Comments about ‘Readers' forum: Tea party downgrade?’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Aug. 11 2011 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Roland Kayser
Cottonwood Heights, UT

If you were to actually read S&P's report, they mention our inability to raise revenues on several occasion as one of the leading factors in their decision. Countries that spend far more than we do still have their AAA rating. It is the imbalance between revenue and spending that is the problem, not just the spending.

CHS 85
Sandy, UT

No, the tea party dug in their heels and said "don't pay the bills that we have already accrued" leaving contractors, employees, beneficiaries, and everyone else who does business with the federal government high and dry. Is that the sensible approach you are talking about?

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

S&P didn't tell anyone to reduce spending. They said they were worried about instability of our government.

You know what countries have AAA ratings? Socialist countries like Canada, Denmark, France, England and Norway. Yep, all of those socialists in Europe pretty much the more socialist they are the higher thier rating.

And no, Greece is is trouble because it's banks gambled with the people's money and lost, not because of social programs.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Blaming the tea party for our economic problems is like blaming the guy who called 911 to report a fire for the fire! The tea party only warned politicians on both sides what will happen if THEY (politicians) don't stop their out of control spending! Now we have these same politicians pointing their fingers at everyone except themselves for the problems, they caused!

Rand
FLAGSTAFF, AZ

"Correct so far?"

Not entirely. Another reason S&P cited for the downgrade was the political brinksmanship in Congress and its inability to effectively govern. A good portion of that blame can be laid at the feet of conservative ideologues such as Eric Cantor, who walked out of meetings if he didn't get his way. Wouldn't even consider closing unethical corporate loopholes unless taxes were lowered elsewhere.

Maybe some of you believe that is "principled", but to me it is childish, dangerous, and a sure sign of poor leadership. Apparently S&P wasn't too impressed with it either.

So Mr. Smurthwaite can pick and choose his facts to make it seem like this is all the tax-and-spend liberal's fault, but the actual truth is that American society itself has built this problem and that both conservative and liberal politicians cater to it. And both conservatives and liberals are going to have to compromise to find a long term solution. The Tea Party hasn't gotten that message yet.

pragmatistferlife
salt lake city, utah

Wrong, the downgrade was solely because the downgrade was not meaningful and the tea party prevented a meaningful solution. 4 trillion with a third cuts and a third revenue increases was deemed meaningful. Three times in the notice from S&P they said the downgrade was because the two parties could not work together. Even McConnell said you couldn't get to 4 trillion without revenue increases, and who blocked all revenue increases? Tea Party downgrade pure and simple.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

The tea party was right to insist we live within our budget.

The tea party was wrong to insist that the poor and middle class bare all the burden for doing so.

And that was the rub.

Esquire
Springville, UT

Nice try, Richard, but your facts are wrong from the beginning. If you want to balance the budget, everyone agrees it will take not just cuts, but increased revenue. I wonder how Mike Lee explains his votes for more spending on wasteful programs. He doesn't, only doing the will of rich special interests in Washington. Then he turns around and wants to cut programs that help the least of our society, calling for caps that have exemptions for the same wasteful spending he supports. Can't you see the hypocrisy and madness of the tea party guys?

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

Ok let's try to forget that S&P rated 14 trillion of soon to be toxic debts that would tank the world economy and exasterbate the federal deficit as AAA from 2003 to 2008. Since it was the federal government that ended up BUYING those toxic loans....

Let's try to forget they rated Leemon Brothers as AAA right up until thier bankruptcy. I'll try to forget that nobody from Wall Street or S&P went to jail for tanking the economy....

The S&P statement was entirly political about political issues, not about our ability to pay our debts. It may have something to do with the S&P being led by conservatives like McGraw Hill.

Let's forget that the S&P is being investigated in other countries for it's mob ties......

The Tea Party did do this. They cheered the downgrade even. Congradulations.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

This spin will not work. The President was attempting a timely and balanced solution in light of the economy. The tea party people announced that the plan claiming a debt downgrade was no big deal. The large balanced reduction was boycotted into a small divisive problem by the dogmatic unilateral approach of the tea party. This minority uprising was planned since January based upon a Limbaugh attempt to get the President irregardless of the consequences. Noe you have the consequences.

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

You may not have seen McCain go balistic on the Tea Party. Was that glossed over on Faux News?

McCain wont apologize for calling tea partiers hobbits

At the the height of the debt ceiling battle last month, McCain read a Wall Street Journal editorial aloud on the Senate floor that slammed tea party-backed Republicans and called them "hobbits" for demanding a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution in return for their votes to raise the debt ceiling.

