Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Math be damned, S&P downgrades US debt from "Great" to "Meh"   (money.cnn.com ) divider line
    More: News  
•       •       •

11622 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Aug 2011 at 11:51 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



774 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2011-08-06 03:49:56 AM  

Xetal: djh0101010: That's just farking great. Let's see. Which party controls 2/3rds of the government at this time? Right. So, let's blame the tea party, who is a minority of the minority third.

Wow, really people? Get your shiat straight and stop blaming a minor minority for the failings of the Democrats. Run the damn numbers and/or STFU.

/yes, serious
//no, not trolling.
///no, also not staying up, sleepytime. Post whatever Joker images you want, I'll check in in about 8 hours to see how badly the leftist idiots have mis-represented, or pretended to mis-understand my points.

////no really, by all means, leftist idiots, go on about how a minority of the minority in one of 3 branches is to blame for everyone else failing. Um, er, show your work and all that, if it's not too much trouble. Idiots.


You also should read S&P's justification of the downgrade. You don't have to guess which part of our government is primarily responsible for the downgrade, they come right out and tell you.

But then again, if you actually used your brain and read what S&P was saying, then you wouldn't be a pathetic Republican shill.


I don't know, but tea party isn't mentioned in their document.

http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheadername3=MDT​-Type&blo b col=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3​DUS_Downgr aded_AA%2B.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=ap​plication% 2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere=1243942957443&​blobheader value3=UTF-8

/Dumb assed Libtard shill.
 
2011-08-06 03:50:42 AM  

JohnnyC: I think it is safe to assume that will be the case for the remainder of his first term. His second term will go smoother I think.


There won't be a second term.

Obama: "I'm here to help"

America: "Haven't you done enough already? We don't need your kind of 'help'"
 
2011-08-06 03:51:55 AM  
To avoid a downgrade, S&P said the United States needed to not only raise the debt ceiling, but also develop a "credible" plan to tackle the nation's long-term debt.


No kidding? You mean raising the ceiling by 2 trillion again in 18 months is a bad idea? *facepalm*


The bill relies too heavily on cuts to discretionary spending, which is not the major driver of the country's long-term deficits. And it all but ignores the need to reform entitlements and raise more revenue -- both of which are key ingredients to improving the country's long-term solvency.


I completely agree with this assessment. We have to address bloated entitlements, like it or not. Sounds a lot like what I've said in several; other threads.
 
2011-08-06 03:53:47 AM  

Penman: JohnnyC: I think it is safe to assume that will be the case for the remainder of his first term. His second term will go smoother I think.

There won't be a second term.

Obama: "I'm here to help"

"REAL America tm ": "Haven't you done enough already? We don't need your kind of 'help'"


ftfy
 
2011-08-06 03:55:01 AM  

JohnnyC: odinsposse: Yeah that's nice. You know that a number of the same reforms you mentions were proposed by other plans like the Gang of Six plan? Except those plans were even better at reducing our debt because they also included tax raises.

You forget... any plan endorsed by President Obama was shot down out of spite. I think it is safe to assume that will be the case for the remainder of his first term. His second term will go smoother I think.


That is a dangerous assumption. It's not spite. There are two opposing views for the future of the world and they are fighting it out right now. Unfortunately, the people's defenders have feet of clay.

/Or you could take my mother's view, who I visited today like a good son, and believe we're just not living according to God's law and this is his punishment'
//Athiest *facepalm*
 
2011-08-06 03:55:11 AM  
s3.amazonaws.com
 
2011-08-06 03:55:35 AM  
Oh, and the "OMG This is the tea party's fault" people aclueless, and blind, and a large part of the problem.
 
2011-08-06 03:56:47 AM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: To avoid a downgrade, S&P said the United States needed to not only raise the debt ceiling, but also develop a "credible" plan to tackle the nation's long-term debt.


No kidding? You mean raising the ceiling by 2 trillion again in 18 months is a bad idea? *facepalm*


The bill relies too heavily on cuts to discretionary spending, which is not the major driver of the country's long-term deficits. And it all but ignores the need to reform entitlements and raise more revenue -- both of which are key ingredients to improving the country's long-term solvency.


I completely agree with this assessment. We have to address bloated entitlements, like it or not. Sounds a lot like what I've said in several; other threads.


Yeah, really it's defense that's the drain. We need to put about 300k grunts in the jobless pool and end all our farking Bush wars. Spend that money on America, not blowing up fundamentalists in far away lands.
 
