zero revenue increases and 100% spending cut would be a mix covered in their statement and I thin it is safe to assume they are smart enough to know that. I personally think there will and should be some revenue increases and the dems will have all the leverage to get them in December next year. If they let them expire then the tax increase would come before most of the spending cuts hit. One of the reasons the tea party scares the crap out of the political class is they seem to be willing to risk reelection to push their agenda. Doesn't look like the S&P believes the dems will do the same.
A pure and unadulterated form one thing and one thing only is in no sense a "mix" of that thing and another. The most generous way to read S&Ps statement is that they think Republicans insane and Democrats incompetent; there's plenty of evidence for both, so that's probably also the most generous way to read Washingtons reality (and I use the term very loosely).
By the way agreeing that the dems are spineless kind of undermines your argument that it is all the republicans fault. The republicans at least are doing what they believe is in the best interest of the country. If the dems are signing on to things they don't think will help the country because they are spineless cravens (yes I have been reading Martin) then I would say they are more at fault and should be despised by both sides of the political spectrum.
I have no idea who Martin is, but I'd say that's a fair assessment. The reason I and a lot of other people chose Obama over Hillary during the primaries is that he presented himself as an intelligent, charismatic and convincing old school liberal. That was a welcome and long overdue alternative to the Republican Lite, Third Way triangulation focus group BS the Clintons brought to Washington and claimed Bills two terms vindicated as the great white hope of Democrats who'd been getting killed in Presidential politics (never mind that Clinton had Perot polling 19% of the 1992 vote and 10% of the 1996 vote, mostly from conservatives and libertarians who wouldn't touch Clinton with a ten foot pole). Unfortunately, it was also a load of crap; after explicitly stating he wasn't on board with the Clintons Democratic Leadership Council during the primaries, he rapidly embraced it once elected. Basically, he pulled a McCain: Suck up to the base to get nominated, then swing to the center. The difference is Obama waited until the INAUGURATION to swing to the center, which means he campaigned on leftism he's never even tried to deliver. Like I say, cowardice is the GENEROUS explanation for that; the rank cynicism and corruption of two decades of Democratic leadership is the far more likely cause.
It's kind of a good news, bad news deal for folks like you: Whoever the two party system elects your craving for what Bush 41 rightly called "voodoo economics" will continue to be satisfied. You can either cheer for the Republicans responsible or boo the Democrats responsible, but your policy goals will be achieved. The bad news is that it will keep degrading Americas strategic, diplomatic and economic position in the world and turn us into a second class world power full of unemployed, starving, ignorant and sickly citizens while China takes our place as the leading producer of both guns AND butter. At least you can continue taking cold comfort in your indefatigable ability to blame that on the policies present in Democratic RHETORIC, but nowhere in the policies of either party. Personally, I think an American public that realizes the problem, wants something better and can't find anything about Democrats OR Republicans in the Constitution will go a different way. I just hope it's a peaceful political way.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
US Credit Rate Downgraded - Obama should resign.....
06/08/2011 04:12:48 AM
- 1410 Views
you, it was the tea party republicans that caused this
06/08/2011 05:57:16 AM
- 953 Views

Que tonterías.
06/08/2011 04:23:49 AM
- 945 Views
Really?
06/08/2011 05:05:48 AM
- 997 Views
Leaders have to lead.....
06/08/2011 05:18:21 AM
- 817 Views
Cuts aren't up to him, though.
06/08/2011 05:37:50 AM
- 860 Views
Yeah, sure, the President has no say or control.....good grief.....
*NM*
06/08/2011 06:13:49 AM
- 478 Views

S&P didn't demand cuts, they demanded fiscal responsibility.
06/08/2011 03:18:10 PM
- 1100 Views
and haters gotta hate..... *NM*
06/08/2011 05:49:25 AM
- 455 Views
I admit it, I hate what Obama is doing to our country..... *NM*
06/08/2011 06:12:39 AM
- 470 Views

As ever your disinterest in facts seems to be central to your posting.
06/08/2011 11:34:20 AM
- 920 Views
Which would be less annoying if so much of Congress didn't suffer from the same delusions.
06/08/2011 03:48:04 PM
- 808 Views
Does Timmy G play sax like his brother Kenny? *NM*
06/08/2011 01:11:17 PM
- 453 Views
Fun fact - I dated in HS Kenny G's niece.....
06/08/2011 03:13:52 PM
- 812 Views
S&P specifically cited GOP refusal to raise taxes among their reasons.
06/08/2011 03:10:22 PM
- 984 Views
Of course one could just read the actual S&P report
06/08/2011 04:01:07 PM
- 981 Views
Sure.
06/08/2011 04:53:47 PM
- 992 Views
Right, ABC new's summary of the report is not the report
06/08/2011 07:02:46 PM
- 1294 Views
Link works, but I'm not sure why you think it refutes snoops assessment or mine.
06/08/2011 08:35:10 PM
- 1086 Views
It doesn't refute it, it just isn't this simple distillation you're offering
06/08/2011 09:23:33 PM
- 905 Views
It's more than half a sentence; I quoted several paragraphs.
06/08/2011 09:56:31 PM
- 790 Views
Well yes, after I gave you the report, I think I'm pretty obviously refering to before that
06/08/2011 11:02:17 PM
- 811 Views

Before that I was referring to the paragraphs quoted in the ABC report.
07/08/2011 01:21:18 AM
- 1225 Views
not really
06/08/2011 10:15:32 PM
- 857 Views
"the mix of spending and revenue measures"
06/08/2011 10:23:06 PM
- 934 Views
So you read the statement that they take no posistion as they take the dem position?
07/08/2011 04:51:58 AM
- 936 Views
I read a "mix" to be a mix.
09/08/2011 12:14:35 AM
- 850 Views
So in other words you just ignore the actaull words and read it say what you want it to say *NM*
09/08/2011 02:07:57 PM
- 522 Views
A mix of something and nothing is impossible; one thing is one thing, not a mix.
09/08/2011 04:56:00 PM
- 1035 Views
US politicians are too busy fighting over who gets to play the fiddle. *NM*
06/08/2011 05:53:32 PM
- 471 Views
would him resigning really help?
07/08/2011 10:24:00 AM
- 894 Views
not as long as he has the high functioning moron Joe Biden as VP.
08/08/2011 12:34:32 AM
- 896 Views
In reality, its Congress (BOTH parties) AND the President who are to blame.
08/08/2011 01:59:13 AM
- 915 Views
40% is not a small tax increase and a small spending cut
09/08/2011 04:20:28 AM
- 792 Views
Why are people making a deal about the debt ceiling increase?
09/08/2011 03:42:13 PM
- 824 Views
Because, when you get down to it, the debt ceilings very existence was always a political threat.
09/08/2011 05:02:12 PM
- 794 Views