Btw.. good on Fox for cherry picking bits out of Standard & Poor's report

Artful Dodger:

The decision by Standard & Poor's to push America into the second division, when it comes to trustworthiness about paying its bills, puts the USA below the UK, Germany, France, Singapore, Finland and 14 other countries.

The reason it gives is what all America has been saying: Washington doesn't work. The S&P report says: "The political brinkmanship 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."

They say they think dealing with the debt remains a "contentious and fitful process". They say no-one is serious about dealing with the programmes that eat up money, like Medicare, health care for the elderly.

They single out Republicans for ruling out tax rises. "It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options... 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."

My colleague Robert Peston has an excellent blog on the economics of this, but what about the politics?

President Obama will doubtless use the occasion to scold Congress again and urge politicians to come together not as Republicans or Democrats but as Americans. Some may be chastened enough to do that for a while.

But is fair to put all the burden on the legislators, as though failure to agree a consensus is a moral lapse? The president is fond of saying that Americans vote for divided government not dysfunctional government.

Yet the system, a much-loved relic of a different age, constructed for reasons little to do with the 21st Century, is almost designed to bring about dysfunctional government. The combination of a strict separation of legislature and executive, plus two-yearly congressional elections, all but encourages having different parties in control of different bits of government.

......... well lets blame everyone in Washington (or is linked to) then. Obama, Congress, the Senate, Lobbyists, Democrats and Republicans.

... The Tea Party, Murdoch via Fox and any other group that is only thinking about a few extra dollars in their wallet and not their country. Or puts politics or ideologies above that of the needs of the USA.

.. 31 years ago a process started that reduced the taxes from the rich by 35% to 35% from 70%, effectively reducing tax income from 70% of Americans by 50%. It seems America worked before hand.....

Artful Dodger: The people who passed this horrible compromise need to be blamed as well. It was said ahead of time, that if a balanced budget amendment were to be passed, our credit rating would most likely not be downgraded.

This compromise was a JOKE. Typical Washington DC JUNK.

The people who got elected this past time better learn to stick to their guns, or they will be voted out as well.

The Col: That's a left wing talking point.

There has to be a time in the history of the US where the out of control spending and the never ending raising of the debt ceiling stops. The PEOPLE have said now is the time. It has to stop now. It's gone way way too far And Obama has a significant role in the financial demise of the US. He has put us into more debt than any other president!

So I don't buy your agrument of "hostage" taking etc.

Obama is an incompetent. He owns this. He had TWO YEARS of House and Senate control. So don't blame the Republicans. This is all on him.

Artful Dodger: I think you have to blame congress,especially the Republican hostage taking of the debt ceiling.Never before has the debt ceiling been leveraged, it would make any investor worry about carrying of debt.Frankly it has come to the point where Republicans seem so bent on the taking down of Obama, they would risk the whole economy laying in ruins to achieve their goal.I think Obama has been a gutless negotiator, but his errors are based on terrible judgement.The Republicans on the other hand seem determined to undermine every initiative, thinking that the worse things get in the USA the better chance for taking office.Kinda like winning the battle, but losing the war.

Chalk up another historic achievement for the Obama presidency. For the first time ever, United States government obligations have been downgraded from AAA to AA+ by Standard & Poor's. Barack Obama's vision of America as an exceptional country, just the way Greeks think Greece is a special country, is one step closer to fruition.

Übergeek 바둑이: BTW, S&P isn't and obscure organization. And you're wrong about the downgrade. I've been listening all morning to the news and every expert talking head says the same thing: The US has been downgraded. period.

Justaminute: You are right that Obama inherited a mess. But he didn't make things better, he made them worse. He tried to spend his way out of debt. Try that with your budget and see where it leads. He tripled the daily debt that Bush had. In the history of presidents, Obama has spent the most and incurred more debt that any of the others. And he did this in short order. He's created job killing regulations and more is on the way. He talks down to legislators and is anything but a leader. He can't bring the parties together (we need Clinton back! He at least got things done in spite of the fact that the Repubs tried to kick him out of office).

Obama is a failure.

Nation debt has doubled in the past 5 years. The majority of that increase came under Obama.

Übergeek 바둑이: We've never had a downgrade before. Now we do. Wallstreet reacted once again.

Obamacare is bad. It's impossible to fund and it's a job killer. The more government does, the less effective it is.

