The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Obama Lied, America's Credit Rating Died

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 9:02PM

If only Obama had signed on to the Ryan plan. Cuts so unpopular they would be political suicide, coupled with absurdly optimistic growth projections, are what this country needs.

Or the original Boehner proposal that had fifty billion-with-a-b in cuts the first year that would have only cost a hundred billion to implement. Boehner led the way in calling for fiscal sleight of hand and dodging difficult choices, but Obama passed up the chance.

The Tea Party, of course, deserves none of the blame.

rightasrain| 8.5.11 @ 9:32PM

Shucks, if only we pesky tea partiers had never politely pointed out that taking in $2 trillion per year while spending $4 trillion is a bad business plan maybe S&P never would have noticed.

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 9:58PM

Golly gee, no not at all! Ryan had it right, by gum! Just project unemployment falling to 6.4% by next year and then continuing to fall to 2.8%, and assume such low unemployment isn't inflationary but adds hugely to revenue increases and reduced expenses! Project a new housing boom before the previous bubble has finished collapsing! Project unprecedented economic growth! Avoid messy implementation details by taking in vague generalities about "caps"! Ignore the fact that the Heritage Foundations models have historically been overly rosy!

That's the kind of fiscal fantasy the country needs, and only the Tea Party has the guts to provide it.

rightasrain| 8.5.11 @ 10:13PM

No, the fiscal plan this country needs is a serious attempt to restrain public spending and rein in entitlements and only the tea party has the guts to provide that.

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 10:33PM

July Jobs report Is In.

U-3 Unemployment: 9.1 Percent

U-6 Unemployment: 16.1 Percent.

Obama will have a very hard time getting re-elected with these numbers.

gueppe barre| 8.7.11 @ 10:09PM

He will be re-elected because they will do whatever is necessary to steal the election. Furthermore, the zombies that vote for him can't even spell economy, they are already gainfully unemployed and firmly on the dole, and they're gonna vote for the free cheese, man! Keep your eyes peeled for dead men walking (to the voting booth)!

Timothy L. Pennell| 8.6.11 @ 8:42AM

Enron-style Accounting. Bernie Madoff-style handling of other people's money. A Ponzi-style Ponzi Scheme.
I know: Let's let them run our HEALTH CARE.

JP| 8.6.11 @ 9:47AM

Narky,

If only Obama put to paper his own plan... wait, but he didn't. If only Reid put to paper a budget, or presented Boehner his own plan... but wait, he didn't.
Nice try

WL| 8.5.11 @ 9:06PM

Where's QUIN???? and that list of "conservatives" who didn't want to hold the line????

I have an idea....Republicans and Democrats can both DITCH US TEA PARTY "TERRORISTS"...

GET US STRAIGHT TO AN F RATING!!!!!

While they are at it...they can blame US TAXPAYERS FOR NOT HAVING ENOUGH TO TAKE!!!!!

THEN CALL US BRATS...

To hell with em.

Occam's Tool| 8.5.11 @ 9:42PM

I'm here at Cape Cod attending a Conference, and, lo and behold, some idiot Liberal women are BLAMING THIS ON BUSH!

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 10:09PM

Those idiots! What, do they think that when we had a surplus we should have used it to reduce the deficit? That's nuts! A tax cut for the rich was the right thing to do and nobody can deny that putting that money in the hands of job creators paid off tremendously in subsequent years ... with reduced unemployment and economic prosperity which in turn resulted in higher revenue, decreased deficits and a smaller debt burden. Tell those silly liberal women to tune in to Fox News and get themselves educated.

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 10:20PM

Apparently, You're On Snarcotics.

"When President George W. Bush took office, our national debt was $5.768 trillion. By the time Bush left office, it had nearly doubled, to $10.626 trillion. So Bush's record on deficit spending was not good at all: During his presidency, the national debt rose by an average of $607 billion a year. How does that compare to Obama? During Obama's presidency to date, the national debt has risen by an average of $1.723 trillion a year — or by a jaw-dropping $1.116 trillion more, per year, than it rose even under Bush."

glenny44| 8.5.11 @ 10:58PM

Let's see. $607 billion/year = $50 billion/month. Not great, but still manageable. Let's not forget. Much of this debt ceiling increase was early in GW's administration (Clinton recession suppressing tax revenues, initiation of the Afgan/Irag wars that were widely supported at the time, etc).
Obama's much worse in my book.
glenny

W| 8.5.11 @ 10:15PM

Occam, don't accept any rides from those liberals.

MacDaddy| 8.8.11 @ 8:33AM

Especially if they say, "Oh, I know a great little place to watch the sunrise...we just have to drive across this little bridge I know of....

Mimi| 8.5.11 @ 9:09PM

We begged, We pleaded, We voted, We tried to stop the Democrat spending spree.....They noww have their wicked way ......They and they ALONE have done this to WE The People !
SHAME, SHAME, SHAME on them!

Sarah| 8.5.11 @ 9:43PM

where do you get your facts? http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix.....34x466.jpg

WL| 8.5.11 @ 11:48PM

Go screw yourself. You know good and well this is a phony graphic. As if....How in the hell can you live with yourself printing this crap. You need to go to hell.

gueppe barre| 8.7.11 @ 10:14PM

Where does this bs come from?

michael| 8.5.11 @ 9:11PM

You people are delusional. You are the shining example of everything that is wrong with this country.

michael| 8.5.11 @ 9:13PM

They could have quadrupled the spending cuts and the rating would have been cut precisely because such aggressive cuts without adequate revenue projections is a death knoll for a struggling economy. There are obviously no Econ majors patronizing this site.

danny| 8.5.11 @ 9:29PM

Michael, just an old country boy here. Do I hear you saying that if tax increases had been included in the deal all would be well?

W| 8.5.11 @ 9:38PM

michael. the "agressive cuts" were reductions in the projected increases of 8% per year after 2013. There is only about 60 billion in cuts in the 2011 thru 2012. According to your economic theory we need more than 60 billion in taxes to revive the economy? Or is it a higher figure? Obama has lots of econ majors on his staff, how come they did not know this economic gem and agreed to the DEAL, and why did Obama agree to continue the Bush tax cuts in December 2010. Even O said you cannot raise taxes during a recession.
Are you an econ major?

9th ID| 8.5.11 @ 11:54PM

You mean like your hero Keynesian Krugman? LOL!

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:47PM

BS! The governmental revenues as a percentage of GDP have remained fairly stable throughout recent history. The Democrats' call for more taxes is simply their desire to SPEND MORE MONEY FROM SAME INCREASED REVENUES ON MORE OF THEIR GOVERNMENTAL WELFARE, PERIOD. We don't need more revenue, we need more governmental spending reductions!!!!!!!!!

Dave| 8.7.11 @ 7:38AM

death knell

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 9:37PM

A minority faction of your party held the faith and credit of the United States hostage to push an extremist ideology, and now that you succeeded in disgracing this country you whine that it's the other guy's fault. Nice work. What tremendous patriots you are.

W| 8.5.11 @ 9:44PM

The deal passed because the Democratas in the Senate and House and Obama agreed with it. Your party controlled all three branches for two years and did nothing about the deficit and did not even pass a budget.
What is the extremist ideology? reducing spending when you have to borrow 40% of every dollar you pay out? is balancing the budget extremist? Do you even know the meaning of the word extremist? Be specific and tell us what is this extremist ideology.

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 9:53PM

Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.

Read it and weep. Jackasses.

W| 8.5.11 @ 10:14PM

the jackass is the symbol of the Democrt party, you moron, that caused this downgrade.

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 10:21PM

I like how you read S&P saying one of the main reasons they downgraded our credit was the Republicans total unwillingness to raise any taxes and come away blaming the Democrats. What an Orwellian fantasy world you people live in.

Warrior | 8.5.11 @ 11:11PM

Even if you got the $1.2 trillion that your dear Marxist President had asked for, it still was about $3 trillion short of preventing the downgrade. What a horrible redistributionist/Keynesian world you liberals are forcing us to live in.