McCain : "What I said was true. It's unrealistic and unfair to the American people to tell them that we have to pass a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution before we would act. If anyone misunderstood that then of course I would apologize. ... But it's not my fault if they misunderstood. ...

Furry1993
Clearfield, UT

To Counter Intelligence | 6:51 a.m. Aug. 11, 2011

And this is even more true:
Far right wing policies are a disaster
Therefore anyone who notices must be vilified if they are to remain in power

What they dont seem to understand is that the more hysterical they get, the more obvious the failure becomes.

KM
Cedar Hills, UT

Rand

Eric Cantor had had enough of this president and his unrelenting desire to bring down America. Who can blame him when one looks at the way he was raised, the people who have influenced him all his life. Its a wonder he is even able to get up in the morning. BTW, didn't the 'anointed one' walk out of another meeting before Cantor? why did you fail to mention that?

Invisible Hand
Provo, UT

It's ironic that Senator Kerry, who has been in Congress for decades, blames this debt mess that has been building for decades, on the Tea Party influence that is barely two years old.

silas brill
Heber, UT

John Chambers, the head of sovereign ratings at S&P, told CNN that the political brinkmanship over the debt ceiling proved to be a key issue, with "the U.S. government getting to the last day before they had cash-management problems."

It wasn't the Democrats who forced this issue to the last day. It wasn't the Democrats that threatened default. This was regarding a budget Congress had already approved. Using default as a bargaining chip was the Tea Party Republican's business.

Screwdriver
Casa Grande, AZ

We are still IN the FAILURE of right wing policies goldfish. "Hi my name's Dora. Have we met?"

The right wing strategy is to take advantage of short memories and team worship mentalities to blame someone else for thier disaster.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

The Down-grade can be blamed on the Tea Party because:

1. Refusing to Compromise [Something required in Non-Totalitarian regimes].

2. Showing the World that Congress is out of control by making their own Congressional leader [Speaker John Boehner] look like a fool.

3. Holding America hostage - Demanding they get their way, or commit National suicide.

4. Refusing to increase revenues by dropping stupid tax breaks on the Uber-Rich and Wealthy [who could still get those tax breaks - if only they re-invested their income back into the economy or grew their businesses.]

I could go on, and on....but jumping up and down - even claiming "Victory!" in the Federal Budget debates -- and then when reality kicks in and things turn negative, so they turn right around denying they were they cause of the down grade is completely ridiculous!

Denialism - (remember the Birthers)
The trademark of the Tea Party.

Nonconlib
Orem, UT

Even though I shouldn't be, I'm still amazed at the letters to this newspaper that evidence such an appalling lack of understanding of economics. Of course, the Tea Party program for destroying the country can't even be called economics. It's really just bad arithmetic. There is no way on earth we can balance our budget by only cutting spending. What, Richard, are we going to cut to shave over a trillion dollars from our annual spending?

But let me see if I understand this correctly. We can't afford to close corporate tax loopholes when profits have been at record levels, even in the midst of the "Great Recession." We can't afford to tax the super-rich, even when CEO pay went up 23 percent from 2009 to 2010. We can't raise tax rates when Warren Buffett's tax rate is lower than the cleaning lady's. We can't afford to raise taxes when a hedge fund manager's take-home pay was $5 billion last year, and he's not a "job creator."

What the Tea Party does not understand is that their movement is not very original or independent. It is simply another program that benefits large corporations and Wall Street.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

Tough fighting a backlash started by tea party advocates with old spin.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

"The first thing lawmakers could have done is to have raised the debt ceiling in a timely manner so that much of this debate had been avoided to begin with, as it had done 60 or 70 times since 1960 without that much debate," said John Chambers, the head of sovereign ratings at S&P.

S&P had already said they wanted to see at least a 4 trillion dollar deal for the next 10 years. [Which the Deomcrats proposed]
But, those same Tea Party members blamed for the fighting were fighting for a much larger cuts. They wanted to cut much deeper into federal spending and reform entitlement programs.
[i.e., Going for broke].

President Obama also wanted a larger deal that would have included tax increases only on the wealthiest of Americans, which Standard and Poors would have supported as well, but once again, those same Tea Party Republican refused to compromise.
.
.
.
Yes, we can clearly blame the Tea Partiers - based on the S&P themselves.

(Source...ironically - FoxNews)

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments