Lower rating trigger . ..Investigation

S&P lowered America credit rating and now the DOJ is investigating them increases… WOW

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/17/doj-reportedly-investigating-standard-poors/


Is this the type of Government Administration … We Americans Want?

The investigation statrted before the downgrade. This should be investigated. S&P pulled some really shady moves

LJ;866145 wrote:The investigation statrted before the downgrade. This should be investigated. S&P pulled some really shady moves

What a strange coincidence then, eh? Timing is everything? This is classic Chicago politics unfolding right in front of us.

S & P might be shady, but what does that say for the Congressional oversight, led by Frank and Dodd? Shouldn't they be in front of the Obama tribunal? You know it won't happen because it's all George Bush's fault anyhow so why drag them into it.

What happened to the investigation into "Fast and Furious"? I read where several of the main perpetrators were given promotions by the Obama Administration very recently. More Chicago politics for ya...stand up for Obama and get rewarded. Capone would be very proud of Barry and the Agitators.

It's all a conspiracy

SP got fired by the city of LA after it downgraded some of its bonds.

LJ;866145 wrote:The investigation statrted before the downgrade. This should be investigated. S&P pulled some really shady moves

What about the investigation of Fannie and Freddie Mac? With the increase in the investigation in S&P should the extenuating root sources of the problem be increased also? Where has that investigation gone and those who promoted Fannie/Freddie agenda.

Do yourself a favor sometime and watch the movie "Inside Job". Absolutely chilling account of how the financial crisis all came about. More upsetting is how EVERYONE was involved, regardless of administration and party. Even more upsetting is that many still are.

The Feds....

• U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000​,000,000
• Fed budget: $3,820,000​,000,000
• New debt: $ 1,650,000,​000,000
• National debt: $14,271,00​0,000,000
• Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000​,000

Remove some zeros and pretend it's a household budget:

• Annual family income: $21,700
• Money the family spent: $38,200
• New debt on the credit card: $16,500
• Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
• Total budget cuts: $385

And we wonder why the idiots in DC don't get it and the MSM continues to vilify the Tea Party for "going too far."

believer;869822 wrote:The Feds....

• U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000​,000,000
• Fed budget: $3,820,000​,000,000
• New debt: $ 1,650,000,​000,000
• National debt: $14,271,00​0,000,000
• Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000​,000

Remove some zeros and pretend it's a household budget:

• Annual family income: $21,700
• Money the family spent: $38,200
• New debt on the credit card: $16,500
• Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
• Total budget cuts: $385

And we wonder why the idiots in DC don't get it and the MSM continues to vilify the Tea Party for "going too far."

Don't watch more then a few minutes a week but wasn't the problem that the Teabaggers wanted to default? If so they deserved to get hammered.

LJ;866174 wrote:It's all a conspiracy

I guess so....... send in the DOJ to S&P offices, but keep them out of the Black Panthers crib.

Change we can believe in .........

Bigdogg;870129 wrote:Don't watch more then a few minutes a week but wasn't the problem that the Teabaggers wanted to default? If so they deserved to get hammered.

Default? Naw. The Tea Party thinks we need to pay our bills. They simply wanted much larger spending cuts than $385.

QuakerOats;870344 wrote:I guess so....... send in the DOJ to S&P offices, but keep them out of the Black Panthers crib.

True. After all they'll be needed for security at the polling places next November.

Public sector Presidents step down when the pressure via goverment administratio is applied .. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/22/standard-poors-president-resigns/?test=latestnews

but Political Mofo that don't heed the public opinion and the will of the people . . .. stay to screw up even more..

Belly35;870947 wrote:Public sector Presidents step down when the pressure via goverment administratio is applied .. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/22/standard-poors-president-resigns/?test=latestnews

but Political Mofo that don't heed the public opinion and the will of the people . . .. stay to screw up even more..

Just coincidence, Belly. :rolleyes: Not that this smacks of the Chicago way. I'm sure he was going to retire long before he took a swipe at Barry and the Agitators.

Head of S&P stepping down

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Head-of-rating-agency-SampP-apf-2708009513.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=3&asset=&ccode=

Lawyer up... The Adminisrtation is coming ...

http://www.businessweek.com/video/#video=9tZDRyMjoAgqxle54Ac3BgLydXAZtFer

believer;869822 wrote:The Feds....

• U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000​,000,000
• Fed budget: $3,820,000​,000,000
• New debt: $ 1,650,000,​000,000
• National debt: $14,271,00​0,000,000
• Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000​,000

Remove some zeros and pretend it's a household budget:

• Annual family income: $21,700
• Money the family spent: $38,200
• New debt on the credit card: $16,500
• Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
• Total budget cuts: $385

And we wonder why the idiots in DC don't get it and the MSM continues to vilify the Tea Party for "going too far."

A country is not a household.

Trying to run one as such would be just as stupid as spending as much as we currently do.

I Wear Pants;878812 wrote:A country is not a household.

Trying to run one as such would be just as stupid as spending as much as we currently do.

Not suggesting that at all. Simply crunching the Fed numbers down to a level where anyone with half a brain can easily see what's wrong with our Big Gubmint spending problem.

believer;870373 wrote:Default? Naw. The Tea Party thinks we need to pay our bills. They simply wanted much larger spending cuts than $385.



True. After all they'll be needed for security at the polling places next November.

Almost right about the Tea Party. They want to pay the bills, but only those bills they feel are important to their ideology. They and their de facto leader, Ms. Bachmann, were strongly in favor of default by not extending the debt ceiling, and that's a fact.