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 11:16PM

I'll have to pull the rating report, but I know beforehand one of their concerns was the fact that the two parties were so divergent on ideas and debt ceiling was too short in nature, that they were concerned about the countries ability to raise the debt ceiling in the future, when necessary.

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 11:18PM

http://tinyurl.com/44xrv4f

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 11:22PM

Thanks. Glad they made this report public.

WL| 8.5.11 @ 11:50PM

I don't want you stealing any more of my money with taxes just so you can spend it on crap programs for people who didn't earn MY MONEY....what part of that don't you understand ?....BASTARD

BruceBerger| 8.7.11 @ 9:52PM

What are you talking about? The law of the land right now stipulates big tax increases on January 1, 2013. So, what in the world are you complaining about?

W| 8.6.11 @ 11:50AM

Talk about fantasy, Reid's proposal did not include any tax hikes. Obama's budget was voted down 97 to 0. Wake up.
How much of a tax raise do you want. be specific.

MikeBee| 8.8.11 @ 9:13AM

DRed,
Wrong, of course. We on the Right understand and anticipate that you on the Left know nothing about economics or history. You state that Republicans continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues. Wrong! What you meant to say was "raise taxes." Raising tax rates simply causes fewer revenues to the Government. Cutting tax rates (up to a point) has been proven, again and again, to INCREASE revenues to the Government (Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush all proved this). Republicans wanted the Bush tax cuts to continue; Democrats wanted them eliminated, and even more tax increases. This would have caused FEWER revenues to the Government. End result: the donkey party (true jackasses) wanted increased spending and fewer revenues to the Government. The responsible Tea Party Republicans wanted cuts in spending and continued higher revenues to the Government. We got mostly the Donkey-dream, and our credit has been downgraded, as expected.

Where did you learn your Macroeconomics? Harvard?

Nick| 8.5.11 @ 11:54PM

DRed,

"A minority faction of your party held the faith and credit of the United States hostage [...]."

That's right! And guess whose going to get ALLLLL the blame? Yep, you guessed it, President Ditherer!

Aren't you oh, so proud of O'Bama's regime for continuing President Bush's tax cuts, DRed? Wasn't that great?

Oh, yeah, and continuing President Bush's wars of aggression? The same wars the incompetent boob said he was going to end? And you morons believed him! Ha-ha-ha-ha!

And now, he capitulates to the T.E.A Party and is going to get all the blame! Next comes the double-dip recession!

Happy Birthday, President Ditherer! You go down in history as the first president who caused our credit rating to be downgraded, EVER! It probably will be the first thing listed in your obituary.

Just like "Second President to be Impeached" will be the first line of Bubba 'the pervert' Clinton's obituary. Not even the Polio Prince caused the nation to be downgraded! And he took a depression and made it GRRRRRREAT!

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 12:39AM

I hate to rain on your celebration of international embarrassment, but the American public was in favor of compromising on a package of tax hikes and spending cutting, and they, like S&P are going to hold the Republican party more responsible.

I thought continuing the Bush tax cuts was a mistake. But you guys claimed they were necessary to create jobs and restore our economic prosperity. Now you seem overjoyed that they might be leading us back into recession. I confess, I don't see what you're so happy about, my friend. I'd much rather be wrong and have the country do well than be right than have all of us suffer.

Truth to Power| 8.6.11 @ 9:01AM

"I'd much rather be wrong and have the country do well than be right than have all of us suffer."

That isn't the way things work. You do wrong things and there are consequences. You push ponzi schemes and our country will pay. That is what is happening in Europe as well. It is time to pull your head out of the sand and pull in the right direction.

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 11:24AM

DRed,

Keep living in your fantasy land. You wouldn't know what the American people wanted if your life depended on it.

The O'Bama regime will be blamed, and rightly so. Too many Americans think the president has control of the economy.

President Ditherer will go the way of the incompetent peanut farmer, unless he gets smart, and triangulates like Bubba 'the pervert' Clinton. But, I believe it's too late.

Liberal policies lead to disasters such as this one. Like I stated, get ready for the double-dip recession.

You keep defending this Bush-clone, DRed. Because, when you defend O'Bama, you defend his extension of President Bush's tax cuts and the continuing of his wars of aggression.

Next thing you know, Ditherer is going gut MediCare. Oh, wait, he already did that with O'BamaCare! I forgot.

Maybe he'll go after Socialist Security next, like President Bush did. Will you still defend the incompetent boob then, DRed?

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 11:52AM

Nick, I'm basing my comments about who the public is blaming for this fiasco on the polls I've read. I know polls aren't a perfect reflection of what the American public wants, but I don't know of any better evidence. Do you? Why do you think Obama should rightly be blamed for the tea party republicans willingness to default on our obligations rather than compromise?

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 12:38PM

DRed,

Polls change with the wind. But, modern electoral history shows that the public punishes the president for a bad economy, whether real or perceived, e.g. the elections of '80 (real) and '92 (perceived.)

All the "default" hype was, just that, hype. Did we default on August 2nd? No, we did not. It was a bogus deadline. So, the T.E.A. Party Republicans weren't willing to "default on our obligations." Lefty talking points don't work here, DRed, you should know that by now.

The O'Bama regime is at fault because they've known about the debt limit ceiling since last November, and they did nothing but play games. They put O'Biden in charge. Was that being serious? Nope.

I've been extremely harsh on the GOP, but, for the fact that they didn't make O'Bama grovel on his knees, like they should have.

That fact that President Ditherer will get all the blame, is only a little satisfying.

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 12:54PM

Nick, you've lost me again. We didn't default on August 2nd, because we raised the debt ceiling. I'm not sure how that proves the deadline was bogus.

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 1:49PM

I know this is tough for you, a bleeding heart lefty, to understand, DRed.

We didn't default because the deadline was phony. Did we default at 12:00 A.M. on August 2nd? No, we did not. Had we defaulted by the time O'Bama signed the bill into law at around mid-day? Again, no.

So, the August 2nd deadline was bogus. Had no deal been achieved, we wouldn't have defaulted on August 3rd, either. We would have kept paying our obligations.

Hey, if President Ditherer is so great, why didn't he use the 14th Amendment to increase the debt limit, like his kook base wanted? You liberals hitched your wagons to this loser, now we all have to deal with the consequences.

Gee, do the American people remember that O'Bama got Usama? Umm....no, they don't. Their on vacation, or watching Big Brother.

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 2:14PM

You're probably right about the Aug. 2 deadline being phony. Maybe we could have cobbled together enough money to last a few more days or weeks and then run out of money and defaulted on our obligations. Is that what you would have done? That doesn't seem like much of a plan.

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 6:10PM

DRed,

I already told you my plan. They should have made O'Bama grovel. President Ditherer would have done anything, anything to make sure we didn't go through this a year from now.

The GOP leadership failed to capitalize on this fact. They should have bled him dry.

Also, the experts that I saw said we had over a month before we even had to start to worry about a default.

Again, you keep defending your Bush-clone. The double-dip is just around the corner. If the O'Bama regime doesn't implement some free market policies, post haste, it's peanut farmer time!

BruceBerger| 8.7.11 @ 9:54PM

Dred,

Why didn't the Dems raise the debt ceiling at the end of last year? They certainly could have done so.

JmsA| 8.5.11 @ 9:41PM

UNPRECEDENTED!

Pete| 8.5.11 @ 9:52PM

Listen to the Lefties whine.

And why? Because they know the credit downgrade is another nail in the coffin of their bloated (and immoral) welfare state. It will make more debt more expensive and hence less likely to be used to the reckless extent it has been. This is good.

There's also fear on a part of a lot of them. They fear that they'll be thrown out of the cocoon government jobs and face the dreaded private for the first time in their lives.

