Sen. Paul Threatens Debt Ceiling Filibuster

From the Daily Caller:

Tea Party favorite Sen. Rand Paul is planning a filibuster sometime next week to bring the debt ceiling negotiations to the Senate, the Huffington Post is reporting.

“We’ve not had one minute of debate about the debt ceiling in any committee,” the Kentucky Republican told C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers” in a Sunday interview. He said after not having a budget or an appropriations bill in two years, he’s “part of the freshmen group in the Senate that’s saying, ‘No more.’”…

What Paul and other TEA Party Senators would really like is to link an increase of the debt ceiling to a balanced budget amendment.  So far, McConnell, the GOP Leader, says that is a non-starter – not enough votes for it.  To which I answer, “yeah, so?”.  Put the pressure on the Democrats for once – it is quite reasonable, and in keeping with American opinion, to demand some really hard and fast fiscal discipline.  In fact, the people are more and more demanding it.  Put it right in Reid’s lap – tell him that you don’t have enough votes to pass an increase unless Reid can round up enough votes for an amendment.

The good news here is that I feel more confident that our side will prevail, in the long run, than ever before.  Usually when we get to these points it is time for the GOP to cave and liberals to get what they want…now, not quite like that.  Unless there is some serious debt reduction, no deal can pass the House.  Naturally, Obama, Reid and the rest of the Democrats are hoping that the old tried and true tactics of allowing the MSM – and its manufactured polling – to stampede the GOP in to going along…but I don’t think it will work this time.  I think that when push comes to shove both TEA Party principal as well as political survival will rule the day:  the GOP will stand firm.

21 thoughts on “Sen. Paul Threatens Debt Ceiling Filibuster

  1. retiredspook89 July 5, 2011 / 11:34 am

    I think we’re going to get right down to a “whoever blinks first, loses” scenario. If Congress fails to increase the debt ceiling, I’ll bet that little Timmy Geithner will do exactly what most families would do if all their credit cards were cut off, and their income was reduced: start prioritizing expenditures, cable, cell phone, dining out, eliminating or scaling back vacations and entertainment, etc.. Most people forget that, to a small extent, the government has already done this insofar as eliminating COLAs for Social Security recipients and military retirees for 2-1/2 years. The President’s demagoguery in his June 29th press conference insulted the intelligence of the American people.

    • Mark Noonan July 5, 2011 / 11:52 am


      Without a doubt Democrats are using scare tactics to get their way – claiming it will be default when it will actually just be a matter of spending less money. Default will come if we keep piling on debt for another three or four years…which, of course, is precisely what raising the debt ceiling will do, unless it is coupled with genuine budget reform.

      Remember it, boys and girls: the Democrat assertion is that if we don’t go further in to debt, we’ll go bankrupt.

  2. GreenMountainBoy July 5, 2011 / 12:12 pm

    “Put the pressure on the Democrats for once ” Sorry. Do not see this happening from the repub leadership in D.C. It would mean the end of golf outings and country club invitations. They serve themselves not us. Thet will happily lead us nowhere as long as they are “liked” by the establishment.
    I wish it were not true but do not expect anything from these people. They will break your heart and leave.

    • thomas July 5, 2011 / 1:03 pm

      I guess then you won’t be voting for the GOP candidate come election time?

      We both know it’s going to be either Romney, or Huntsman.


      • GreenMountainBoy July 5, 2011 / 1:09 pm

        I have already stated that neither romney, huntsman, or any gop candidate that has/is supporting any progressive agenda will be getting my vote.
        You have your beliefs, I have mine. Enough said.

      • thomas July 5, 2011 / 1:36 pm

        So then as a general rule. If you don’t get the candidate that YOU want, you won’t vote for the GOP candidate.

        In other words, you are contributing to Obama winning a second term? That’s an accurate statement isn’t it?

        ALso, isn’t it unrealistic to think that you will always get your way, your candidate, your principles, and your beliefs? Isn’t the whole purpose of governing, to compromise, and to “govern”.

        you seem to lien toward totalitarianism if you ask me.

      • GreenMountainBoy July 5, 2011 / 3:52 pm

        To vote for a progressive , no matter what letter he has after his name, is in my opinion, just contributing to the decline. You are free to vote for whomever you want. I am not trying to convice you otherwise. The same goes for me, I am free to vote or not vote for whoever I want.
        The republicans need to make up thier mind wheather they want to be in opposition to the progressives or go along with them. As soon as they make up thier mind what kind of political party they want to be, people with either come back or leave for good.
        The republican party left me. I did not leave them.

      • Amazona July 5, 2011 / 4:06 pm

        “We both know it’s going to be either Romney, or Huntsman.”

