comment: >
  
  
  It would need to be settled by the Supreme Court, of course
  
  Would it? Is there a case or controversy that they could hear? Someone would have to prove that ignoring the debt limit actually harms them in order for that to happen.
context: Just waiting for it to be called what it is, an act of domestic terrorism. >
  
  Or you know, the FBI/law enforcement to at least get a fraction of enthusiasm they had for the "war on drugs", or other stupid stuff they loved. Blows my mind how little fucks seem to be given over straight up domestic terrorism. Why aren't they throwing the Patriot Act around and all that like they used to? You'd think they wouldn't need a formal invitation to do their jobs, especially on something like this where they might be allowed to access/use the more "fun" tools and such.
  Figures the time we're actually threatened they take a back seat approach. >
  
  I’m in Eastern NC & have been hearing that the Moore County attack was perpetrated by law enforcement. >
  
  Honestly wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. Having known a few law enforcement, they're not exactly the stable types. >
  
  Ex-cop and now a fireman used to me my first floor neighbor in NJ. The guy plays music too loud that it could be heard from upstairs. The guy wanted to hang toys that are shaped like balls (human anatomy) from the back of his truck. The previous president of the condo association and a few neighbors didn’t like it, so they prohibited him from doing that using a by-law or something (I disagree with that decision btw). The guy sued the condo association and fought for almost two years in court about that. Whenever I see him in the stairways and said Hi a couple of times, he just ignored me (he didn’t to my downstairs neighbor), so I stopped greeting him afterwards. He would park his firetruck in front of the building to check on his dog/cat during the day while he is supposed to be working. Every time he makes such visit to feed his dog/cat, it takes about 30 mins and he and his firefighter coworker would just take it easy/slow while blocking a huge chunk of the parking space in front of the apartment. 
  Needless to say that the guy is very likely a stereotypical asshole ex-cop that we used to hear/read about (I mean there are very likely a decent amount of good police folks but I wouldn’t be surprised the profession draws a certain type of people more so than others. I also worry that when another insurrection happens, there would be so many cops, ex-cops, military and ex-military that it would be very hard to put down the uprising (my home country, Myanmar, always have been under military rule and people there know too well how police and army work together to suppress people there). >
  
  He probably didn't respond to you because you aren't white. I am half Irish and it really shows, but my name matches my other race and once some people know I am an other they treat me differently. Some people are subtle, some make tonedeaf remarks, some make racist remarks, some just avoid you. >
  
  Northeast US I assume? The racist attitude that has stuck around for a century+ in the US against Irish heritage feels so strange coming from the West Coast. Out there it was only the issue of "Mexicans" (Latinos). Is the Northeast really that exclusionary still? Kind of thought it was just a movie thing. >
  
  Its my non Irish side that is the issue. >
  
  Wtf. Why does this keep happening >
  
  Domestic terrorism. >
  
  Yes
  The neo nazis think power outages will cause crime and civil unrest so it can accelerate the "race war"
  Apparently this has been a strategy since the 80s or 90s in their nazi literature. Due to the current political climate it is becoming a reality
  Behind the bastards podcasts weekly discussions talk about the history of the this in more detail >
  
  
  The neo nazis think power outages will cause crime and civil unrest so it can accelerate the "race war"
  
  The problem with that is the country would already have to be heavily unstable for a localized power outage to cause people to flip out and riot. As in, "I'm not sure I'll be able to feed my kids next week for months now" unstable, not "man coffee sure has gotten expensive". 
  Otherwise I don't think we could physically exist anywhere that loses power frequently, as people would continuously be losing their minds every time.
  Realistically all they're doing is alienating more and more people they effect, and pushing law enforcement into more of a corner to act. It's not like they can only target democrats or "the enemy" by doing this, they're probably hurting just as many if not more of the people they have no disagreement with. >
  
  If the debt ceiling isn't raised in the next week, the government might shut down for months and delay Social Security and other program payments. The House is following the shock doctrine. People will reach the point of desperation quicker than you think. >
  
  While that’s a good concern to raise, there is a line of thought that the 14th Amendment renders the debt ceiling unconstitutional.
  
  The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
  
  Now, as this is specifically speaking in the context of denoting it doesn’t apply in the case of emancipation of slaves or insurrection of indebted parties, there may be some wiggle room, but the preamble of Section 4 of the 14th Amendment strictly establishes that the public debt shall not be questioned. So there is a line of thought that emerges from this: that as the Legislature has already authorized the expenditures that accrue debt, those expenditures will continue, even if we have surpassed the limit to the amount of debt the US can accrue by congressional mandate. It would need to be settled by the Supreme Court, of course, and that is… fraught, but the Court could rule that the debt limit questions the validity of the US Public Debt.