Justaminute: That is the problem. Too many politicians now worrying about their popularity in the USA rather than doing their job. Serving one term and doing what needs to be done would be great.. but with all the Murdoch style media pressure.

Artful Dodger: The current mess? ... policies that were made 30 years ago affecting the US tax revenue was his decision? I agree Obama is now the figurehead, yet the problem lies within your political system.


"Many of these folks are in situations that warrant the help. Others are leeches. And there are plenty of those leeches around."

leeches come in all shapes and sizes, yes you get some who scrounge off the gov... some scrounge off the rich, or fair weather friends. Some marry into, some con. Then you have the rich who cheat the gov... I believe that figure is more significant in obtaining a balanced economy, as the amount lost is much more than the amount paid to those on the dole.

Übergeek 바둑이: you are wrong.....the USA credit rating was down graded to a double A+....it is no longer AAA

The mess America and Europe are in began before Obama came to office. Blaming him for the mess makes as much sense as blaming the Conservatives in the UK or politicians who inherited the great depression in the 1930’s. If anything this rating downgrade is a condemnation of the political posturing of both parties in recent weeks, putting party politics before giving confidence to America’s creditors. Would you have confidence in lending to someone who was happy to even think about defaulting on paying you? America’s politicians got what they deserved, but unfortunately the result will affect us all, by having to pay higher interest rates.

Artful Dodger:

> Yeah, he must mean that he's the FIRST president in US history to have the country's debt credit rating DOWNGRADED!

Just to clarify, the credit rating of the United States was not downgraded. There was fear that it would be, but the rating still remains at AAA. To date the only agency to downgrade the credit rating is some rather obscure bond rating agency in China, and they did that over six months ago.

The big jump in the debt during the Obama administration is due in great part to the stupid bailouts. I think Obama was very foolish in agreeing to take on a policy that was created by the Bush administration. Obama should have just let the banks collapse and drown in their own incompetence. Instead he gave away almost 1.5 trillion. I am sure that in reality they gave away a lot more and they are not telling the public the whole story. The bailouts showed that when push comes to shove, the Republicans and Democrats are equally whorish in selling out to big corporations.

Well, Obama did two things that really tarnished his image. Healthcare reform is well-intentioned and giving healthcare to people who don't have is never a bad thing. "Obamacare" as they call it is not the bad part (in spite of the protestations of Republicans).

The first really bad part is the bailoutsfor banks and car makers. This is in par with the Bush administration selling out to Big Oil and Saudi Arabian interests.

The second bad part is the bombing of Lybia and interfering in what was a civil war. Obama should never have sent soldiers to a mess created by France and the UK. Now the Nato axis is commited to a war. Well, an undeclared war because even that the Nato axis has no courage to admit.

President Obama should have stayed away from bailouts and bombings. He wasted money that would have been better spent on reducing the deficit. If he can't turn around the fiscal deficit problem, he will lose the next election.

Artful Dodger: LOL @ Sponsor

USA now down to doubLE a+...what ever happened to the OBAMA lovers?

Here's an idea to combat terrorism
The government should closely monitor the Internet and social-networking sites that engage in what the government calls, "violent extremist narratives."

Call it what you will. but close monitoring of the internet could yield valuable intel regarding terrorist chatter. Have some key word tags and a thousand little bots out there searching and just another way to fight the bad guys.

Bernice:

I'm fair and balanced and offer no spin

Artful Dodger: that is what I meant, but get sick and tired of being misquoted or words put into my mouth....thank you for clarifying for me.

Yeah, he must mean that he's the FIRST president in US history to have the country's debt credit rating DOWNGRADED!

Now That's an incredible stride!

Let's all hang on for the liberal talking points and watch them frantically point fingers away from themselves. They will probably blame James Garfield for this one.

(V): I think Bernice's point was that those on the dole are not contributing to society yet are consuming the benefits. Many of these folks are in situations that warrant the help. Others are leeches. And there are plenty of those leeches around - those who could work, but don't. They have plenty of excuses that excuses wont' pay the bills.

(V): The current mess is now Obama's problem and he's done plenty to exacerbate it. He blames others, but if things were going great, we all know The Great One would take credit. So he also should own plenty of blame for the horrible state of affairs. And his ideas are only going to make things worse. He's too stupid to know that.