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 10:05PM

Bravissimo! When people are losing their jobs and homes at an even faster rate they'll blame one man and one man only: Obama.

I hope the GOP is strategizing right now about how to ratchet up the pain level in this country, so that someone like Sarah Palin can step in and rescue this country by cutting entitlement spending to the bone!

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 10:29PM

Narky,

If you could answer with minimal snark and maximum specifics, what debt-ceiling plan would have been acceptable to you?

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 10:51PM

The Ryan plan is the only one that was really true to Tea Party Principles. It alone used the kind of fiscal fantasy needed to rationalize the kind of solutions that we, and by we I mean people who are financially secure, need.

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 11:30PM

In other words continue the insane spending until we're downgraded (check), interest rates spike (that's coming) and the dollar is reduced to nothing (coming as well).

You, like your boy Obama, have no plan.

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 11:45PM

Ryan? Darling of the Tea Party? I'm talking about HIS plan.

Nobody else had the guts to project economic growth as high as he did. Nobody else had the nerves of steel needed to project a housing boom at a time when foreclosures are increasing. Nobody else was willing to stand up in front of voters and say that under his plan unemployment would drop suddenly and continue dropping to unprecedented lows.

Those are the kind of bold visions of fiscal fantasy that you simply can't get from idiot liberals with their "economists" and "economic history" and "reality". You need the Tea Party for that kind of visionary thinking.

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 10:56PM

While I agree the fiscal sanity the past couple of years has been criminal, it didn't start w/ Obama (no excuse to continue). I'm all for cutting taxes, but if you are going to do that you need to cut spending too. Don't create new entitlements and don't start trillion dollar wars just to try and save daddy's image. If we would have tried continuing the success of the late 90s, we'd all be in much better shape for countless reasons. Now we're forced to cut by drastic amounts (I'm not talking about the de minimis amounts in last week's agreements, but what's in store, just to get back to even at the worst possible time). Additionally, while no one should be excused for their actions, it's harder to blame individuals for spending like drunken sailors when Uncle Sam (both dems and repubs) were spending like a drunken navy.

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 10:28PM

Major ratings firms -- namely Standard & Poor's and Moody's -- have said even if the country raises the debt ceiling and doesn't default, there's a strong likelihood that the triple-A bond rating will be cut to double-A unless a budget can be crafted that results in $4 trillion in savings, the result of the massive debt load the country has accumulated in recent years. The nation's outstanding debt is more than $14 trillion.

A senior banking official told FOX Business that administration officials have provided guidance to them that even though a default is off the table, a downgrade "is a real possibility for no other reason than S&P and Moody's have to cover (themselves) since they've been speaking out on the debt cap so much."

Matthew Vadum | 8.5.11 @ 10:31PM

That's complete BS, Clint. The AAA should have been downgraded a long time ago.

victor| 8.6.11 @ 1:47AM

When would that have been Matthew, eh?
The aforementioned Nikola G. Swann wrote in June of 2009:

Why the U.S. Government Is Still Rated AAA
http://www.businessweek.com/in.....rss_search

We were in a mess then, we are in a mess now, the only difference is that we booted out 600 democrats across the country and swept the vermin, well, nearly all, out of the House.

What is complete BS is that our credit rating needs to be downgraded.

What needs to be downgraded severely is our spending.
Our credit cards are maxxed out and we still want to call the banks and ask for more credit.
The only way out is to use the 6 Billion Dollars that comes in daily to the Treasury more wisely and spend it on things that we need, not want.
How about cutting the EPA, Planned Parenthood, the IMF, ACORN, Dept of Energy, Education, etc.
There's a difference between obligations and debt.
Look at your own house, mortgage, rent, utilities, phone, you are obliged to pay those.
Cell phone, cable, DishTV, credit cards, those are debts you are not obliged to incur.

The president and his treasury sec'y both lied when they said that they cannot prioritze spending.

In 1985, under circumstances very similar to the debt ceiling crisis of today, the U.S. Government Accountability Office issued an opinion asserting that the Secretary of the Treasury is within his rights to not only prioritize debt service over domestic spending, but also more broadly “liquidate obligations in any order it finds will best serve the interests of the United States” in a situation where Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling. The GAO reaffirmed that position in May of this year and an independent report from the Bipartisan Policy Center agreed that the Executive Branch may be forced to simply “pick winners and losers.”

They can pay SS, Medicare, Military payrolls, veteran's benefits, interest on the debt, bondholders and push off til the next month or further some of the more outrageous debts.

That six billion dollars will not stop coming in and the president, if he had any testicular fortitude, would do just that, but he won't.

Matthew Vadum | 8.6.11 @ 5:45PM

Victor, you seem to be yet another guy who doesn't understand public finance.

I don't claim to be an expert on these things but I know from covering public debt markets for 7 years at The Bond Buyer newspaper that S&P downgraded the U.S. sovereign debt rating because it no longer is as confident as it used to be that the U.S. can meet its long-term financial obligations.

AA-plus isn't a bad rating per se, but it's a far cry from AAA. S&P was simply acknowledging reality, which is that the U.S. government doesn't have its fiscal house in order. As a result U.S. sovereign debt is no longer the benchmark against which all other sovereign credits are judged.

Did the U.S. deserve the downgrade? You betcha.

P.S. The phrase is intestinal fortitude, not testicular fortitude, though I think I know what you're getting at. A clever revitalized cliche certainly.

victor| 8.7.11 @ 2:56AM

Matthew Vadum:
"yet another guy who doesn't understand"

I understand finance, having to go through much the same thing; i.e. too many debts and obligations and not enough capital.
You have to pay what you must and put off what you can.
I included the quote from the GAO in the 80's to show that it can be done, and it must be done.
It won't because we have a callow youth in the White House who never managed anything, never met a payroll or even, apparently, balanced a checkbook.
History tells him that he can do it, but he chooses not to.

Since the Treasury is under the jurisdiction of the White House, they most certainly can set priorities, but the won't in order to further exploit the situation.

If we had an honest press, they would be hammering Obama when he says he cannot pay anything.

The reality is, is that the press has aided and abetted him in his crime of ignorance.

If we had a real president,he would have set the priorities and made them work.

The further reality is, is that if we had a president who set these priorities two years ago we wouldn't be here today talking about any sort of failure.

I agree, we deserved the downgrade because HE doesn't understand public finance and he has too many around him that don't either.

Because we have gotten so far from Article I, section 8, that is why we are in the straits we are in.

The Founders would have no problem impeaching him for what he is doing to our country.

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:02PM

Yep, they should downgrade each/every time the stupids of this country elect Democrats to any political office!!!!!!!!!!

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 10:41PM

What happens when China plays the adult and cuts of the kiddie's credit card?

Perhaps Bono can please our case to them to have our debt forgiven?

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 10:41PM

What happens when China plays the adult and cuts of the kiddie's credit card?

Perhaps Bono can please our case to them to have our debt forgiven?

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 10:43PM

I swear I hit the submit button once.

victor| 8.6.11 @ 1:29AM

Just remember Bob, the memory is the first or second thing to go.

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 10:44PM

Duuuuuuhhhhh !
The point was that Our Tea Party Candidate Dr.Ron Paul & many of us knew that the Obama scare tactics about raising The Debt Ceiling were Bogus .

"Speaking to a small crowd at an Ames hotel, ( Dr. Ron) Paul also called threats of a U.S. credit downgrade from agencies like Moody’s Investors Service “misleading,” arguing they should be ignored in the overall debt debate.

“If they couldn’t tell us there was a housing bubble, how can they tell us there’s a crisis coming?” the congressman said.

Paul, a famous advocate of small government, said the slogging U.S. economy could have been avoided with a wake-up call, if the Federal Reserve didn’t print money and instead allowed interest rates to surge."

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 10:56PM

Yes! Stop printing money and let interest rates surge ... that's the kind of hard-hitting solution that this nation needs in our hour of darkness and no matter what anyone says it's not a crackpot nutjob whacko idea At All, Nosirree Bob. What would we do without the Tea Party?