Perhaps we should leave it all up to the Tea Party and their idiot supporters. Before that happens, however, I will want to liquidate my investments and savings to prepare for the financial nuclear winter which will follow their misguided and amateurish fiscal policies. You folks seem to think it is all so simple. It is, if you are simple-minded and follow fools like Bachmann, Perry et al.

I Wear Pants;878812 wrote:A country is not a household.

Trying to run one as such would be just as stupid as spending as much as we currently do.

Spending (at most) the same as you take in isn't stupid in either context. It really isn't complicated.

stlouiedipalma;879174 wrote:Almost right about the Tea Party. They want to pay the bills, but only those bills they feel are important to their ideology. They and their de facto leader, Ms. Bachmann, were strongly in favor of default by not extending the debt ceiling, and that's a fact.

Perhaps we should leave it all up to the Tea Party and their idiot supporters. Before that happens, however, I will want to liquidate my investments and savings to prepare for the financial nuclear winter which will follow their misguided and amateurish fiscal policies. You folks seem to think it is all so simple. It is, if you are simple-minded and follow fools like Bachmann, Perry et al.

Is there a point to this jibberish? Absolutely nothing made sense here.

I Wear Pants;878812 wrote:A country is not a household.

Trying to run one as such would be just as stupid as spending as much as we currently do.

Stupid, eh? Spending what you make is moronic, eh?

How's the current program of spending what we borrow doing?
What's the current status of spending money owed by children, grandchildren, and people not as yet conceived?
How's it going with spending as much money as Bernacke's printing presses can spit out?

Which is better...raise taxes, spend borrowed money, spend money that doesn't exist, spending money created out of thin air, and creating massive debts that will never be repaid ultimately leading to a financialy meltdown - OR - living within our means, abandoning socialist utopian ideals, and allowing our country to return to what made it great? Pretty easy choice if you ask me, but we can carry on with our current plan. It's working SO well, isn't it?

stlouiedipalma;879174 wrote:Almost right about the Tea Party. They want to pay the bills, but only those bills they feel are important to their ideology. They and their de facto leader, Ms. Bachmann, were strongly in favor of default by not extending the debt ceiling, and that's a fact.

The government defaults on their debt every single day. Every dollar they borrow will be paid back in a dollar worth less than that, and they beat you out of the difference. Every dollar you got ten years ago is now worth $0.75 and that is falling fast. The United States has officially defaulted several times, most recently in 1971 when they refused to honor foreign payments in gold. This is nothing new, and default is coming whether the Tea Party or any party wants to raise the debt ceiling or not.

Manhattan Buckeye;879232 wrote:Is there a point to this jibberish? Absolutely nothing made sense here.

It may be jibberish to you, but then you might be a card-carrying member of the Tea Party. Every day I find another reason to support my belief that the Tea Party and their supporters are idiots.

Let's take yesterday as an example. I get a phone call from some Tea Party organization, prefaced by a pre-recorded message from none other than Dick Morris. Yes, the same Dick Morris who likes to suck on the toes of prostitutes while whistling "Dixie". Once Dick gets done with his rant, which praises staunch conservatives like me (talk about not doing homework!!), a real live Tea Party member gets on the line and asks me to send money in order to "defeat the socialist agenda that Obama has brought to our country". Rather than just hanging up on this fool, I decided to let him know what I felt about his message and that of Dick Morris.

Are the Tea Party operatives really that stupid?

stlouiedipalma;879529 wrote:It may be jibberish to you, but then you might be a card-carrying member of the Tea Party. Every day I find another reason to support my belief that the Tea Party and their supporters are idiots.

Let's take yesterday as an example. I get a phone call from some Tea Party organization, prefaced by a pre-recorded message from none other than **** Morris. Yes, the same **** Morris who likes to suck on the toes of prostitutes while whistling "Dixie". Once **** gets done with his rant, which praises staunch conservatives like me (talk about not doing homework!!), a real live Tea Party member gets on the line and asks me to send money in order to "defeat the socialist agenda that Obama has brought to our country". Rather than just hanging up on this fool, I decided to let him know what I felt about his message and that of **** Morris.

Are the Tea Party operatives really that stupid?

Dude, I get calls from Obamabots every week asking me to help bring down Boehner before he sets the planet on fire or some such crap. Everyone works off the same call lists.

It must be frustrating for you that these idiot teabaggers are kicking the shiznit out of you people on a daily basis.

stlouiedipalma;879174 wrote:Almost right about the Tea Party. They want to pay the bills, but only those bills they feel are important to their ideology. They and their de facto leader, Ms. Bachmann, were strongly in favor of default by not extending the debt ceiling, and that's a fact.

Perhaps we should leave it all up to the Tea Party and their idiot supporters. Before that happens, however, I will want to liquidate my investments and savings to prepare for the financial nuclear winter which will follow their misguided and amateurish fiscal policies. You folks seem to think it is all so simple. It is, if you are simple-minded and follow fools like Bachmann, Perry et al.

If you think that by not extending the debt ceiling, the US government would've defaulted to its creditors, you might be the simplest of the simple-minded. Most of the wacko Tea Partiers and Mrs. Bachmann stated clearly that interest on the debt should be paid first (meaning no default). Monthly revenues to the federal government are more than enough (about 10 times in fact) to service US debt. Obviously not all government obligations would have been met, but default was not an option.