Skip to content

x

t

Menu
  • Home
  • What’s ConWebWatch?
Menu

WND Promotes Debt Limit Denialism

Posted on October 11, 2013

Unsurprisingly for a website that is trying to con readers into giving it money to tell members of Congress not to raise the debt ceiling, WorldNetDaily is rather desperate to push the myth that not raising the debt ceiling has no consequences.

Bob Unruh writes in an Oct. 8 WND article:

President Obama has been using the threat of a “default” to persuade House Republicans to fund his newly implemented health-care law and the rest of the heavily indebted federal bureaucracy, as well as end the government shutdown.

[…]

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi both have followed the party talking points, encouraging Americans to “avoid default” by having the GOP give the president what he wants.

The  problem, however, is that the Democrats’ threat of default is not reality, according to leading economists.

Unruh then repeats claims from various sources claiming that there is no threat of default because the federal government would still be receiving enough in revenue to pay interest on the money it has borrowed.

Garth Kant followed with an Oct. 9 article:

A growing number of economists and politicians say President Obama is just factually wrong when he claims the United States is risking default by not raising the debt celing.

They also say Obama is mistaken in claiming that failure to raise the debt ceiling would be a disaster, or as he put it, “insane, catastrophic, chaos.”

One famous economist even goes so far as to portray the president’s dire warnings as outright dangerous and irresponsible. CNBC’s Lawrence Kudlow accused the president of threatening “to pull the whole system down for (his) own gain.”

But as economist Jared Bernstein points out, even if the federal government paid its creditors, there is not enough money to pay all expenses, and that is “default by another name.”

Both Unruh and Kant reference the claim that default could be avoided by prioritizing expenses. But that’s a fallacy as well: Experts say such prioritization is unworkable and legally dubious, in that the Treasury Department doesn’t have the legal authority to prioritize payments.

Unruh and Kant dismiss or ignore entirely such arguments. That’s not good journalism.

Share on Social Media
xfacebookpinterestredditemailmastodon

Categories

Archives

Aaron Klein Alex Christy Bill Donohue Bob Unruh Brent Bozell Christopher Ruddy Chuck Norris Clay Waters Colin Flaherty Craig Bannister Curtis Houck Dan Gainor David Kupelian Dick Morris Ellis Washington Elon Musk Erik Rush Fox News Fred Lucas Gabriel Hays George Soros Hunter Biden Ilana Mercer Jack Cashill James Hirsen Jane Orient Jeffrey Lord Jerome Corsi Jesse Lee Peterson Joe Kovacs John Gizzi Jorge Bonilla Joseph Farah Joseph Vazquez Karine Jean-Pierre Larry Klayman Leo Hohmann Les Kinsolving Mark Finkelstein Mark Levin Matt Philbin Michael Brown Michael W. Chapman Mychal Massie Nicholas Fondacaro Noel Sheppard P.J. Gladnick Penny Starr Rachel Alexander Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Ronald Kessler Scott Lively Scott Whitlock Susan Jones Terry Jeffrey Tierin-Rose Mandelburg Tim Graham Tom Blumer Tom Olohan Wayne Allyn Root

  • Facebook
  • X
  • Mastodon
©2026 x | Design: Newspaperly WordPress Theme