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 11:00PM

We obviously don't want rates to rise now. I think Paul is referring to the Fed's easy money actions during the better part of the Bush administration. Cheap rates helped fuel the housing bubble and encouraged much of the exotic financial innovations that liberals like calling weapons of financial destruction (I wouldn't go that far, but not entirely off base) as pension fund managers and others had to hunt for yield.

Matthew Vadum | 8.5.11 @ 11:14PM

S. Narky, you don't get it. Printing money causes interest rates to surge. I'm getting really tired of you economic illiterates telling the rest of us how these things work. Get thee gone.

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 11:24PM

Interest rates literally can't get any lower. Try harder.

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 11:47PM

Excuse me, MV, I was merely agreeing with the wisdom of Ron Paul as posted by Clint. "Paul, a famous advocate of small government, said the slogging U.S. economy could have been avoided with a wake-up call, if the Federal Reserve didn’t print money and instead allowed interest rates to surge."

You won't find stupid liberals coming up with ideas like that. You need to look to Ron Paul and the Tea Party for that kind of thinking!

victor| 8.6.11 @ 1:53AM

S.Narcosis:
"You won't find stupid liberals coming up with ideas like that."

You'll find them collaborating with the Red Chinese Communists to further downgrade and debase the dollar by not drilling for oil and helping devalue the dollar and switch oil to the yuan as the petrol currency, eh?

How about taking Paul Krugman's advice and simply print more money and spend it on more useless and worthless "shovel ready" stimulus projects?
Yes, that's the kind of smart and innovative thinking that liberals like to come up with, eh?

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:56PM

Paul was referring to the FACT that if the Fed did not institute QE I & II that facilitated keeping rates low [for welfare purposes] and allowed them to rise naturally due to periodic inflation from a growing economy. Paul was absolutely correct, but you didn't underatnad his correct point. The Fed's interest rate policies under Bernanke have artificially lowered rates by their printing excessive amount of money to asininely attempt to bolster this economy destroyed by this Democrat regime!!!!!!

rightasrain| 8.5.11 @ 11:18PM

I was hoping your snarcolepsy had kicked in. Any objective observer would admit that the tea party is the only group even trying to proffer serious solutions. Witness the Mack Penny Plan: it's simple, sensible and would balance the budget in six years. We weren't exactly wallowing in the primordial ooze at 2005 spending levels. To paraphrase Mark Steyn, it's August 1914, but you, however, seem content to play croquet on the lawn.

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 11:56PM

I love it! Cut "just a penny" from every dollar, every year for six years!

What I love about this is that there are a lot of voters who won't realize that to cut a penny means cutting enough to compensate for growth ... inflation, an increasing population of retirees, etc. ... and then cut a penny. It's hardly any different from the "don't cut anything" plan ... if by that we man making deep cuts to keep spending constant ... but the "just a penny" angle hides that. From the stupider voters anyway.

Just a penny! How hard could that be! Why, it doesn't even sound like you'd have to take much away from Medicare and Social Security and so on. Just a penny!

rightasrain| 8.6.11 @ 12:21AM

When your children and their unborn children come into this world already owing thousands of dollars (if there is still a dollar) to China, I hope you tell them that this is all because grandma was too selfish to cut a penny.

S. Narky| 8.6.11 @ 1:09AM

I can't disagree with that. What grandparent wouldn't give up a penny ... a measly stinkin' little penny ... to give us back some fiscal sanity?

The average social security benefit is $1,177. Can't they live on $1,176.99?

Oops, that's a penny per dollar. Can't they live on $1,165.23?

Oops, that penny cut is after cutting to compensate for inflation. Call it 3%. Can't they live on $1130?

Oops, that penny cut and adjustment for inflation don't take into account the increase in the number of beneficiaries each year. That's why social security spending is going up at something closer to 15% per year and rising.

Can't they live on $990/month?

Are they too selfish to cut ... one penny?

rightasrain| 8.6.11 @ 8:21AM

What is so sacrosanct about a program that has only been around for a few score years and was never intended to be the only source of retirement income? People have to reacquaint themselves with the notion of providing for their own retirement--especially when we are broker than broke and there is no alternative.

rightasrain| 8.6.11 @ 8:25AM

...because instead of those mean Republicans pushing grandma over the cliff, it will be you flinging your own children into the abyss.

Dave| 8.7.11 @ 8:25AM

@snark@1:09AM
Are you trying to say all those adjustments would't occur w/o the penny cut? Or that fiscal planners assume NO GROWTH in the number of beneficiaries? Or inflation? If so, they should be fired. Like Timmy G. And you.

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 11:35PM

Not only are your points lame, your snark is mediocre.

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 11:08PM

For the most part I really like Ron Paul, and 100% agree that their handling of the mortgage and structured finance space kills all credibility (add that to the fact that were some of the biggest beneficiaries of regulatory overstep -- i.e. the NRSO). While I like a lot of what he says, he starts sounding like a clown whenever he talks about going back to the gold standard. While I agree that central banks should abandon the dual mandate (i.e. focus only on price stability rather than price stability and economic growth) and look like the pre-EMU Bundesbank, a gold standard just isn't a viable solution. Outside of that, the Tea Party could learn a lot from him. For the most part he sounds like he knows what he's talking about. The Tea Party, and I do admire their message, partly to being rather grass roots (let's be honest, there are some moneyed interests pulling some strings) and being a start-up have a great message but have the message totally destroyed by a number of their just incompetent or unpolished messengers.

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:06PM

Well maybe old Paul ain't so smart after all, since we have NOW been so downgraded, huh? His overall point concerning their inability to previously predict the fiscal excrement coming out of DC from Democrats [the source of the 'housing bubble' from their AFFORDABLE HOUSING welfare of many years prior] is correct and well stated though!!!!!

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 11:08PM

Do Your Homework & Then You Might Even Be Relevant To The Discussion

"Ron Paul: Government is Already Defaulting by Destroying Currency

WASHINGTON - The debt ceiling debate is providing plenty of opportunity for political theater in Washington. Proponents of raising the debt ceiling are throwing around the usual scare tactics and misinformation in order to intimidate opponents into accepting more debt and taxes. It is important to distinguish the truth from the propaganda.

First of all, politicians need to understand that without real change default is inevitable. In fact, default happens every day through monetary policy tricks. Every time the Federal Reserve engages in more quantitative easing and devalues the dollar, it is defaulting on the American people by eroding their purchasing power and inflating their savings away. The dollar has lost nearly 50% of its value against gold since 2008. The Fed claims inflation is 2% or less over the past few years; however economists who compile alternate data show a 9% inflation rate if calculated more traditionally. Alarmingly, the administration is talking about changing the methodology of the CPI calculation yet again to hide the damage of the government's policies. Changing the CPI will also enable the government to avoid giving seniors a COLA (cost of living adjustment) on their social security checks, and raise taxes via the hidden means of "bracket creep." This is a default. Just because it is a default on the people and not the banks and foreign holders of our debt does not mean it doesn't count."

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:11PM

Paul is entirely accurate and correct, and Bernanke's/Obama's QEI,II [and no doubt the futuristic III also] is the gasoline to the inflation fire that is slowely igniting. With this ratings downgrade, all interest payed by consumers will no increase/explode. THANKS BARRY & DEMOCRATS, GOOD JOB!!!!!!!

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 11:12PM

The Above Was For Miss SNarcotic.

Glein| 8.5.11 @ 11:14PM

Duh! All economic geniuses and Republicans and Democrats have been lying to the American people. They are the elites so they get the goodies! They told the rest of the country to go to hell! Hey Boehner! Hey McConnell! How does it feel to preside over US humiliation! Good job cowards!

NadePaulKuciGravMcKi| 8.5.11 @ 11:31PM

the Friday night bombshell
serious as a heart attack
ZNN tried to lie too!