2011-08-06 03:59:40 AM  
America's "AAA" credit rating has been downgraded. USa! USa! USa!
 
2011-08-06 04:00:13 AM  
"Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden ..."

They agree with the goals of the Tea Party.

"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."


They see Democrats as an impediment to long-term fiscal sustainability.
 
2011-08-06 04:00:20 AM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: I am just going to ignore the specific reasons that S&P listed for the downgrade and blame the other guys. GO RED TEAM!

 
2011-08-06 04:02:12 AM  

Slam1263: I don't know, but tea party isn't mentioned in their document.


Your URL didn't work... make a link to it or something.

Fail in Human Form: That is a dangerous assumption. It's not spite. There are two opposing views for the future of the world and they are fighting it out right now. Unfortunately, the people's defenders have feet of clay.

/Or you could take my mother's view, who I visited today like a good son, and believe we're just not living according to God's law and this is his punishment'
//Athiest *facepalm*


Oh no... I'm pretty sure it's spite. The #1 stated goal of the Republican party is to take down President Obama. If I remember correctly, wasn't there a plan or two that was generally endorsed by the House and when President Obama said he liked it, the Republicans and T-P folks suddenly didn't like that plan anymore? I seem to recall that happening more than once.

Ugh... Oh boy... yeah, because we all know that if there was a god, it would totally punish us by farking with our economy. No swarms of locusts or blood rain... just farking with the American economy... yeah... that's how a god would do it. (haha) *facepalm* indeed.
 
2011-08-06 04:02:51 AM  

Alien Robot: I am just going to ignore any paragraphs that make the guys I am rooting for look bad. So, all of them but two. GO RED TEAM!

 
2011-08-06 04:02:52 AM  

neongoats: Spend that money on America, not blowing up fundamentalists in far away lands.


I agree with this part. I have been against all the Bush wars. However you are simply factually incorrect about defence spending. Defense spending is a much smaller fraction of the budget than the entitlement programs, as mentioned by the financial experts. So, bring the troops home, and then start reforming entitlements.
 
2011-08-06 04:04:12 AM  

JohnnyC: If I remember correctly, wasn't there a plan or two that was generally endorsed by the House and when President Obama said he liked it, the Republicans and T-P folks suddenly didn't like that plan anymore? I seem to recall that happening more than once..


That has more to do with the tea party tilting at windmills than hatred of the president. The speaker would have taken the 85 - 15 deal but the tea party told him to shove it.
 
2011-08-06 04:05:01 AM  

Alien Robot: They agree with the goals of the Tea Party.


No... they agree with, "a goal", not "the goals"... somehow I highly doubt that S&P is out to undermine the President of the United States of America.
 
2011-08-06 04:05:19 AM  
I love the smell of liquidation in the morning.
 
2011-08-06 04:05:37 AM  

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

They agree with the goals of the Tea Party.

"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."

They see Democrats as an impediment to long-term fiscal sustainability.


Obvious partisan shill is obvious. Had you not been so selective in which parts of the S&P statement you quoted, your argument might have had some credibility.
 
2011-08-06 04:05:47 AM  
img263.imageshack.us

/obligatory
 
2011-08-06 04:06:57 AM  

JohnnyC: The #1 stated goal of the Republican party is to take down President Obama.


And Obama has been taking a moderate Republican stance on most issues therefore pushing the GOP far, far to the right, securing the moderates and independents in 2012.

The guy's a god damned political genius.

www.balloon-juice.com
 
2011-08-06 04:06:57 AM  
the S&P are some of the same tards that said CDOs filled with subprime mortgages were AAA, and then when it turned out they were junk said those ratings were just "opinions" not guides to investment. why the fark would anyone listen to that group of farking tards?

also, thank you tards that made the debt ceiling, which shouldn't exist since passing a budget is the same thing as agreeing to increase debt.

/excited to see what monday brings...
 
2011-08-06 04:07:58 AM  

Kludge: ThrobblefootSpectre: I am just going to ignore the specific reasons that S&P listed for the downgrade and blame the other guys. GO RED TEAM!



Yes I know you are. Along with a bunch of other sadly partisan sheep in here.
 
2011-08-06 04:08:26 AM  

Kludge: JohnnyC: The #1 stated goal of the Republican party is to take down President Obama.

And Obama has been taking a moderate Republican stance on most issues therefore pushing the GOP far, far to the right, securing the moderates and independents in 2012.

The guy's a god damned political genius.

[www.balloon-juice.com image 500x349]


You're a fool. He got rolled, you'll get over it.
 
2011-08-06 04:09:21 AM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Yes I know you are. Along with a bunch of other sadly partisan sheep in here.


Holy Fark!

'I know you are but what am I?'

trollingusedtomeansomething.jpg
 
2011-08-06 04:09:27 AM  

Fail in Human Form: That has more to do with the tea party tilting at windmills than hatred of the president. The speaker would have taken the 85 - 15 deal but the tea party told him to shove it.


I'm not convinced. I have seen far too much evidence to the contrary.
 
2011-08-06 04:10:11 AM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
R.I.P Ace of Base
 
2011-08-06 04:10:35 AM  

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

They agree with the goals of the Tea Party.

"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."

They see Democrats as an impediment to long-term fiscal sustainability.


You are picking and choosing quotes just like the other side is.
 
2011-08-06 04:10:52 AM  

JohnnyC: Fail in Human Form: That has more to do with the tea party tilting at windmills than hatred of the president. The speaker would have taken the 85 - 15 deal but the tea party told him to shove it.

I'm not convinced. I have seen far too much evidence to the contrary.


Such as? I'm here in the cheap seats with you but I've been pretty spot on with me assumptions.

/I've been hitting the key notes before they come out in the op-eds
 
2011-08-06 04:11:56 AM  

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

They agree with the goals of the Tea Party.


or they think that massive unfunded tax cuts while starting two wars and passing an unfunded expansion of medicare drug coverage is not sound fiscal policy...

they aren't saying that spending needs to be cut. they said that spending at this level without increasing revenues is a bad idea.

/also they are the still the farktards that rated CDOs composed of subprime mortgages AAA
//so what the fark do they know?
 
2011-08-06 04:13:07 AM  

Kludge: JohnnyC: The #1 stated goal of the Republican party is to take down President Obama.

And Obama has been taking a moderate Republican stance on most issues therefore pushing the GOP far, far to the right, securing the moderates and independents in 2012.

The guy's a god damned political genius.


That play has been tried before in other countries. It does secure the initial election win, but since it basically involves letting the country be driven off a cliff, it doesn't end well. Hardly the act of a political genius.
 
2011-08-06 04:16:13 AM  
You dont raise taxes in a recession
I wont raise taxes on the wealthy until the recession is over
I will go through the budget line by line and cut waste

I guess the rhetoric from he president is either lies, or comes with caveats
 
2011-08-06 04:19:09 AM  

Kludge: And Obama has been taking a moderate Republican stance on most issues therefore pushing the GOP far, far to the right, securing the moderates and independents in 2012.

The guy's a god damned political genius.


Not a moderate "republican" stance... A moderate democratic stance. You know... the same one he walked into the White House with. I'm amazed with how many people were convinced that President Obama was a liberal. I consider myself to be an independent and a moderate. My social stance tends to be a little more liberal (AKA freedom to be who you are, love who you are, do what you like as long what you like isn't harming other people). I think the realization that he is a moderate has come as a bit of a shock to those who wrongly thought he was a liberal, but Republican... he is not. Republicans don't give a shiat about the American people as a whole, he does... If he only cared about corporations and took as many heaping shiats on the poor, I would agree... but he's more about lifting people up than trying to crush them (which also tends to be the M.O. of the Republican party).

He will get my vote in 2012. I don't see how I could possibly even consider voting for a Republican after the shiat they have pulled in the last decade.
 
2011-08-06 04:22:30 AM  

odinsposse: TDBoedy: not true, in fact there was the Mac Penny plan that decreased the feral budget by 1% each year for 8 years and balanced the budget.

Why wasn't it actually brought up by the Tea Party in the House if it was the Tea Party plan?

All the future cuts ARE fake because the congress can only make lawful appropriations for the current year moran. They can't create a 10 year budget. Every future congress can ignore their proposals and repeal away the triggers and other shiate.

Our government's revenue is estimated at a little over 2 trillion a year. If we wanted to avoid a credit downgrade we needed to produce 4 trillion in debt reduction. You can't do that without projecting future budgets. Even your Penny plan depends on cuts through multiple future budgets. This is total hypocrisy and is clearly being done to try and brush off the fact that Democrat and bi-partisan plans did more to shrink the budget than the Tea Party.

The eternal problem rests with the fact that you and most of the population have been bought off by government promises...or what we like to call entitlements. Of course you aren't actually entitled to the entitlements the way you are your rights...but hey as long as you get yours amirite?

This is total derp. Pathetic.

To balance the budget you would have to cut 40%. That doesn't mean that every agency gets cut by 40%.

You would have to cut by 40% just to break even. That doesn't include paying down the debt.

a bunch of planned cuts

Yeah that's nice. You know that a number of the same reforms you mentions were proposed by other plans like the Gang of Six plan? Except those plans were even better at reducing our debt because they also included tax raises.


Tax raises aren't necessary and none of my response was derp. Breaking even is all that is required for a balanced budget which is only the FIRST step...which disingenuous motherfarkers can't under stand. Lets walk before we run shall we?

The reason that tax increases aren't necessary is because the rates aren't the problem. There is a deficit of tax payers due to the recession and taxing people more and employers more does not create more jobs. And yes an income tax is a job tax and so is the FICA tax because employers pay half that the employees never see in their pay stubs/checks.

I am all in favor of paying down the principle on the national debt. You know who isn't? The President and nearly everyone in congress. The government has the power to lay and collect taxes, but not the absolute right to do so. They have a fiduciary duty to not overspend in the first place as public servants. Its kinda like those jerk-off city managers making 300K a year but not doing anything to deserve it. You'd defend them by your current logic. And you'll deny that...or call it a red herring, but it is an example of government overspending whether it is for simple greed, more control over our lives or to start a war that you think is wrong...

The military presence is going to be winding down in Iraq and the "savings" were going to come anyhow, but it isn't honest to double count it as if it was a part of some decision congress had made to reduce costs. It will happen regardless of what congress does.

I'll bet I could balance the budget better than anyone in congress but you'd have a lot of laid off federal workers. I'd rather have them in the private sector anyhow where their earnings didn't come from tax revenue but they still paid in to the govt.

makes more sense that way. Govt doesn't have a net positive effect on the economy through simple spending. Even targeted spending won't do it unless the activity is designed to support economic activity. improving rail traffic is ok, making sure our interstates are in a state of continual improvement rather than simply patch and pray.

Our govt like our infrastructure is in a constant state of decay because we don't restrain spending. If we had some bit of self control then we could actually use debt to our advantage and do things like large infrastructure improvements much easier. But no we have to keep on spending. *sigh* its like talking to Chuck Schumer.
 
2011-08-06 04:22:39 AM  

Kludge: Alien Robot: I am just going to ignore any paragraphs that make the guys I am rooting for look bad. So, all of them but two. GO RED TEAM!


I felt some balance was needed. Did you not notice any of the many dozens here with the opposite point of view for the blue team? Scroll up to see what 'The Numbers' had to say about 'Xetal'. It's odd that you would call out only the one side. It's like you are just playing some game for political gain -- seeing how much you can tar the opposition.

Bottom line: right now you are only paying for 60% of the government you are getting. You are borrowing from future generations 40% of every dollar spent on government now. Sometime in the future people will get only 60% of the government that they pay taxes for to cover your present borrowing. No one will be willing to give up that much tax and get that little return. You must deal with that now. We should have dealt with it in the past, but that is behind us and we can only influence the present and the future. Continuing to ratchet that 40% up to ever higher percentages is insane. Down that path lies fiscal suicide. Spending must be cut. Government must shrink. If you want to see how Democrats react when even a small cut to government is threatened, just look at their reaction to cutting some minor federal subsidies to some rural airports.
 
2011-08-06 04:24:34 AM  

The Numbers: That play has been tried before in other countries. It does secure the initial election win, but since it basically involves letting the country be driven off a cliff, it doesn't end well. Hardly the act of a political genius.


I don't think you, I, or anyone else truly understands the serious, long-term damage that has been done to the GOP.

We'll raise revenues in 2012, get back on track and establish a AAA rating again. Much to the GOP's chagrin.

This image, taken just before the great crash of 2011, will say it all for generations to come:

phenobarbarella.files.wordpress.com
 
2011-08-06 04:24:36 AM  

Huck And Molly Ziegler: I agree with you persons. The fools who bought into the Tea Party propaganda were so embittered by their 08 loss that they were willing to bring about any ill circumstance in order to prepare the ground for their ascendancy.
They forgot elections, and stupid ideas expressed in public forums, have consequences in the grown-up world.


Not only opinions do have consequences. So does racking up new debts at a breathtaking rate without any plan or strategy how to exit the debt spiral. If the US wasn't so dependent on debts it couldn't care less about an AA instead of AAA or AA instead of AA+
 
2011-08-06 04:29:52 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Such as? I'm here in the cheap seats with you but I've been pretty spot on with me assumptions.


Such as they didn't become active until after it was clear President Obama was to become President. The fact that they endorsed the policies of the Bush admin and as soon as those policies were passed to the Obama admin, they started protesting (taxes hadn't changed... just the leadership). The fact that they show up at these protests with racially charged signs. The fact that they've tried to stand in the way of any progress that the Obama admin has tried to implement. The fact that they took part in the nations highest number of filibusters and votes of cloture in our history. The obviously racist views of their members. And so on and so forth.

Seriously... you really didn't notice the pure unadulterated hatred and spite they've had for the President (and the government in general) since he took office?
 
2011-08-06 04:30:15 AM  

Alien Robot: I felt some balance was needed. Did you not notice any of the many dozens here with the opposite point of view for the blue team?


How to annoy a liberal:

Fark the motherfarking holy fark out of the entire farking country!

It's not about 'TEAMS'. That was the whole point of my comment.
 
2011-08-06 04:31:39 AM  

T-Servo: WhyteRaven74: We have lots of money. The problem is where the money is, and isn't. A lot of it comes down to 20 plus years of stagnant wages. If they hadn't been stagnant, we're not even having this discussion, at all.

Fair point. Wages for most Americans are stagnant over decades. Taxes for those who increase wages goes down. Number of people in workforce goes down, demand on entitlements and Rascals goes up.

/throw in a war just for fun


Actually, total compensation isn't down, it's steadily risen for the last twenty years. Its just that wages are falling. Rising health care costs are dragging not only wages down, but the whole economy in general. We really need a solution for rising health costs, especially since our population is ageing. Demographics are one constant in human history that are unavoidable but also not appreciated.
 
2011-08-06 04:32:18 AM  

djh0101010: That's just farking great. Let's see. Which party controls 2/3rds of the government at this time? Right. So, let's blame the tea party, who is a minority of the minority third.

Wow, really people? Get your shiat straight and stop blaming a minor minority for the failings of the Democrats. Run the damn numbers and/or STFU.

/yes, serious
//no, not trolling.
///no, also not staying up, sleepytime. Post whatever Joker images you want, I'll check in in about 8 hours to see how badly the leftist idiots have mis-represented, or pretended to mis-understand my points.

////no really, by all means, leftist idiots, go on about how a minority of the minority in one of 3 branches is to blame for everyone else failing. Um, er, show your work and all that, if it's not too much trouble. Idiots.


Or you can read what S&P themselves wrote. This downgrade was caused by three factors, the inability to trim the deficit to the amount S&P wanted, the Republicans use of a procedural vote as a political tool, and the realization that the republicans will never let the bush tax cuts expire.

If you want to argue with S&P be my guest, but that is what they wrote.
 
2011-08-06 04:34:15 AM  

The Numbers: Xetal omitted to mention anything about 3, I believe deliberately, because it didn't fit with his own partisan narrative about who should be blamed for the downgrade.


I actually don't think you'll find many liberals who disagree social security and medicare are in trouble. The disagreement is in why there's a problem and what should be done.

Personally, I'm in the "it's because the baby boomers are retiring. The best thing to do in the short- to medium- term is to find other places to cut while increasing the efficiency of those programs, and figure out ways to reduce the cost of living for retirement-age people so we can spread SSL benefits thinner without reducing quality of life. In the long-term, we need to implement population control policy in the form of accessible birth control, reduced tax incentives for larger families, and immigration reform. Once our population growth is sustainable, those programs will self-correct" camp.

Make up the difference through tax reform, namely eliminating loopholes which allow American capital and labor to move abroad without taxation, sharply raising the estate tax and channeling those increases straight to social security at least until population growth is under control (yes, I'm an advocate of generational redistribution of wealth), and ending Reagan-era and beyond tax cuts which are one of the core sources of the deficit problems.

And for god's sake, reregulate markets and industries while axing defense. The deregulation and defense spending trend pioneered by Reagan has done nothing but harm to the country and its capability to generate revenue and keep it within the country. This is especially true in the case of deregulation, which has launched a thirty-year-long series of economic bubbles and busts starting with the S&L crisis of ever-increasing intensity, with the only beneficiaries being the super-wealthy.
 
