Town Hall Season: Rep. Ted Yoho Brings The Funny

As Town Hall Season continues, Representative Ted Yoho (R-FL), who recently claimed that Obamacare is racist, told constituents at a town hall that we should consider defaulting on our debt because creditors won’t mind.

I say, You know what, I know we need the money, and I’m gonna pay it, I’m just not paying you today, and we’ll pay you with interest, but we need to do a major reset and look at us internally, and say we can’t afford this …

… And so they say that would rock the market, capital would leave, the stock market would crash, interest rates would go up. I said, “Let me give you my feeling: Interest rates are gonna go up anyways. They went up the last time they raised the debt ceiling, interest rates went up … because we’re not dealing with the problem. We’re putting another Tylenol to the problem. And that’s not [an ad] for Tylenol.” So let’s just address the problem, and I think if we address it, I think the creditors that we owe money to around the world would say, “you know what, they’re getting their house in order.” And I think our credit rating would do better, if we did that than face the mass [sic] program we’ve been up to … There are several of us that we’re not raising the debt ceiling; don’t ask us. We don’t have a money problem, we have a spending problem.

If we default on our debt, our credit rating will go up! Creditors won’t mind at all!

That’s brilliant.

LegitFry

Just in case you slept through the last several years of Republican brinkmanship — defaulting on the national debt would have sweeping consequences. The national credit rating would plummet and borrowing costs would go up for nearly everyone as a result. There would be mass furloughs and disruption of essential services.

This entry was posted in Wingnuts and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Nefercat

    Where was this turkey last time his idiot cohorts tried this stunt?

    • micki voss

      still in the test tube

    • Dennis Collins

      Did anyone check to see if Yoho’s pod is ready for his return.

  • Victor_the_Crab

    Dear Ted Yoho:

    • Dennis Collins

      What an insult to a hard working clown

  • muselet

    Ted Yoho (I keep wanting to type “Yahoo”—I wonder why) needs to test his theory on a small scale before applying it to the country.

    To that end, he should stop paying his bills. If his creditors applaud and raise his credit score and give him a hearty atta-boy for making the hard choices necessary to deal with his household debt, then his idea should be seriously considered at a national level. I don’t think that would be the reaction, but maybe Yoho knows something I don’t about debtors and creditors.

    Until he runs this little experiment, he should sit down and shut up.

    –alopecia

  • stacib23

    Is this anything like my mother joking that stuff in a store (food, merchandise, whatever) without a price tag is really free?

    • Dennis Collins

      Uhhh no, your mom knows she’s just kidding.

  • Barbara Striden

    Here’s the difference between the right-wing crazies and the left-wing crazies: very few of the crazy lefties hold elective office.

  • Norbrook

    One might remind Representative Yoho that the last time Republicans played games with the debt ceiling, the country’s credit rating was downgraded by several rating agencies.

    The definition of insanity that “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results” is applicable to him.

  • Badgerite

    It seems that they think of throwing the country into crisis as a great opportunity for them. Kind of like Bush and his hitting the ‘trifecta’.

  • Draxiar

    Ladies and Gentlemen I give to you the implied “Party of Personal Responsibility”.

  • BlueTrooth

    It was the downgrade that impacted interest rates…better described as
    borrowing costs. Yoho plays it off like the threat of default was never
    mentioned in the downgrade analysis. But this type of ignorance is
    common when ideology trumps reality, on both the left and right. But
    when economic policies are driven purely by ideology, it just doesn’t
    work. As much as the right likes to pretend Reagan was the great
    ideologue, he was actually a great salesman. The natural conservative
    position should be to protect the rating and maintain the lowest
    borrowing costs as a fundamental principle. Which brings up an issue
    that’s been gnawing at me…are we misidentifying these Tea Party types
    as “Conservatives”? Limbaugh made a point of differentiating the “new
    conservatism” from the tradition of Buckley and even Reagan. Buckley
    would refer to the pseudo-Libertarian and Libertarian (Goldwater) as
    Anarcho-capitalists. Of course, that isn’t likely to make sense to the
    average political consumer and “anarchism” is just too abused. But what
    exactly IS this ideology? It includes the dismantling of the Federal
    Government. There is a core principle that accepts the complete
    dismantling and leaving only the States with a privatized Military
    funded through…well, that’s where it gets really grey. I’ve spent time
    in the trenches with these yahoos and the story is pretty simple. We
    dump the Central Bank and Congress takes over all monetary policy. We
    dismantle every Federal Agency and the States decide if they keep local
    offices functioning. The only purpose of the Federal Government is to
    oversee the military (maybe?), answer Constitutional disputes between
    States and manage the money supply (although States may opt to create a
    competing currency or allow competition within the State). There really
    isn’t a whole lot of detail beyond that other than “freedom” and they
    completely ignore the global economy. And with that minimally detailed
    goal, they’re busting down doors to get the ball rolling by bankrupting
    the “Federal Government”. They believe that somehow, the Federal
    Government can be bankrupted without affecting local or even State
    economies…let alone the global economy. The simplistic premise is that since a
    big percentage of our Nation’s wealth is held by Corporations and
    select few families, these entities will transition into providing services and capital due to market demand. But that just opens a new can of worms and a mass uncertainty that I suppose Buckley correctly identified as
    Anarcho-capitalism. Huh, whaddya know. If the shoe fits?