Ronald Ernest Paul
warned us in 2007

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 11:34PM

If you read the following (courtesy of DRed's link above), you notice 2 things. One, is the obvious concern for the actual deficit we're running up, but the second one is related entirely to the personalities involved in the debate. While I agree that the agreement falls significantly short of what is needed, and the fact that one party totally ignores economic reality of entitlements, certain elements of the Tea Party do shoulder some blame in the downgrade. I'm not necessarily suggesting that one had to agree w/ the plan or even vote for it (and remember a certain someone was voted against the last increase in the debt ceiling) but the fact that a sizable members of congress suggested that they wouldn't agree to any increase in the debt ceiling is both irresponsible and ignorant. While I'd love to swing to a balanced budget (really we need a surplus) overnight, the reality is we're far from it and will likely take a lot of hard work and plenty of pain to get there, the mathematical reality is that you have debt, your close to a limit and you running a deficit implies that you either increase the ceiling or you stop paying your bills (i.e. default).

We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the
prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related
fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the
growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an
agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and
will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal
consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week
falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the
general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.
Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public
debt burden and our perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent
with our criteria (see "Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and Assumptions
," June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41). Nevertheless, we view the U.S.
federal government's other economic, external, and monetary credit attributes,
which form the basis for the sovereign rating, as broadly unchanged

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 12:44AM

I suspect jrs and I would disagree on a lot, but he's talking a lot more sense than most of you. The fact is that both parties have been irresponsible. As far as I can tell, we need to enact both unpopular cuts to entitlement programs while taking the also unpopular step of raising taxes. You tea party ideologues, of course, are totally unwilling to compromise-that seems to be the major worry that caused S&P to downgrade our credit rating. You people don't want to govern. You don't want to be responsible. You just want to fiddle while Rome burns.

farmboy| 8.6.11 @ 1:31AM

Maybe we don't want to compromise because we have seen these deals in the past. Taxes went up and promised cuts didn't happen. As far as fiddling while Rome burns that was happening long before the tea party movement happened.

victor| 8.6.11 @ 2:02AM

Ask Ronald Reagan in 1983 and George H. W. Bush in 1991 when the democrats promised. pinky swear, that they will cut spending $3 for every $1 dollar in taxes.
The dems lied then, they lied last week and they will lie 2 months after they all drop dead

George S| 8.6.11 @ 3:21AM

What are the marginal tax rates necessary to balance the FY 2011 budget? 38%...40%..90%? How much revenue will that raise? How much money will be raised by slowing the depreciation of corporate jets?

Why raise taxes? Why not just raise the debt ceiling once again? This way we can avoid both cutting entitlements and raising taxes. Isn't that a simple solution?

But then again, remember how the media and certain lefty trolls on this site were crowing how Obama cut taxes for "95% of Americans?" Was that irresponsible?

Just exactly what costs a trillion dollars more in 2011 than 2007?

What did we get for the stimulus? It saved further job losses? So that is worth almost a trillion, yet saving further American lives against terror attacks by attacking Iraq and Afghanistan was wasted money. Bush's War... yet no one calls it Obama's stimulus. It's called Irresponsible Tea Party's Refusal to Compromise on Taxes.

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 12:34PM

The single best way to drive the deficit down would be to get Americans back to work. High unemployment is a much bigger problem than our debt. Any ideas? Keep in mind that banks and corporate America are flush with cash right now.

jrs| 8.6.11 @ 1:52PM

That's the hardest question to answer. Stimulus isn't the answer. Simplifying and consolidating regulations help. Simplifying and removing uncertainty over tax structures would certainly help. I'm no energy expert, but lot of talk about expanding energy exploration in the US could add more jobs and reduce prices, thus freeing up consumers to purchase other goods.

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 2:20PM

The thing is, the foundation for a recovery is there. Banks and corporations are sitting on massive cash reserves (the banking system has about a trillion dollars of cash in reserve, and corporations have almost two trillion). But there's not enough demand in the economy, because the unemployment rate is way too high. I don't think the problem is that consumers don't have enough money to purchase goods-at least those of us who have jobs. The problem is that there are too many potential consumers who can't buy things, because they're unemployed. Unemployment is the biggest problem.

celebs4truth.com | 8.5.11 @ 11:38PM

Watch...it'll be all out bedlam, and 3rd world status, blood and guts in the streets, and the general media will still be calling this all a "double-dip recession!" HAHAHA Anyone who listens to the Alex Jones show has known this was coming for a looooong time! It's only establishment/mainstream media brainwashed idiots that still buy the "double dip recession" garbage that they've been feeding the sheeple for months and months that didn't know anything was coming, whatsoever!

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 11:41PM

"The National Inflation Association released the following debt ceiling report to its NIA members:

NIA hasn't written about the whole debt ceiling issue over the past few weeks because in our minds it is completely irrelevant. Our elected representatives in Washington along with the mainstream media have been wasting thousands of hours of time and hundreds of millions of dollars debating a topic that has no meaning at all. The President, Senate, and House of Representatives are putting on a show to make it look like they care about cutting spending and balancing the budget. Except for a select few elected representatives like Ron Paul who care about protecting the U.S. Constitution and preserving what little purchasing power the U.S. dollar still has left, every other politician in Washington is putting on a complete charade in order to trick their constituents into believing there is a difference between the proposals from the Republicans and Democrats."

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:18PM

There is a difference between Republicans and Democrats, and anyone doubt same are the same morons who voted for HOPE & CHANGE in 2008 and hopefully have been GIBBS'ED upside their stupid craniums into the reality of 10% unemployment, an unimproving economy, $4/gallon gasoline, a ratings agency downgrade, a real estate market in the economic toilet, etc AND NO RELIEF IN SIGHT. Okay America, you got exactly what you deserve by voting for this Democrat in November of 2008 so hopefully you're enjoying the economic excrement which you caused by not voting for the Republican [which if you had done so, you'd be seeing significant economic/financial improvements from the recession now instead of staring at a double dip one now]. Yes, there's always a difference, VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!!!!!

Pecos Pete| 8.6.11 @ 8:09AM

What did anyone expect if Congress/president won't corral the rapid rise in deficit spending and debt growth.

In the real world rose colored lenses won't make life prettier or better.

martin j smith| 8.6.11 @ 8:40AM

DRED /jrs ( the same people or things ? ---Interesting having a conversation with each other. Wow and how much do you get paid ( You sing or plural ). This debt isue has been going on for decades, but Obama has spent more than just about all other administrations put together and HIS unwillingness to even articulate the word " free market" is telling. As to the Tea Party --they are very new in this game. And if anything it is the who are trying to push us to a more responsible economic policy. If the Socialists had any substantive arguments against them they would not resort to their only argument which seems to me to be about Marxist style rhetoric of class warfare and demonization. So, jrs and RED
you are both full of it.

marble| 8.6.11 @ 9:34AM

I believe all citizens should have to go to Washington D.C., while in high school or not, just to see that these politicians are just people, not celebrities. They aren't better than the average man and only appear bigger than life, just like the White House, because we see them on television.
I also think all politicians should have to take a basic economics class before they're allowed to vote on anything with our tax money.

Mimi| 8.6.11 @ 11:14AM

Watch the aftermath of this. Who shows leadership?, more importantly who says and does what!

Will they come back from vacation?
The whole country has been humiliated and
embarassed:Will any one apologize and make
amends to the country....WE as a NATION
has been harmed...What and WHO will step
up to the plate ?.....The NATION is waiting !

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 11:50AM

As I've told you many times, IT'S THE DEMOCRATS STUPIDS:

'......House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican and one of the architects of the deficit-reduction plan, reacted to the downgrade by saying “it is my hope this wake-up call will convince Washington Democrats that they can no longer afford to tinker around the edges of our-long debt problem.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat who also helped write the plan, said the announcement “reaffirms the need for a balanced approach to deficit reduction that combined spending cuts with revenue-raising measures.” Obama had been pushing throughout his talks with Republicans on the debt deal for what he termed the “balanced” approach that would include some measures to increase federal revenue along with spending cuts. While he was willing to accept tax increases that were dwarfed by spending reductions, Republicans drew a line against any policies that could be construed as raising taxes.....'

