The Right Version of Government Shutdown Might have Merit

   I wavering in my opposition to shutting down our government. It is now two hours into that shutdown, and our nation will be debating it come the morning sun.
   The shutdown, as presently constituted, I remain tentatively against.
   I have warmed to the idea of some shutdown, though. I have not studied enough to have a good thought on what it will do to our economy, and defaulting on our loans. I do not favor defaulting, for if we have bills to pay, we should pay them.
   But, if defunding a program means we don't take out the loan to begin with, well, I kind of like this idea. I think there are a lot of things I'd like to see defunded. And, shuttering a few government offices -- just some -- might be a way to cut into our deficit.
   I have been one of the few who likes the Sequester. If we pick and choose what we are defunding, what we are shutting down, and pick only things we have not already taken out loans for, then this could be Sequester II.
   Only bigger.

. . . Liberty, and Justice, and Obamacare for All

. . .one nation, one payer, indivisible, with liberty and justice, and Obamacare for all. Now, if the Pledge of Allegiance gets rewritten that way, I don't think I want to take such a pledge.

Sooner or Later, the Piper Must be Paid

   Spend your way to prosperity: It's an axiom so obviously false. Yet, as a nation, we trully do believe it. Whenever our economy really gets in trouble, we give it a high dosage of stimulus spending because, well, we intend to spend our way to prosperity.
   But, behind the prosperity comes the piper. Sooner or later, the piper must be paid

In Politics, if You Don't have a Dime, You Don't have a Horse

  When it comes to politics and running for office, there is a rule:
   If you don't have a dime, you don't have a horse.
   America abounds with rags-to-riches stories, but there might not be a single such story on the political landscape. Not many janitors are back in Washington. Of the bunch in D.C., I would guess not a one made less than $40,000 before being elected. Not a one. And, I'm sure, not a one was elected while spending $40,000 or less.
   Not a one.
   Because, in politics, if you don't have a dime, you don't have a horse.

Party Should Include all its Members

   Utah is considering switching from a caucus-convention system to a system in which all the candidates are in the primary. Turning the decisions over to the voters is fair. They are the ones who should be selecting our leaders. It has been argued that the party ought to be able to select its own candidates. While that is true, who is the party? Is it the few, the party activists, just the convention delegates? Or is the party all the people who belong to it -- all them? I think it is fair to let the full party membership be the party, not just the insiders.

Does the U.S. Deserve Its Credit Rating?

   Ever wonder how a country can be $17-plus trillion dollars in debt and still have a AAA or AA+ credit rating? I do. Some would measure the largest debt by GDP to debt ratio, which is fine, and the U.S. might fare okay. But, I do wonder how the U.S. would rank if you just took the total debt, $17-plus trillion, and determined how many countries have ever owed more.
   And, a triple A rating, just the same, you say?
   Well, I read how a country's likelihood to default is the centerpiece in determining what its credit rating will be. And, the U.S. is considered a sure bet to pay its bills. I read how as long as we can print as much money as we choose, we can print enough to cover all our bills, so we deserve a AAA rating.
    Great, let's get the presses rolling. Paying our $17-plus trillion just became an easy thing.
    Actually, I don't think it would be as easy as all that.
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1080905118001/does-us-still-deserve-triple-a-credit-rating/

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_18633096

Government Intimidation for Downgrading Bond Rating?

   So, I'm reading along, wondering if there is any chance Standard & Poor's might again lower the U.S.'s credit rating as the U.S. again waits to the last moment before funding its bills. At the very bottom of the wikipedia article, it says another credit rating firm, Egan-Jones, lowered the U.S.'s rating not just once, but three times, and that after the second downgrade, the SEC voted to bring administrative action against Egan-Jones for a years-old situation.
   A touch of extortion or blackmail here? At any rate, I do not like it. This story might be a year and a half old, but it is still newsworthy. Our nation should not engage in such tactics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_government_credit-rating_downgrade

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/19/us-eganjones-sec-idUSBRE83I1BQ20120419