Seeing as the level of money given is supposed to be just enough to live on.. then putting income tax on them just means the 'dole' has to be increased so the gov can tax them.

.. A bit complicated and more paperwork!!

I never said anything about charities...I was talking those that got the dole and sat around on their fat butts drinking beer and watching television all day.

as for working for charity...so do I...Queensland Coast Guard....IS NOT funded by the Government so relies on donations and funds raised by its members.....no big deal working for charity really

Artful Dodger: It's allll Obama's fault. Yes Dan.. Presidents speak that way... Raygun did when he announced SDI...

Or were you talking about the blogger going OTT??

The original post is below. The point here (made sarcastically) is that Obama is bragging about the "incredible strides" his administration has made. The author points out the huge deficit, and huge unemployment as hallmarks of Obama's policies. It's not meant as a fear tactic, it was meant to make fun of "The Great One."



(V): This man is pathetic.
In a speech at a campaign fundraiser Wednesday night (August 3, 2011), president Obama said "...we have made some incredible strides together" but "...we're not even halfway there yet". Excuse me! Half way to where? Where are we going? Do we have to go? Or are you going to drag us kicking and screaming by the scruffs of our necks?

Do you mean you will take us to 18% unemployment instead of the current 9%, $28 trillion in debt instead of the current $14 trillion, $8 per gallon gasoline prices instead of $4? Will taxes double?

No one can say we haven't been warned.

Artful Dodger: ??? The original point??? .... is it original.

As to Bush not being in office. Pu -- lease.. I said Republicans and Conservatives. As the matter of the use of fear by whomever is not a new thing. McCarthy did it.. Raygun did it... The KKK do it.

History did not start in 2008... *hint* the year marker!!

(V): doesn't matter where you got it, you still cherry picked

And you're not bringing it back to point, that never was a point. YOu strayed from the original point and inserted that.

That said, it's unlikely that any group has never used scare tactics at one time or another. Obama has mastered it and uses it regularly. I agree that Bush used it as well. But he's not in office. So that point is meaningless.

Artful Dodger: didn't get it from there

Just a way to bring back to a point... Have not the Republicans and American Conservatives used scaremongering.

The answer is yes. Everyone gets scared, it's part of basic human biology. Interpretation of that feeling is always open to abuse.

(V): http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2011/03/conservatives-are-more-fearful-than.html

Though the Science study’s authors cautioned against an overly broad interpretation of their findings, the results suggest that fear leads to political conservatism.

"Threatening situations do indeed seem to increase people’s affinity for politically conservative opinions, leaders, and parties," said New
York University psychologist John Jost.

Study co-author Kevin Smith, also a University of Nebraska political scientist, demurred at making such a connection. "Historically speaking, politicians have appealed to the ‘be afraid’ response in the electorate in an attempt to mine votes," he said. "But in terms of going from campaigning to what we did in the laboratory, that’s a large leap."

But even Smith agreed that "people with stronger responses are more sensitive to potential threats in their environment."

Asked whether the findings imply a fearmongering strategy for conservatives, New York University psychologist David Amodio responded, "Yes.
And some people believe that they are actively using this strategy."

The Bush administration has been accused of exploiting fears, though it’s hardly a new approach.

"The whole aim of practical politics," wrote journalist gadfly H.L. Mencken,
"is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins."

Jost condemned such tactics. "From an ethical standpoint, conservative campaigns should not exploit feelings of fear in the general population," he said.

Of course, ethics tend to be forgotten during election seasons.

Aren't you glad that Obama is once again going to "pivot" and focus on jobs now?

He might want to start by reigning in his runaway bureaucracy who are more concerned about carving out fiefdoms than in getting out of the way of job creation:


While Congress was focused on increasing the debt limit and giving Americans the impression that they were actually working towards reducing our debt (which didn't happen), President Obama and his administration quietly piled on $9.5 billion worth of regulations to job creators...in just one month!

"While Washington and Americans have been focused on the debt ceiling, the Obama administration has continued to roll our more crushing red tape," a spokesperson for Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) said.

The new regulatory costs include 229 new rules and the finalization of an additional 379 rules, the majority of which came from (no surprise) the EPA, the new healthcare takeover law, and the Dodd-Frank financial takeover law.