Boehner/Republicans would have tripled those budget cuts IF NOT FOR REID/DEMOCRAT who initially requested NO CUTS and thereafter INCOME TAX INCREASES TO SOLVE THE BUDGET DEFECIT. Do you all want your TAXES RAISED [on top of 10% unemployment and our economy in the financial toilet THANKS TO OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS' SPENDING THREE TIMES AS MUCH AS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION PREVIOOUSLY DID? Do you not understand that Obama's WELFARECARE AND NON-STIMULUS TO LABOR UNIONIZED STATE/LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PLUS DEMOCRATS' PRIOR SOCIAL LEGISLATION/WELFARE OF AFFORDABLE HOMES, CRA ACTO OF 1977, THE WAR ON POVERTY, THE GREAT SOCIETY'S COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCIES, ACORN, FANNIE/FREDDIE GSE'S ETC ALL CAUSED THIS CREDIT DOWNGRADE?

WAKE UP [STAND IF YOU WISH TO] AND VOTE REPUBLICAN. Bachmann, Paul, Romney and other Republicans are rightfully calling now for Geitner to go,and this has to happen in addition to Holder, Obama and as many Democrats as possible next year!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 11:50AM

As I've told you many times, IT'S THE DEMOCRATS STUPIDS:

'......House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican and one of the architects of the deficit-reduction plan, reacted to the downgrade by saying “it is my hope this wake-up call will convince Washington Democrats that they can no longer afford to tinker around the edges of our-long debt problem.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat who also helped write the plan, said the announcement “reaffirms the need for a balanced approach to deficit reduction that combined spending cuts with revenue-raising measures.” Obama had been pushing throughout his talks with Republicans on the debt deal for what he termed the “balanced” approach that would include some measures to increase federal revenue along with spending cuts. While he was willing to accept tax increases that were dwarfed by spending reductions, Republicans drew a line against any policies that could be construed as raising taxes.....'

Boehner/Republicans would have tripled those budget cuts IF NOT FOR REID/DEMOCRAT who initially requested NO CUTS and thereafter INCOME TAX INCREASES TO SOLVE THE BUDGET DEFECIT. Do you all want your TAXES RAISED [on top of 10% unemployment and our economy in the financial toilet THANKS TO OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS' SPENDING THREE TIMES AS MUCH AS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION PREVIOOUSLY DID? Do you not understand that Obama's WELFARECARE AND NON-STIMULUS TO LABOR UNIONIZED STATE/LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PLUS DEMOCRATS' PRIOR SOCIAL LEGISLATION/WELFARE OF AFFORDABLE HOMES, CRA ACTO OF 1977, THE WAR ON POVERTY, THE GREAT SOCIETY'S COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCIES, ACORN, FANNIE/FREDDIE GSE'S ETC ALL CAUSED THIS CREDIT DOWNGRADE?

WAKE UP [STAND IF YOU WISH TO] AND VOTE REPUBLICAN. Bachmann, Paul, Romney and other Republicans are rightfully calling now for Geitner to go,and this has to happen in addition to Holder, Obama and as many Democrats as possible next year!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 11:50AM

As I've told you many times, IT'S THE DEMOCRATS STUPIDS:

'......House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican and one of the architects of the deficit-reduction plan, reacted to the downgrade by saying “it is my hope this wake-up call will convince Washington Democrats that they can no longer afford to tinker around the edges of our-long debt problem.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat who also helped write the plan, said the announcement “reaffirms the need for a balanced approach to deficit reduction that combined spending cuts with revenue-raising measures.” Obama had been pushing throughout his talks with Republicans on the debt deal for what he termed the “balanced” approach that would include some measures to increase federal revenue along with spending cuts. While he was willing to accept tax increases that were dwarfed by spending reductions, Republicans drew a line against any policies that could be construed as raising taxes.....'

Boehner/Republicans would have tripled those budget cuts IF NOT FOR REID/DEMOCRAT who initially requested NO CUTS and thereafter INCOME TAX INCREASES TO SOLVE THE BUDGET DEFECIT. Do you all want your TAXES RAISED [on top of 10% unemployment and our economy in the financial toilet THANKS TO OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS' SPENDING THREE TIMES AS MUCH AS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION PREVIOOUSLY DID? Do you not understand that Obama's WELFARECARE AND NON-STIMULUS TO LABOR UNIONIZED STATE/LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PLUS DEMOCRATS' PRIOR SOCIAL LEGISLATION/WELFARE OF AFFORDABLE HOMES, CRA ACTO OF 1977, THE WAR ON POVERTY, THE GREAT SOCIETY'S COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCIES, ACORN, FANNIE/FREDDIE GSE'S ETC ALL CAUSED THIS CREDIT DOWNGRADE?

WAKE UP [STAND IF YOU WISH TO] AND VOTE REPUBLICAN. Bachmann, Paul, Romney and other Republicans are rightfully calling now for Geitner to go,and this has to happen in addition to Holder, Obama and as many Democrats as possible next year!!!!!!!

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 11:16PM

"[...] are rightfully calling now for Geitner to go,and this has to happen in addition to Holder, Obama and as many Democrats as possible next year!!!!!!!"

And this includes RINOs like Orrin Hatch and Lindsey Grahmnesty!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 8.7.11 @ 10:47AM

Agreed!

Nick| 8.7.11 @ 12:16PM

Well, I'm glad we could agree on something, OF!
Ha-ha!

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 11:50AM

As I've told you many times, IT'S THE DEMOCRATS STUPIDS:

'......House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican and one of the architects of the deficit-reduction plan, reacted to the downgrade by saying “it is my hope this wake-up call will convince Washington Democrats that they can no longer afford to tinker around the edges of our-long debt problem.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat who also helped write the plan, said the announcement “reaffirms the need for a balanced approach to deficit reduction that combined spending cuts with revenue-raising measures.” Obama had been pushing throughout his talks with Republicans on the debt deal for what he termed the “balanced” approach that would include some measures to increase federal revenue along with spending cuts. While he was willing to accept tax increases that were dwarfed by spending reductions, Republicans drew a line against any policies that could be construed as raising taxes.....'

Boehner/Republicans would have tripled those budget cuts IF NOT FOR REID/DEMOCRAT who initially requested NO CUTS and thereafter INCOME TAX INCREASES TO SOLVE THE BUDGET DEFECIT. Do you all want your TAXES RAISED [on top of 10% unemployment and our economy in the financial toilet THANKS TO OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS' SPENDING THREE TIMES AS MUCH AS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION PREVIOOUSLY DID? Do you not understand that Obama's WELFARECARE AND NON-STIMULUS TO LABOR UNIONIZED STATE/LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PLUS DEMOCRATS' PRIOR SOCIAL LEGISLATION/WELFARE OF AFFORDABLE HOMES, CRA ACTO OF 1977, THE WAR ON POVERTY, THE GREAT SOCIETY'S COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCIES, ACORN, FANNIE/FREDDIE GSE'S ETC ALL CAUSED THIS CREDIT DOWNGRADE?

WAKE UP [STAND IF YOU WISH TO] AND VOTE REPUBLICAN. Bachmann, Paul, Romney and other Republicans are rightfully calling now for Geitner to go,and this has to happen in addition to Holder, Obama and as many Democrats as possible next year!!!!!!!

Wayne | 8.6.11 @ 12:24PM

GOP needs to quite targeting medicare and social security. It is costing them votes among seniors and giving them to Obama.
There are over 1 trillion dollars each year in Obama programs to go after. Government workers are receiving pay and benefits for in excess of what workers in the private sector make. I know one new IRS agent, right out of college will will be able for 14 dollars per month, put her boyfriend on her health insurance. These are the types of things to target. Go after the SEIU, the department of education and the department of energy.

