If S&P Downgrades America's Credit Rating, Which Political Party Will Americans Blame

[J.E.D]

Don't quit now

Maybe a few more big FONTs will convince others that you are correct

I don't need fonts to prove you incorrect. All I need are the facts, which are on my side. All you need to do is pull your head from your ass. Now sit down and shut up.. I'm done with your ignorant ass.

Just when I thought we could be friends
Sort of like Rainman with you playing the part of Raymond

You're a moron.

 

[Neotrotsky]

I don't need fonts to prove you incorrect. All I need are the facts, which are on my side. All you need to do is pull your head from your ass. Now sit down and shut up.. I'm done with your ignorant ass.

Just when I thought we could be friends
Sort of like Rainman with you playing the part of Raymond

You're a moron.

Perhaps

for wasting my time with you

 

[Divine Wind]

Who's to blame for S&P's U.S. credit rating downgrade? - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

After all the politicking, Washington now turns to its favorite pastime, the blame game. Republicans blame Democrats. Democrats blame Republicans. No one honestly ever accepts the blame themselves.

But in the case of the downgrade of America's credit rating by Standard and Poor's, there is plenty of blame to go around......
So who's to blame?

1. Congress -- The strategic decision to create its own crisis and make everything about political victories has sunk approval of Congress to a record low. .....

2. The White House -- In a difficult position, the president was trying to act like a teacher trying to settle down an unruly class. But while the grand bargain was the best outcome, the failure to strike it showed the White House had lost control. ....

3. Interest Groups -- The school yard gang. These un-elected private money backed groups are called interest groups because they only have their own interest in mind.....

4. The Supreme Court -- I bet you didn't see this coming. The Court's recent rulings on campaign finance reform have made a system full of holes even more porous. The court has removed restrictions on speech, unraveling the rules that were aimed to help voters and their representatives have a more honest relationship. The new rules allow big money outside interest groups have their say in numerous campaign ads that make members of Congress even more beholden to these groups who control the purse-strings and have nearly unlimited, and unregulated funding. The modern electoral system has born the dysfunctional government that we are witnessing today.

 

[BDBoop]

Whatever they didn't say in their official press release, they DID say when speaking to Anderson Cooper.

CNN.com - Transcripts

JOHN CHAMBERS, HEAD OF SOVEREIGN RATINGS, STANDARD & POOR'S: Well, thanks for having me.

COOPER: Why did S&P downgrade the United States' credit rating today?

CHAMBERS: Well, I think there were two reasons.

The first reason is the one that you have outlined, being our view of the political settings in the United States have been altered. We have taken them down a notch, the rating down a notch. The political brinkmanship we saw over raising the debt ceiling was something that was really beyond our expectations, the U.S. government getting to the last day before they had cash management problems.

There are very few governments that separate the budget process from the debt authorization process. And we also think more broadly that this debate has shown that although we do have an agreement that will and we do believe will deliver at least $2.1 trillion of savings over the next decade, it is going to be difficult to get beyond that at least in the near term. And you do need to get beyond that to get to a point where the debt-to-GDP ratio is going to stabilize.

COOPER: So it's interesting. You're saying without a doubt, the recent debate, the recent roadblocks in Congress, the tenor, the timing, the tone of the debate had a major impact on this.

CHAMBERS: Yes.

Which is where my sig comes from, obviously.

 

[Neotrotsky]

You have a very broad definition of "they"

Nor does it imply that S&P calls for tax increases
and he did say:

COOPER: Already on Twitter, other places, Republicans and Democrats are pointing their fingers at each other, at President Obama, at Congress. Do you blame one side more than the other?

CHAMBERS: No, I think that there's plenty of blame to go around.



The Left's spin is poor on this one
Truth is hard for the Left
But keep trying

 

[bripat9643]

We get through it by working together. Since we have a divided gov't, both sides will have to compromise. That means for Dems, entitlements will have to be put on the table. That means for Repubs, taxes will have to be put on the table. And both sides will have to put defense on the table. Until that happens, things will not get better, but worse.

You don't "work together" with a gang of criminals. You fight them anyway you can. There's nothing a productive citizen should dread more than Congress anouncing a "bi-partisan compromise."

 

[Trajan]

Well based of the article id say the tea party since they didnt want.to raise any taxes. Fucktards.
The american people would be smart to shun the teaparty.

That's what government officials claimed, not S&P.

Of course they are going to blame Republicans. What don't they blame Republicans for?

Aww... yeah, they're totally blameless.

The irony with ALL of this budget/deficit mess is that if the Republicans got everything they wanted by way of cuts, they haven't even stopped to realize that they would be responsible for putting even more people on the government dole. But pubs/cons never think of long-term effects of ANYTHING. It's only what looks good, sounds good, feels good, now, and they bank on the overall ignorance of the American people to believe that they have a "plan," when in fact, they never do.

not so;

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, Pub.L. 104-193, 110 Stat. 2105, enacted August 22, 1996) is a United States federal law considered to be a fundamental shift in both the method and goal of federal cash assistance to the poor.

more at-
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[saveliberty]

I made it up? Try pulling your head from your ass and read this:

CNN.com - Transcripts
COOPER: What could the United States have done to have avoided this?

JOHN CHAMBERS, HEAD OF SOVEREIGN RATINGS, STANDARD & POOR'S: Well, I think it could have done a few things. The first thing it could have done is to have raised the debt ceiling in a timely matter, so that much of this debate had been avoided to begin with, as it had done 60 or 70 times since 1960 without much debate.

So that's point number one. And point number two is it could have come up with a fiscal plan similar, for example, to the Bowles- Simpson commission [which included tax hikes], which was bipartisan. Although it did not have a supermajority vote, it did have a majority vote and came up with a number of sensible recommendations.

