Ahh see you figured out the rub... He is primarily a figurehead, however he has to sign off on things like spending. And since he did sign off on quite a lot of spending much of it introduced by him.

 

Isn't that like going to the bank and finding out your broke... and writing checks anyway?

 

Yes repeatedly capitulated to a small extreme minority that really did not understand what they were doing or the potential and very real damage they were causing.

And stand for what. The only thing the conservative/Republican/Tea Baggers stand for is trying to make the nation fail just so president Obama does not succeed.

And they can't even do that right but they sure do cost us money and jobs on a daily basis.

No president Obama offered a "grand bargan" including changes to social security and entitlements that cut $4 Trillion and the conservative/Republican/Tea Baggers walked out on it because President Obama pointed out the proposals for cuts only would not help the US credit rating and we would be downgraded just like we have been.

No now that is just a total lie and an easily provable one. It was George Bush that not only doubled the national debt by adding $5 Trillion to it but also allowed out economy to be looted and collapse. Bush also handed President Obama $1.5 Trillion dollar deficit on his first budget.

You're the one who obviously does not have a clue to what's really happened here. Because the national debt doubled under Bush and is a long ways from tripling.

No actually you're just really really surprisingly brainwashed and ignorant about what has really happened here you have no idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

 

This is his baby......you can sugar coat and come up with bull shit excuses, but when all is said and done it happened on his watch. It's his just like 9/11 was Bush's. We lost the AAA rating because of too much debt and we were even warned that the deal that was signed wouldn't help. I blame both houses and the boy for absolutely no leadership. The only group that had it right WAS the tea party.

 

I am not familiar with the nuances of US government politics..
but..
I had heard that there was a system of checks and balances that prevented one man for doing exactly as he pleased, that whatever law/bill/ papal Bull had to go through committees/ inquiries/ and scrutiny before the President could sign anything..
Now from what I am reading on here is, despite having elected officials from both sides of you political spectrum...these being officials elected by the people to represent them.. one man, the President has been doing exactly as he pleased without any regard to due process and he , and only he, is entirely at fault.. the Albatross is around his neck alone.. that no one else is accountable at all.
Shouldn't he be Emperor Obama instead of President? Sounds like he has an awful lot of Power.

Or, being a Canuck in the land of Parlimentary Igloo's and Timmy's Double Double, I am missing something here?

Is this a correct assessment?

 

This is his baby......you can sugar coat and come up with bull shit excuses, but when all is said and done it happened on his watch. It's his just like 9/11 was Bush's. We lost the AAA rating because of too much debt and we were even warned that the deal that was signed wouldn't help. I blame both houses and the boy for absolutely no leadership. The only group that had it right WAS the tea party.

 

What your saying is true.... However Before last year... The House of Representatives was controlled by the Democratic party (they had the Majority) they also have the majority in the Senate... and if the President is also a Democrat, Then bills and spending gets passed like shit through a goose. that was upto and until this last election of the house, where the Republicans particularly the Tea party Republicans gained the majority in the house, and have since put the kibosh on many progressive programs and spending. But while the house holds the purse strings, all bills must then pass through a democratic Senate... and then be signed by the democratic president.

 

Expected.

From the report:

Of note: S&P is rating the US lower than the bad mortage backed securities at the height of the housing bubble (which they rated AAA)


Here's the report

http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheadername3=MDT-Type&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3DUS_Downgraded_AA%2B.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8

 

We have a winner take all system which is a bit bizarre compared to the parliamentary system. In which even the minority is represented. So, in the US whoever gets the majority of votes gets to represent the people. Not like in Canada and the UK where a majority is represented by more and the minority is still represented.

 

So.. to my understanding by what you've posted, before the democrats got control of your House of representatives.. your economy was on the up and up and no debt was incurring and it was only through Democratic spending that the US economy headed into this situation? The Republicans bear no responsibility for this downgrading at all?

 

That would in fact depend on who you are and how you look at it, yes it has been policy to do deficit spending for many years, However the US national debt quadrupled under in the last 3 years because of Democratic spending excesses, IE the health care reform, ect. So yes the republicans have incurred and are responsible for some of the debt, however the democratic progressives have gone on a spending binge.

We were in a recession and the economy would have probably stabilized and recovered.

 

And here's another real kicker. S&P pretty much said if the conservative/Republican/Tea Baggers refuse to raise taxes the US might not be able to pay its bills.

http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2011/08/05/sp-downgrades-u-s-debt-rating-press-release/

 

well as I read it, and it could be wrong, the reason why S&P downgraded your rating was not so much about your debt, but because of the bipartisanship and fighting, the inability to quickly and decisively come to an agreement to that would resolve the issue and provide stability.

In laymans terms; "get your shit together and stop bickering before we start considering your country a safe place to invest again"

Of course.. I could be wrong. I'm not american.

 

Um Yeah, our government was never designed to act swiftly or decisively, which is why it's really really a bad sign when it does. I think the only exception to that rule is the few times we have declared war... what all three or four of them. The whole swift decisive thing is not what the founding fathers of the US had in mind. They wanted it to be a quagmire, the whole purpose of the US government was to have limited power but because of progressive reform government power has increased and increased over the years. Which leads us to today.

 

Well suffice it to say.. outside looking in? Your whole system needs a reboot.

 

Why many of the population would rather have a government who is in the background rather than the foreground... The US used to be a free society lately its become less and less...but you could be right a revolution can be helpful from time to time.

 

This is a very good understanding as the quotes from the actual S&P analysis clearly show.

And our political instability, inability, and willingness to actually threaten world credit markets for purely political ends was one of the main reasons for the downgrade.

That's clearly shown by the fact S&P was a couple trillion dollars off, which they admitted, and it didn't make any difference. The political dysfunction outweighed even that.

 

I don't know.. the US was often considered the "great experiment" with it's wild ways and quirky ideals.. up to americans to solve it..
But until they do, the rest of the world is going to see the US as either a) caustic to invest or b) easy to exploit.

But by all accounts from foreign press like RT, China, etc.. the US is no longer the economic powerhouse it once was.

But I reiterate.. I don't live there, your particular ideals of freedom and democracy are foreign to me, just an observer from the gallery above the operating table.

 

Dear republicans,

The national debt at the time of the election of Barak Obama stood nine trillion dollars and was expected to grow to eleven trillion dollars befor the last Bush buget expired and the first Obama buget took effect. That was in fact exactly what happened.

In other words...while Obama has done nothing to repair the problem, he inherited the vast majority of the problem from the Republicans and is now expected to ficx something that even the tea baggers and republicans dont have any answers for.

While I am not an Obama supporter and feel that he is generaly unqualified I would appreciate it if you would start using facts to back your arguments instead of hyperbole and bullshit because it makes you look like ignorant, knuckle draging monkeys. Obama is responsable for a small fraction of the current problem in comparison to what George W Bush and the Republican congress created.

Thank you for you time.

Me.