Wayne | 8.6.11 @ 12:19PM

Dems keep demanding tax increases, and fail to see the immorality in it. They expect the taxpayers to pay more in taxes for no new services. In the private sector that would be called EXTORTION.

We know that the pitch to increase taxes is immoral and an excuse to continue to pay the political cronies and those on the public dole for VOTES. It is about power, not the welfare of the country.

We need to follow the Coolidge methodology of less taxes (come GOP and start demanding LOWER taxes), and a reduction in the size and scope of government. The taxpayers are strapped and no longer able to support a welfare state.

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:22PM

Correct Wayne, and that's been true for all of my substantial lifetime. The younger generation needs to WAKE UP AND SMELL THE DEMOCRAT ROSES [IE EXCREMENT]. Their usual HOPE & CHANGE is pure propaganda masquerading their desires for an enlarged welfare state [paid for by taxpayers]!!!!!!!

Dixie Pixie| 8.6.11 @ 1:10PM

Well Obamageddion has arrived.
The Official Democratic Dogma is “Laissez les bons temps rouler”,
which is French for “Let the Good Times Roll on”.

Obama, Pelosi, the Democratic Leadership and the MSM all claimed if the debt ceiling wasn't raised the US credit rating would be downgraded from AAA to AA.
The Democrats and the MSM (but I repeat myself) also claimed if that happened an economic disaster would befall us.

Moodys said exactly the opposite, stating it was the uncontrollable rise in Federal spending and thus the raise in debt that would make it impossible to service the resulting debt, thus the ratings agencies would have to downgrade the US rating.
That has happened and now the US has the credit rating of Slovenia.

What is Obama and the Democrats plan?
Why to spend more money on themselves by laundering the money through the Federal Government.

Starting from a Bush level Federal Budget of approximately $ 2.7 Trillion dollars and adding the TARP / Stimulus of $ 900 Billion to that base line gives the current US Federal spending of $ 3.6 Trillion.
That is too high according to Standard and Poors.

Naturally, Obama, Democrats and MSM state more money is necessary, as in a further $ 2.1 Trillion in debt treated as Federal income.
That means by election day the Federal Government will be spending $ 5.7 Trillion Dollars a year!!!!

Obamageddion is just starting.
The Federal Government can not last if it takes in approximately $ 2.7 Trillion in revenue and spends $ 5.7 Trillion leaving a shortfall of $ 3.0 Trillion in debt per year.
The credit rating of the US is certain to fall to junk bond status as Worldcom and HealthSouth had better accounting practices than the Federal Government.

Can anyone imagine what a total financial collapse is going to look like?
We are certain to find out in the next Presidential Term.
Obamageddion is now starting to snowball and coming straight at you.

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 2:01PM

Since this subject is about the credit downgrade, please read the following TRUTH from a REPUBLICAN:

'....Boehner Blames Democrats for Credit Downgrade
Saturday, August 6, 2011 10:59 AM
By: Dave Eberhart

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, reacted to the news of Standard & Poor’s downgrade of the U.S.’s credit rating on Friday night, saying, “This decision by S&P is the latest consequence of the out-of-control spending that has taken place in Washington for decades." He added that “the spending binge has resulted in job-destroying economic uncertainty and now threatens to send destructive ripple effects across our credit markets.”

Boehner issued the following statement in a press release after the long-term credit rating slipped to AA+:

“This decision by S&P is the latest consequence of the out-of-control spending that has taken place in Washington for decades. The spending binge has resulted in job-destroying economic uncertainty and now threatens to send destructive ripple effects across our credit markets.

“Republicans have listened to the voices of the American people and worked to bring the spending binge to a halt. We are no longer debating how much to spend, but rather how much to cut. Unfortunately, decades of reckless spending cannot be reversed immediately, especially when the Democrats who run Washington remain unwilling to make the tough choices required to put America on solid ground.

“The Administration and Democrats in Congress had sought an increase in the debt limit without any spending cuts or reforms. Republicans made clear the American people would not tolerate that and fought for the largest spending cuts possible. With the Budget Control Act, we made a positive first step toward reducing the debt, but much more must be done.

“In May, I warned, ‘if we don't act boldly now, the markets will act for us very soon.’ It is my hope this wake-up call will convince Washington Democrats that they can no longer afford to tinker around the edges of our long-term debt problem. As S&P noted, reforming and preserving our entitlement programs is the ‘key to long-term fiscal sustainability.’

“Republicans remain committed to ensuring the United States always meets its obligations. Though we are outnumbered in Washington, we will continue to press Democrats to join us in taking meaningful steps to rein in our debt and deficits.”...'

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 2:19PM

PS: And more TRUTH. Enjoy tea partiers [and THANKS also]:

'....Debt deal exposed the meltdown of a movement
Andrea Tantaros

Thursday, August 4th 2011, 4:00 AM

The compromised debt-ceiling deal reached by congress signals the decline of the far-left.

Now that a deal to raise the debt ceiling and cut federal spending has been made, many have been quick to declare winners and losers in the battle that dominated the headlines for the last several weeks. But only one real loser is overwhelmingly clear: The far left, which was ignored, embarrassed and rendered irrelevant.

Originally, liberals - including President Obama - pushed for a clean vote on the debt ceiling increase. They didn't get it.

Liberals also pushed for a tax increase on top wage earners, including businesses, and came up short. In fact, the President tried to push the issue with House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and others in the Republican leadership and was strongly rebuked, because there was not nearly enough political appetite in Congress - on either side of the aisle - to raise taxes on anyone in an economic slump.

And the left failed to get its way in the discussion about automatic cuts to domestic programs if the "supercommittee" doesn't agree on $1.5 trillion in additional cuts by Nov. 23. Nor will there be automatic tax raises if no agreement comes about, just cuts - which is, again, mostly favorable to the right.

That's why some Democrats bucked their own leader and voted against raising the debt ceiling. New York's own Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who voted no (along with both of New Jersey's Democratic senators), said, "I do not believe this proposal is a fair, well-thought-out or balanced deal for our fragile economy or the millions of middle-class families struggling to make ends meet."

Ouch.

The reason that the right prevailed and the Tea Party was able to exert so much power was because there was no comparable opposition movement on the left. The once-energized army of Obama supporters has humiliatingly shrunk to political mediocrity.

That's because they have repeatedly run the same playbook: engage in class warfare, play the race card, insult the right, repeat. Instead of developing a workable agenda that would advanced their ideals, they have instead chosen to direct their energy toward the politics of personal destruction against conservatives.

They also have a figurehead unwilling to lead. Obama is far more leftist than most Democratic Presidents, including Bill Clinton and John F. Kennedy, but his lackluster performance and "leadership from behind" on major political battles have depleted his mandate and popularity, especially among his base. Even billionaire liberal George Soros' money can't fix that.

New York Times columnist and notorious left-winger Paul Krugman voiced his displeasure with Obama for what he called "an abject surrender on the part of the President" that would "further bolster his wimp reputation." And progressive princess Arianna Huffington said it was "laughable" that the President promised to now focus on jobs. What has he been doing the rest of the time?

Bernie Sanders of Vermont, the Senate's resident Socialist, has suggested that a progressive challenger to Obama in 2012 would be a "good idea." Though it's unlikely, it's a telling sign of a party in peril.

Besides the threat of an enthusiasm gap, Politico suggested last week that many of Obama's fund-raising "bundlers" are bailing, "For reasons ranging from disillusion and dissatisfaction to an overriding sense that the once-idealistic Obama crusade has become yet another soulless political behemoth, that inspired cadre of early Obama supporters has largely been replaced by professional Democratic Party operatives."

