How retarded do you have to be?

You don't have to be retarded at all - you just have to look at what they actually said.

Moody's explanation for giving US a "negative outlook"

"However, the disagreement between the two parties over the means by which to achieve deficit reduction and the difficulties experienced in reaching a compromise on raising the debt ceiling highlight the risks of political polarization."

The issue was not the increase in the debt ceiling - it was the short-sighted recalcitrance of those who opposed allowing it to happen.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/08/news/economy/moody...

S&P stated they wanted to see a "credible plan" to bring down the deficit. ie not political stunts that would have no impact on the deficit (eg balanced budget amendment). US revenues are at their lowest level in 60 years - yet the Tea Party refuses to even consider anything related to the revenue side. That is what makes their plan (in the words of S&P) not credible.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/05/news/economy/downg...

Really, BUT that's not the point the point is that like Sen. Kerry is appointed to the "super congress" and he has taken $378 million from the lobbyists, McCain who also ostracized the Tea Party has taken $478 million. The lobbyists handed the House and Senate members $3.5 billion last year and they are not representing us.

Sen. Reid made statements against them why just because his children all work for the lobbyists and remember Joe Biden said something well his son has his own lobbying firm which represents am trak the train Joe is always talking about taking. He landed them a $36 million contract to study the affect of anthrax on trains.

So they all want to keep quite and who better to blame than the 70 Congressional Tea Party members and the four senators. This small group controls the other 480. LOL Didn't Reid say he would veto anything the House sent over and that was with some tiny cuts by boehner. So it's a joke and if anyone believe the tea Party did it then they are on the take. Plain and simple.

This shows the total but you can also put any politician in the search engine and it shows it all who pays em, how much they get and how they vote. Make sure you do both donations and pacs.

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/index.php

The Democrats tend to run on aggressive campaigns, so they need to have something to attack the Republicans on. They had Congress when they couldve passed whatever budget they wanted, and they almost had a 0% chance of any opposition that would halt it. They let it go, so that they could blame the right for the economic issues. Maybe obama could've blamed George Bush for the first recession (though I personally think thats bullshit), but this is all on him and his buddies.

It was trillion before some liberal tries to make that the main point.

However you are absolutely correct. The administration squeezed then but their April instruction was dramatic spending cuts or else it was downgrade time.

Hey genius , noone said "4 million dollar minimum cut"

Obama's people tossed the 4 TRILLION dollar DEBT REDUCTION number at them, and Standard and poor said that was in the range. Debt REductin.. not CUTS.

why do i bother trying to help the unreachable.

I agree with you 100%, but calling a turd slinging monkey a turd slinging monkey will only make it madder. Liberals like to be politely insulted, otherwise they slam the report button and cry to big brother.

Those who wanna continue the big government ways of handouts and bailouts have to blame someone other than the real culprits.

About like Reid & Pelosi

Democrat voters seem willing to swallow any lie their leaders dish out.

Yes and there was a 4.7 trillion proposal of cuts and new revenue. So whats new?