So as President Obama and his liberal allies complained that enough wasn't being done to stimulate job growth during the debt debate, we find out that they were actually working to make it even harder to create jobs. The President has also indicated - for the Nth time - that he will now "pivot" towards creating jobs.

ok... ... Have not the Republicans and American Conservatives run scares?

(V): Stay on point and I'll discuss anything.

Artful Dodger: Twist... Chinese whispers start from truth and then get distorted... Like fair and Balanced.

(V): Whenever you start your reply like this, "So.. you are saying" I know you're about to twist what's being said.

Artful Dodger: So.. you are saying it's a lie that some folk might think is true...... well I never!!

(V): Jules, that article was using sarcasm.

Artful Dodger: .... people get scared. To suggest that liberals know nothing else just makes them guilty of being human. To suggest that it's only liberals then suggests that anyone who isn't a liberal is not human.

... Have not the Republicans and American Conservatives run scares?

(V): It's the only thing they know.

(V): Many of those are charlatans.

Artful Dodger: Scaremongering.. isn't that a liberal trait?

Übergeek 바둑이: The 'Christian' TV networks here are always asking for money.. many claim that God & Jesus will through a small donation (or large) help you find financial security.

... I object to those abusing charitable status.

In a speech at a campaign fundraiser Wednesday night (August 3, 2011), president Obama said "...we have made some incredible strides together" but "...we're not even halfway there yet". Excuse me! Half way to where? Where are we going? Do we have to go? Or are you going to drag us kicking and screaming by the scruffs of our necks?

Do you mean you will take us to 18% unemployment instead of the current 9%, $28 trillion in debt instead of the current $14 trillion, $8 per gallon gasoline prices instead of $4? Will taxes double?

No one can say we haven't been warned.

Übergeek 바둑이: The church should NOT be taxed. What you describe may be true for some churches, but it's a gross overgeneralization. Most churches are small and operate on a very tight budget. There are thousands of small communities with small churches scatter here and there. There are no mega churches within 50 to 100 miles of me.

People who give to the church are giving of money that has already been taxed.
And if people like you (atheists) continue to cry out for the seperation of church and state, then you ought to mean it in every way. Or do you only want their money?

Better is to have certain restrictions on churches (and they have them here) that in order to remain tax free, they have to meet certain criteria. Otherwise you lose it.

Übergeek 바둑이: Why are you so eagar to have the government forcefully take other people's money?

(V):

> Some churches that are big... mmmmmm ...

The church should be taxed. No question. Quite a few churches operate like businesses and their church leaders make a lot of money. If they are honest they will put it back into their church. If they are dishonest they will buy big homes, expensive cars, and trophy mistresses. By not taxing the church, the state is subsidizing their work. If they work for the benefit of the poor, there is a logic to the tax exemption. If they work for the benefit of a few church leaders, then there is no excuse.

Bernice: Maybe you'd like to start taxing charities as well. But.... in understanding how they work.. as I work for one... would that be fair?

Some churches that are big... mmmmmm ... The Greek Orthodox owns so much of Greece...

Artful Dodger: If the CEO's and people with money were honest they wouldn't abuse the tax system would they. Our countries wouldn't have to spend millions chasing after billions in lost taxes.

Btw.. it's a fact that over the same period the income of the rich has risen by 100% and of the poor by less then 10%. Yet (another fact) ... the level of taxation on the rich has dropped by 35% since 1980 (the trickle down lie)

Plus in the current "The rich pay half"... deductions?

Artful Dodger:

> The tax laws were designed by lawmakers, not CEOs.

Really? And I wonder who is giving the biggest campaign donations to law makers? And who can pay the most to lobbyist so that they can influence law makers into passing tax breaks?

Your idea that the top 10% pay 70% of the taxes is quoted over and over. What is not quoted is how income has increased for the top 10% of the population in the last 40 years, while the poor have had their income effectively eroded. It might seem tah the rich pay more in taxes. They also have made the most money, and at the expense of the poor. But then, right wingers think it is OK to use the poor to get rich.

A Stampede of Support!

We are thrilled to be given the opportunity to help support our soldiers serving overseas, now our goal is to get the soldiers as many remote controlled trucks as we can, and get them there as soon as possible. These trucks are not just toys, they can help save lives. With your donations, we will continue to send these trucks to support our troops.

http://www.fuelmybrain.org/index.html