2011-08-06 04:35:03 AM  
All these problems would be solved once and for all if we just voted the Democrats more power.
 
2011-08-06 04:35:42 AM  
Just passing though...
 
2011-08-06 04:35:46 AM  

The Numbers: Obvious partisan shill is obvious. Had you not been so selective in which parts of the S&P statement you quoted, your argument might have had some credibility.


I was attempting to provide some balance to the many here doing the opposite POV. You called one out earlier (Xetal). Here's another. And another.
 
2011-08-06 04:36:34 AM  
make me some tea [TotalFark] 2011-08-05 08:42:22 PM
Not surprising.

So can we safely say now that "Teabagger" is the appropriate term for these assholes who farked this up?


They downgraded us for the DEBT we owe, and WHY do we owe so much DEBT??? Because of the idiot-in-a-suit that YOU helped put in the White House, dolt. This is all, ALL Obama's fault. It happened on HIS watch, it will go down in history as HIS fault. What did Debbie Wasserman Schultz say--"We (the Democrats) OWN this economy!" and "this economy is has turned around under Obama." Yeah, it's turned around so much we've been downgraded for the first time in history. Way to go, dumbo ears!!! None of you libs can blame this on the Republicans--it's ALL Obama's doing.
 
2011-08-06 04:36:57 AM  

JohnnyC: Fail in Human Form: Such as? I'm here in the cheap seats with you but I've been pretty spot on with me assumptions.

Such as they didn't become active until after it was clear President Obama was to become President. The fact that they endorsed the policies of the Bush admin and as soon as those policies were passed to the Obama admin, they started protesting (taxes hadn't changed... just the leadership). The fact that they show up at these protests with racially charged signs. The fact that they've tried to stand in the way of any progress that the Obama admin has tried to implement. The fact that they took part in the nations highest number of filibusters and votes of cloture in our history. The obviously racist views of their members. And so on and so forth.

Seriously... you really didn't notice the pure unadulterated hatred and spite they've had for the President (and the government in general) since he took office?


Numero uno, I'm not here to defend the tea party (but, you're kinda forcing me into it in the interest of honest debate). Numero dose, yes there are racists in the tea party but I don't believe that's their overriding message and given the current political environment it delegitimizes your argument when you pull the race card (rightly or wrongly... the world sucks get over it). Third, I think the republicans would have filibustered Mother Theresa if they thought they could get their agenda implemented and finally... the tea party didn't get their funding from their backers when Bush was in office and in a political movement that is the entire ballgame. It's the difference between having a few protesters arrested (which happened on Wall St. and congress recently but you'd need to listen to Democracy Now! to know that since it wasn't covered on any of the major news outlets) and having bus loads of people show up to march on the steps of the capital with a 24/7 propaganda outlet singing their praises. They're useful idiots for the ignorant billionaires. The same "stupid" was always there, but it needs fuel to really start a fire. It's the same reason the activist left has miraculously disappeared once this president came to power. It has nothing to do with race, it has everything to do with agenda.
 
2011-08-06 04:37:36 AM  

A Fark Handle: also, thank you tards that made the debt ceiling, which shouldn't exist since passing a budget is the same thing as agreeing to increase debt.


Um, no it's not. Unless you think borrowing is the only way to generate revenue.
 
2011-08-06 04:38:03 AM  

that bosnian sniper: I actually don't think you'll find many liberals who disagree social security and medicare are in trouble.


Funny how Gore's 'Lock-Box' idea doesn't sound so ridiculous anymore.
 
2011-08-06 04:38:06 AM  

FubarBDilligaf: FishInABowl: make me some tea: Not surprising.

So can we safely say now that "Teabagger" is the appropriate term for these assholes who farked this up?

Probably stumbling into troll bait but the criticisms of S&P, and the reason for the downgrade, is that the deficit deal didn't do enough to address entitlements, which is exactly what the tea party was trying to reform. Democrats blocked those changes.

Yeah, sure, if you want to deal in reality, but this is Fark, where anything that isn't pure Left Wing Democratic drivel is depicted as somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun. You can throw facts at them all day long, but that "liberal reality bias" doesn't admit to anything that doesn't suit their bias on reality.


I am sure Alan Moore does not appreciate you paraphrasing him to spread right wing idiocy.
 
2011-08-06 04:41:57 AM  

tony41454: it's ALL Obama's doing.


I hate to feed the astroturfer, but...

Uh, sure (new window).
 
Displayed 50 of 774 comments


Oldest | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report