The progressives are trying to get rid of the filibuster because they don't have 60 votes. They are the ones spreading the idea Rand will fail if he doesn't filibuster the debt ceiling because they think saying that will convince people in the lame duck congress to vote to get rid of the filibuster altogether. He is facing no votes now, and I don't want to add to this meme.

[Brett85]

Rand litterally has veto power. He'll side with the dems on libertarian social issues.

I don't think that he'll side with the Dems on the abortion issue.

[sailingaway]

I don't think that he'll side with the Dems on the abortion issue.

Oh man, not hardly.

[Elwar]

I don't think that he'll side with the Dems on the abortion issue.

That is the most important thing facing the country right now.

If abortion laws aren't hashed out right now I don't know what will become of our country.

:rolleyes:

[lordindra3]

What Rand should do is pay them (establishment politicians) with their own medicine and force them to "compromise"... I really think it is scary not to. If we default on debt, we will turn into Iceland and/or Greece.... Did you see what happened over there?! That is scary. It was almost a local apacolypse....

Having said that, he should threaten a filibuster for a guarantee vote on a balanced budget ammenmend and spending custs.... Rand: "I will hold this country and our economy hostage based on principal, but I will give you your one time vote to raise the ceiling IF and only IF you promise to pass a balanced budget ammendment AND promise universal spending cuts...."... I think this will FORCE the dems and big government Repubs to actually pass the most important vote in our modern history which is the balanced budget ammendment and force small government. Thanks!

[jmdrake]

I don't think he should, because it really could launch us into another depression. I'd rather have Rand find a way to get congress to cut spending quickly and drastically.

Cutting spending quickly and drastically will only happen if the debt ceiling is NOT raised. You understand that right? Here's Schiff on the issue.

YouTube - Raising the debt "ceiling"? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_EHncb_s_4)

If the debt ceiling is raised, congress doesn't have to cut spending. If it is then they do. That said, there's should be no need to filibuster this because Obama should not have the votes in congress to pass a ceiling increase now anyway. If republicans vote for it, kick them out in 2012 along with Obama.

[ProBlue33]

Just a question for this discussion.
Theoretically wouldn't a balanced budget with no fiscal deficit, leave the debt ceiling where it is? Or do we have to factor in interest too?

The point is Rand should be adamant on the yearly fiscal budget, there is nothing we can do about trillions of debt. But the annual deficit is a legitimate target, that is where the line in the sand should be drawn.

[Brett85]

That is the most important thing facing the country right now.

If abortion laws aren't hashed out right now I don't know what will become of our country.

:rolleyes:

It's an important issue if you believe that life begins at conception. In my opinion abortion is no different than killing a 3 year old. I only support libertarians who are pro life.

[Brett85]

Just a question for this discussion.
Theoretically wouldn't a balanced budget with no fiscal deficit, leave the debt ceiling where it is? Or do we have to factor in interest too?

The point is Rand should be adamant on the yearly fiscal budget, there is nothing we can do about trillions of debt. But the annual deficit is a legitimate target, that is where the line in the sand should be drawn.

A balanced budget would prevent any more debt from piling up. If we had a balanced budget amendment we would likely have a surplus at times as well, and we could use some of the surplus money to pay off the national debt.

[Inflation]

what are the other options?

The other option is to reduce the debt ceiling, instead of just maintaining it.

Make the deficit illegal.

[revolutionary8]

I thought knarfxii cleared this up?
Perhaps not.
I'll ask.
WILL RAND PAUL BE A SENATOR WHEN THIS IS VOTED UPON?