        We do, do we?

        What we all know is that the RRL desperately WANTS/NEEDS it to be Romney or Hunstman.

        And who do they fear? Just look at who they are attacking to see who they find to be the biggest threats.

        I loveloveLOVE the transparent efforts of the RRL to choose our candidate for us. It’s the 21st Century political version of “Oh PLEASE don’t throw me in that briar patch!”

  3. Cluster July 5, 2011 / 1:38 pm

    Cool new look Mar & Matt – congrats!

    GMB, while I share your disdain for the DC cocktail circuit, and the RINO’s that serve themselves and cater to that crowd, I caution you from being so jaundiced on the political scene. Allowing Obama four more years to destroy our country because the GOP candidate did not meet your requirements 100% would be foolish. I can’t remember who said it, but I always liked the line – “I don’t even agree with myself 100% of the time” – and I think that advice may serve you well. Vote for the candidate you like best in the primaries, but be damn sure to vote against Obama in the general, even if your candidate doesn’t win.

  4. Sunny July 5, 2011 / 1:43 pm

    Mark, do you believe that eliminating subsidies equals a tax increase? Do you believe that the corporations making record profits should be subsidized by the American taxpayer?

    For once I agree with mtnboy that our representatives are only looking out for their own interests – on both sides of the aisle. They are more concerned about their re-election than doing what is right for this nation.

    • Cluster July 5, 2011 / 1:56 pm

      The dollar amount of corporate subsidies is a drop of water in the ocean when speaking about our financial mess that the government has us in. And yes, I like corporations making profits, that helps everyone involved; unions, employees, middle management, consumers and the government. Record profits just means that they are doing their job well.

      • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 3:14 pm

        thomas = tommiegasbagger

        new name SOS

        Im clost to being with ya GMB, NO RINOS, yer I did vote for mcLame while crossing my fingers and holding my nose…..ANY ONE but the marxist muslem POtuS

      • MontyBurns July 5, 2011 / 4:34 pm

        If they’re doing their job so well, why can’t we get rid of their subsidies?

      • MontyBurns July 6, 2011 / 1:16 pm

        Well, Cluster? Got an answer?

    • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 4:27 pm


      record profits to WHO?? = stockholders.

      stockholders, = 401K, UNION pension funds, working people, retirees…OH yeah all those horrible profits…….

      • retiredspook89 July 5, 2011 / 5:03 pm

        Sunny is an old-timer here, Neo. Related to Arctic Fox, IIRC.

      • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 7:38 pm


        Got it…..not surprising

    • FU July 6, 2011 / 5:33 pm

      “Mark, do you believe that eliminating subsidies equals a tax increase? Do you believe that the corporations making record profits should be subsidized by the American taxpayer?”

      Sunny, these corporations are not getting one single penny from the tax-payer. These “subsidies” are tax credits, which only reduce the taxes owed come filing time. These credits are earned through certain business activities such as expansions whether in capital equipment or their inventory. These “subsidies” are not cash payments by the federal government to recipients as an “energy subsidy” or some other entitlement.

      The word “subsidy” when applied in this fashion is misleading and the mindless drones eat it up.

    • Mark Noonan July 6, 2011 / 10:56 pm


      Certainly we need to dismantle the crony Capitalism built up by liberalism over the past 80 years…but to just willy-nilly eliminate all subsidies without also reducing the corporate tax rate to be in line with the rest of the world would be economic suicide. We’re already going back in to recession and my bet is that it will be far worse than the 2008 crash…lets not add to the misery if we can avoid it.

      In the end, my views are Distributist and that is what I’m aiming for in economics – a market freed from both Big Government and Big Corporation control; ever more people in control of their own means of wealth production; decisions being made as far as possible at the local level. To do this will require an end to such corporate monstrosities as JP Morgan-Chase…but it will also require the end of government monstrosities such as the Department of Labor, and so on.

      (I know – “what is Distributism?” immediately springs to mind. Best to get it from the horse’s mouth, as it were – the words of G K Chesterton:

      All who believe that ownership in the means of livelihood is normal to man, and necessary to liberty, and all who dislike and distrust the concentration of control advocated by Socialists and practiced by Monopolists…

      …are Distributists

  5. neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 3:16 pm

    you seem to lien toward totalitarianism if you ask me.

    NOBODY asked you tommiegasbag

    • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 3:18 pm

      Democrats are hoping that the old tried and true tactics of allowing the MSM – and its manufactured polling – to stampede the GOP in to going along…but I don’t think it will work this time. I think that when push comes to shove both TEA Party principal as well as political survival will rule the day: the GOP will stand firm.

      They had better, or there WILL be a third party.

Comments are closed.