Round 1. Last week, Rush Limbaugh called CNN economist expert Ali Velshi a “Low Information Reporter” for ranting that “Republicans continue to use this (debt ceiling) language that somehow it’s to control spending. And it’s just incorrect”.

Rush was demonstrably incredulous that a CNN ‘economic guru’ would make the statement that the debt ceiling had nothing to do with spending, or spending control.

Round 2. Today, in the rematch, Ali Velshi threw what he may have considered his best counter-punch, in support of his original claim: “But let me explain again to Rush…the debt ceiling law was established to give Treasury the flexibility to borrow chunks of money without going to Congress to get approval every time a law was passed…it’s as simple as that Rush”.

Hardly a crushing blow. We anticipate Mr. Limbaugh’s comeback…’Unhh, Ali, can we interpret your reference to a “law” as meaning a SPENDING bill?’ (Besides, if Congress actually spent less than the government took in, who needs to raise the debt ceiling?)

Why is it we see this as a fight Mr. Velshi cannot win…?

(update) In response to an email from Kirsten H, BlueCollar notes that even though couched in coded terms, the foundational principle as suggested by Rush Limbaugh applies…debt rises as spending expands beyond available revenues.

Anyone with a credit card knows you’ll never hit its limit if you DON’T use the card.

CNN’s Velshi can code the word ‘spending’ in terms such as “every time a law was passed” or “every time a bill involving money was passed”, but no matter what flowery prose is used…they all mean SPENDING.

In the immortal words of Howard Cosell…”Down goes Ali…!!”