The increasingly irrelevant left has only strengthened conservatives. Not only are the Tea Party principles of smaller government and less spending driving the dialogue, but Tea Party popularity is ever-increasing. According to Gallup, conservatism represents the dominant political philosophy in the country. With 41% identifying as conservative and 21% identifying as liberals, it's the left that suddenly finds itself on the fringe.

What we're witnessing is the meltdown of a movement, a faction that's frustrated because it's been abandoned by its leadership, has a failed ideology and is devoid of new ideas. Well, at least since 1932.

Maybe that's why they're so angry at the Tea Partyers, calling them terrorists, as Vice President Biden recently did, and hostage-takers. But the truth is, the right is guilty only of appealing to an electorate that is sick of big government control, the reckless spending of our tax dollars on wasteful programs and socialism creep. They aren't holding anyone hostage - but they are now holding power, while liberals, out of ideas, watch with envy and rage.....'

Wayne | 8.7.11 @ 12:13AM

I would add, that the Obama supporters are generally too stoned to care much.

Oldefarte| 8.7.11 @ 10:50AM

Agreed. Stoned/inebrieded or whatever, Democrat political operative fork over booze/cigarettes etc and bus their constituents to the voting polls in mass, so don't let your guard down and become complacent!!!!!!!

MSpector| 8.6.11 @ 9:00PM

I read where Boehner is castigating Obama for the downgrade, and Obama deserves his full share of castigation. But Boehner ought to be honest and admit that he bought into the phony "baseline budgeting" scam and sold the GOP illusory spending cuts as "the best we could get." Every member of Congress who voted for this charade "got some ' splaining to do."

Oldefarte| 8.7.11 @ 10:52AM

True/correct, but again, the Rs were proposing governmental cuts while the Ds were proposing originally NO CUTS and thereafter INCOME TAX INCREASES!!!!!!!!

Solo| 8.7.11 @ 10:09AM

Anyone who would suggest that Standard & Poors downgraded our credit rating because we didn't agree to increase our debt soon enough has got rocks in their head!

The political component to S&P's downgrade was simply that our government went close to grid lock over the debt issue.

They would never specifically blame one political party over the other as that would damage their credibility (if you'll pardon the pun)...but we can extrapolate what they actually meant.

It is patently absurd to let yourself believe that our credit rating was downgraded because we didn't agree to go farther into debt quickly enough.

We were downgraded because we're eyeball deep in debt and the gridlock occurred because our government (largely controlled by radical left-wing ideologues) refused to allow an even meaningless gesture towards solvency without a nasty, knock-down, drag-out fight.

That and that alone doesn't bode well for the future of meaningful cuts to take place so long as democrats (and RINOs) hold any power at all in Washington.

And before some Kool-aid drinking lefty pops on here about "Revenue" (ie, taxes), let me remind everyone that the democrats claim that cigarette taxes discourage smoking....so what do taxes on business discourage?

51% of working Americans pay no Federal Income Tax. Are we to believe that 51% of working Americans are "Poor"? Really? And which party would be largely responsible for this "free-ride" policy?

And, if so, then what does that tell us about the effects of almost 80 years of "Progressive" rule?

The spending binge is over, folks! It's over! We either cut it to the bone and accept less or it collapses under its own weight and we get nothing, but, either way, it's over. And conservatives have been trying to tell you leftie jack-asses that this was going to happen all along.

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of someone else's money".
Margaret Thatcher

Democrats may be good at parsing the debate, but they can't parse the math. Not forever.

And..it's the math which got us downgraded.

Spam Spammerson| 8.9.11 @ 3:41AM

That you would BLAME one party or person instead of discussing solutions to the [ridiculous] rift that has grown in our nation is shameful. You have totally ignored all of the times Obama accepted Tea Party backed republican proposals which those same Tea Party republicans then refused to pass. That is how the non-crisis became a crisis and revealed government dysfunction. You cannot be both for and against the same thing! The Gang of 6 provided a bi-partisan plan but again it was stopped by Congress. Now they propose a Gang of 12 "Super Congress" like that is somehow going to be different? This nation must step up and face its own lack of integrity. YOU must stop choosing sides for the sake of ignoring the truth of the world. Frankly we DESERVE to lose face and DESERVE to have a bad credit rating. It is not that we cannot pay our debts it is that we are UNWILLING to pay our debts. That is what S&P decided on even after our president pointed out to S&P that they made an error of ~$2,000,000,000.

And for the record, the most popular Tea-Party backed republicans now claiming Obama is the cause of this were in fact those who claimed they got what they wanted out of this self-invented crisis. If THIS is what you wanted then THIS is what we get. The Tea Party wanted a fight for the sake of fighting and the nation lost.

The Thinkwe| 9.3.11 @ 11:59PM

Paranoia will destroy ye. The iron truths of economics decree the great unraveling. Like Sarah Palin, you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the posterior

The American Spectator

View all comments (131) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 9:02PM

rightasrain| 8.5.11 @ 9:32PM

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 9:58PM

rightasrain| 8.5.11 @ 10:13PM

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 10:33PM

gueppe barre| 8.7.11 @ 10:09PM

Timothy L. Pennell| 8.6.11 @ 8:42AM

JP| 8.6.11 @ 9:47AM

WL| 8.5.11 @ 9:06PM

Occam's Tool| 8.5.11 @ 9:42PM

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 10:09PM

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 10:20PM

glenny44| 8.5.11 @ 10:58PM

W| 8.5.11 @ 10:15PM

MacDaddy| 8.8.11 @ 8:33AM

Mimi| 8.5.11 @ 9:09PM

Sarah| 8.5.11 @ 9:43PM

WL| 8.5.11 @ 11:48PM

gueppe barre| 8.7.11 @ 10:14PM

michael| 8.5.11 @ 9:11PM

michael| 8.5.11 @ 9:13PM

danny| 8.5.11 @ 9:29PM

W| 8.5.11 @ 9:38PM

9th ID| 8.5.11 @ 11:54PM

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:47PM

Dave| 8.7.11 @ 7:38AM

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 9:37PM

W| 8.5.11 @ 9:44PM

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 9:53PM

W| 8.5.11 @ 10:14PM

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 10:21PM

Warrior | 8.5.11 @ 11:11PM

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 11:16PM

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 11:18PM

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 11:22PM

WL| 8.5.11 @ 11:50PM

BruceBerger| 8.7.11 @ 9:52PM

W| 8.6.11 @ 11:50AM

MikeBee| 8.8.11 @ 9:13AM

Nick| 8.5.11 @ 11:54PM

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 12:39AM

Truth to Power| 8.6.11 @ 9:01AM

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 11:24AM

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 11:52AM

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 12:38PM

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 12:54PM

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 1:49PM

DRed| 8.6.11 @ 2:14PM

Nick| 8.6.11 @ 6:10PM

BruceBerger| 8.7.11 @ 9:54PM

JmsA| 8.5.11 @ 9:41PM

Pete| 8.5.11 @ 9:52PM

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 10:05PM

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 10:29PM

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 10:51PM

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 11:30PM

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 11:45PM

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 10:56PM

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 10:28PM

Matthew Vadum | 8.5.11 @ 10:31PM

victor| 8.6.11 @ 1:47AM

Matthew Vadum | 8.6.11 @ 5:45PM

victor| 8.7.11 @ 2:56AM

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:02PM

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 10:41PM

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 10:41PM

Bob Grant| 8.5.11 @ 10:43PM

victor| 8.6.11 @ 1:29AM

Clint| 8.5.11 @ 10:44PM

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 10:56PM

jrs| 8.5.11 @ 11:00PM

Matthew Vadum | 8.5.11 @ 11:14PM

DRed| 8.5.11 @ 11:24PM

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 11:47PM

victor| 8.6.11 @ 1:53AM

Oldefarte| 8.6.11 @ 1:56PM

rightasrain| 8.5.11 @ 11:18PM

S. Narky| 8.5.11 @ 11:56PM