CHAMBERS: Well, it's going to take a lot to get back to AAA, because once you lose your AAA, it doesn't usually bounce back in that way.

But I think a key debate will be coming up regarding the extension of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, because if you did let them lapse for the high-income earners, that could give you another $950 billion. I think the question there is, A., would that be on top of we have already achieved with the $2.1 trillion, or would that -- if it was agreeable, which is a big if, you could envision that being counted toward the $1.5 trillion that the congressional committee is looking to achieve.

Wanna try again or are you going stick with your lies?

I don't give a crap what is said on TV. Try S & P directly:

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.

Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on
more comprehensive measures.

In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.

http://www.standardandpoors.com/ser...lobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8

The theme was spending cuts.

 

[saveliberty]

Well, let's HEAR what S&P said to explain the downgrade:

Some excerpts from the release:

[...]The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America’s governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy.

[...]It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options.

[...]The act contains no measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them.

[...]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.

Standard & Poors indicates that they could improve their rating for the U.S. if “the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating.”ref

All minor points to the overwhelming position that spending needs to be cut and entitlements in particular should be targeted.

 

[BDBoop]

Too bad for you
he will get all the blame
if the economy does not improve

typically yes he would, but this is different. not that you would understand why.

What will be remembered is this: Our country was held hostage by the Party of No. It was more important that big business and hedge fund managers be protected than that we raise revenues to normal rates.

THAT'S what will be remembered. When a small portion of Congress, led by Grover Norquist, lost their motherfucking minds and put ideology ahead of the common good.

 

[saveliberty]

Well, let's HEAR what S&P said to explain the downgrade:

Some excerpts from the release:

[...]The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America’s governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy.

[...]It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options.

[...]The act contains no measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them.

[...]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.

Standard & Poors indicates that they could improve their rating for the U.S. if “the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating.”ref

All minor points to the overwhelming position that spending needs to be cut and entitlements in particular should be targeted.

ah so they are now "minor" because they go against your talking point you have going on.

Do me a favor and shut the **** up. America doesnt need your kind.

Punkass leeches like you need me. I work and make your pathetic life possible.

Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden.

Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on
discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on
more comprehensive measures.

In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.

Our opinion is that elected officials remain wary of tackling the
structural issues required to effectively address the rising U.S. public debt
burden in a manner consistent with a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated
sovereign peers.

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.

http://www.standardandpoors.com/ser...lobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Before they lost their media monopoly, Progressives used to get away with complete total lies like "Tea Party caused loss of AAA Credit".

 

[Trajan]

Too bad for you
he will get all the blame
if the economy does not improve

typically yes he would, but this is different. not that you would understand why.

What will be remembered is this: Our country was held hostage by the Party of No. It was more important that big business and hedge fund managers be protected than that we raise revenues to normal rates.

THAT'S what will be remembered. When a small portion of Congress, led by Grover Norquist, lost their motherfucking minds and put ideology ahead of the common good.

who's common good? yours?

 

[appleannie1]

Credit Rating a Victim of GOP Sabotage

S&P points out what has long been obvious: Washington's inability to come to an agreement on how to close the large fiscal gaps that have emerged since the recession began is troubling. Recent events have sapped the agency's confidence that the government can and will do what is necessary to align revenues with spending commitments. And it's difficult to escape the conclusion that America's credit rating was intentionally sabotaged by Congressional Republicans.

Is the U.S. Credit Rating a Victim of GOP Sabotage? | Daniel Gross - Yahoo! Finance

S & P themselves said it was because of Republicans.

 

[saveliberty]

Well based of the article id say the tea party since they didnt want.to raise any taxes. Fucktards.
The american people would be smart to shun the teaparty.

The Tea party stresses a balanced budget and reduced spending. Both are firmly supported by Standard and Poors, Moody and Finch. Whine all you want, but facts are facts.

Um S and P gave their facts. Spending wasnt really part of it. It was the stonewalling that hurt us. The fact that we went up to the last day to sign something said a lot to them. They blame both parties for the downgrade.

But i know you are not an honest person so i dont expect you to understand any of this.

You apparently can't read or just choose to ignore all the references to spending cuts, particularly for entitlements. I'll give you one thing, your a consistent lying piece of crap.

 

[saveliberty]

ah so they are now "minor" because they go against your talking point you have going on.

Do me a favor and shut the **** up. America doesnt need your kind.

Punkass leeches like you need me. I work and make your pathetic life possible.

Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden.

Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on
discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on
more comprehensive measures.

In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.

Our opinion is that elected officials remain wary of tackling the
structural issues required to effectively address the rising U.S. public debt
burden in a manner consistent with a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated
sovereign peers.

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.

http://www.standardandpoors.com/ser...lobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8

lol i dont need you. I could careless about you or your life.
I lay concrete for a living, i dont need anything from you.

you do realize that had we not raised the debt ceiling we would have been downgraded to a D correct? No? didnt think you did.

Yes you are cherry picking one section and avoiding all the other reasons they stated. Why am i not at all shocked.

Way to be a hack.

I mean if you had a brain you would look at the paragraph you posted and know that is not the only reason:

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.

You see the red? They see it less likely that ALL those things are not going to happen or in the case of stonewalling happened.

You dont even understand the actual things you post. You are a ******* retard.

I understand cuts will be made automatically, if the committee of 12 has nothing or can't get something passed by Thanksgiving. It is always amusing to hear a retard call someone else a retard.

 

[KissMy]

Germany & China downgraded the US months ago before the TEA Party helped balance the budget.

Investors pulled money out of stock funds at the fastest rate in over two years in the month of June. According to data released by Strategic Insight, U.S. stock mutual funds saw net outflow of $17.3 billion in the month of June, the biggest monthly outflow since March 2009.