The other day, on the way to work, I heard a quick soundbite of Michele Bachmann claiming that she would not have raised the debt ceiling and that she had somehow been proven right on that score. And I assumed that I must have mis-heard, or that the damn liberal media had taken her out of context, or something, because there's no way that even Bachmann could think that that claim made any sense at all. But, no. I underestimated her delusionality once again. Here is the quote, according to Think Progress:
We just heard from Standard & Poor’s, when they dropped our credit rating and what they said is we don’t have an ability to repay our debt. That’s what the final word was from them. I was proved right in my position. We should not have raised the debt ceiling.
So, how does that make sense, even to a looney like Bachmann? How is it that she thinks she was "proved right?" I don't pretend to be an expert in the field of economics, but those who are experts have repeatedly stressed that if the debt ceiling had not been raised, the consequences would have been much much worse. The only way that Bachmann could have been "proved right" is if we had in fact NOT raised the debt ceiling, and things had turned out fine. Since we did raise the debt ceiling, there's really no way of knowing whether Bachmann could somehow have been right in believing that the US should default on its debts. (Although, come on!)
Hey, it could happen!
So, really the best possible construction she could put on this is that she had not been actually proven wrong. That is not the same thing as being "proved right." It's like watching a baseball game and saying, "I would pinch-hit for Smith, I would send in Jones, he'd hit a home-run for sure." Then, when the manager leaves Smith in to bat, and he strikes out, you say "See, I told you they should have sent Jones in there. I have been proven right!" You may feel vindicated, but there's no way to know whether Jones would have, in fact, homered, or struck out, or even grounded into a double-play. Things might have gotten worse if Jones had gotten into the game. especially if Mr. Jones is the baseball equivilant of letting the nation default on its debts.
Yer out! And so is your credit rating!
Of course, her entire argument is based on a premise which is either a lie, or a stunning show of ignorance, this idea that S&P lowered America's credit rating because we raised the debt ceiling, or because they were worried that America might find itself unable to pay its debts. In fact, S&P haver been quite clear that what concerns them is that there is a large faction within the government which is unwilling to pay. That's you, Ms Bachmann. You and your whole teabagger coalition
. Standard and Poor's is worried that you and your army of ignorant mouthbreathers seem willing, if not eager, to allow the US to go into default. And they worry that you and your imbecille caucus will be completely unwilling to raise the revenues required to pay our debts. The downgrade of our credit rating is YOUR FAULT, you pea-brained lunatic! You and all the other true-believer idiots who decided to play chicken with the US's credit, and got the corporatists to go along with your hostage taking.
And now I hear that Bachmann has won the Iowa straw poll?
. Standard and Poor's is worried that you and your army of ignorant mouthbreathers seem willing, if not eager, to allow the US to go into default. And they worry that you and your imbecille caucus will be completely unwilling to raise the revenues required to pay our debts. The downgrade of our credit rating is YOUR FAULT, you pea-brained lunatic! You and all the other true-believer idiots who decided to play chicken with the US's credit, and got the corporatists to go along with your hostage taking.
And now I hear that Bachmann has won the Iowa straw poll?
All in favor of Bachmann?
Aye!!!
See, Iowa, this is why no one takes you seriously anymore.
Also this:
