Moody's: Neither debt plan protects the nation's AAA rating

PrintSmith wrote:

archer wrote: Where has it been said that CC&B would have kept our AAA credit rating, if any plan had a chance it was the original dem/Obama plan which called for reducing the deficit by $4 trillion with a combination of spending cuts and revenue increases, exactly the amount S & P is looking for. CC&B had no numbers attached, and no specifics.....I think S & P and Moodys would have laughed at it as being smoke and mirrors.

CC&B, at 18% of GDP, would have trimmed $4 Trillion in 10 years easily archer. Our current economy is $14.5 Trillion, 18% of which would be about $2.61 Trillion, give or take, a savings over this year's budget of over $1 Trillion for a single year.

Nice try, but simplistic equations usually don't hold for something as complicated as our economy. If your statement was true the CBO would have had the same results, and they didn't as far as I know.


But as long as you keep with the "wannabe national gov't" everything you post is suspect. We have a national government, it ain't going away, it may get smaller or larger, but it won't disappear. Until you recognize that truth, you are going to be one unhappy dude.

archer wrote: But as long as you keep with the "wannabe national gov't" everything you post is suspect. We have a national government, it ain't going away, it may get smaller or larger, but it won't disappear. Until you recognize that truth, you are going to be one unhappy dude.

We aren't supposed to have a national government archer, and it is imperative that it go away if liberty and freedom are to survive. National governments end in corruption, despotism and tyranny. Always have, always will. We're all going to be unhappy folk until the government that seeks to be national is returned to being federal, and strictly limited in power and scope. The last remaining peaceful manner in which the power and reach of the DC government can be limited is by limiting their access to our money, which is why it is going to happen. If we don't limit it this way, then the manner in which their power is limited will not be a peaceful one. It will be limited by force of arms, just as it has been limited in every other nation with a central government at least once in the course of their history. No national government has been immune from being altered or abolished by force of arms archer, not a single one thus far.

PrintSmith wrote:

archer wrote: But as long as you keep with the "wannabe national gov't" everything you post is suspect. We have a national government, it ain't going away, it may get smaller or larger, but it won't disappear. Until you recognize that truth, you are going to be one unhappy dude.

We aren't supposed to have a national government archer, and it is imperative that it go away if liberty and freedom are to survive. National governments end in corruption, despotism and tyranny. Always have, always will. We're all going to be unhappy folk until the government that seeks to be national is returned to being federal, and strictly limited in power and scope. The last remaining peaceful manner in which the power and reach of the DC government can be limited is by limiting their access to our money, which is why it is going to happen. If we don't limit it this way, then the manner in which their power is limited will not be a peaceful one. It will be limited by force of arms, just as it has been limited in every other nation with a central government at least once in the course of their history. No national government has been immune from being altered or abolished by force of arms archer, not a single one thus far.

Oooo.... Break out the check-off list:


wannabe national government - check
tyranny -- check
despotism - check
"abolished by force of arms" -- check


You forgot:
socialist
regressives
corrupt oligarchy - (except that the corrupt oligarchy was created by the Bushies)
oppressive
usurpation
seize power


...and all the other usual trigger words of the Sovereign Citizen / Federalist / Original Intent / Constitution-worship bullsh*t checklist...

You're slipping again...

I'm really not interested in your Constitution Party , LawAndLiberty , ReasonOfFreedom , PoliticsOfLiberty , TeaPartyPatriot excursions into what you THINK the Constitution says, or should have said. The Supreme Court interprets, and has done so for a little over 230 years. Their interpretations of what it means are what is important, and not the libertarian nonsense of the radical right. The "general welfare" clause was not "invented", but obviously it has been interpreted to mean something you don't agree with.

Oh well....

I'm in awe of the fantasy world he lives in... And I'm forever glad that he hasn't got a chance of a snowball-in-hell of institutionalizing his selfish views into reality... I feel sorry for the sociopathic world he lives in.

I feel sorry for him too... He'll go to his grave feeling like he was "cheated"....

Like I said before, sometimes I think anthrax is a higher life-form on the evolutionary scale.

From Zero Hedge:

While there is nothing new in the just released Jim Rogers interview with the WSJ, it is always refreshing to hear him tell the truth, which is, of course that "the U.S. has already lost its AAA status. Who cares what Moody's says."

As for the response: "The market looks ahead: this is not the first time that the market has dealt with the fact that the U.S. is bankrupt." As for his proclivity to buy long-term U.S. debt: "I wouldn't lend money to the U.S. in U.S. dollars for 30 years at 3%, or 4%, or 5% or you name the interest rate.... I shorted it...

And I'm not much interested in a post-coup view of what the Supreme Court says LJ, I'll stick with the judicially consistent rulings that it issued prior to being co-opted via a coup by the consolidationists. The wannabe national government was never given the authority to impose the constitutional restrictions upon the states. That was a consistent finding of the Supreme Court prior to the coup of the court. The wannabe national government doesn't have the authority to tell a farmer how much or how little wheat they are allowed to grow for their own consumption. That too was a post coup verdict of the Supreme Court. The wannabe national government was never given the authority to be responsible for the individual welfare of each and every citizen in each and every state. That too is the result of post-coup decisions.

The reason this nation is in decline is that it has abandoned the principle of coordinate powers of government and traveled down the road of social democracy for much of the last century. All one need do is look at the social democracies in Europe to see the folly of continuing to do so. Nearly all of them are implementing austerity measures to avoid bankruptcy, some more aggressively than others. England is cutting back on their social programs, Greece is on the verge of collapse because of theirs. France is raising their retirement age, which resulted in civil unrest and demonstrations in the streets. Even Germany, the strongest of the EU nations economically, is cutting welfare allowances for jobless parents and implementing other austerity measures.

I will spend the rest of my life fighting the attempts of others to have this nation regress into a system of government that has a 100% failure rate - a national government with no limits to its power or authority over the governed. Such national governments are altered or abolished 100% of the time throughout the known history of government, usually violently. I will seek instead to return this ship of state to the progressive form of government where each level of government is responsible for only a portion of the governing that was established by the voluntary compact known as the Constitution of the United States of America.

There was no coup...But thanks for playing.... But you're welcome to take "wannabe national government" and shove it.

There was no coup d'etat. There was a popular president, who was elected...along with an unbreakable majority of Congress, ALSO elected, and they packed the court, as was their Constitutional right, with the judges of their choice and who were confirmed. You've conveniently ignored my reponse in a previous message:

How did he happen to HAVE that huge majority in Congress?... Oh wait... He came in after Herbert Hoover started the Depression, and the people were fed up with the incompetence of the REPUBLICAN administration that destroyed the economy. So, they cleaned house, and kicked out all of the Republicans... Dang... That must hurt.

FDR succeeded because the Republicans blew it, and the Dems took over control... How did they get control?...They were voted in by the PEOPLE who were fed up with the Republicans.

If the Republicans didn't like it, they had the same Constitutional rules to change it ... by voting their party back into office and replacing the court....

Ironic isn't it that the man chosen to lead the country out of the ill-informed Republican governance that brought on the Depression and Crash of 1929, elected someone they saw as their savior to the previous Hoover administration's elitism and nincompoopery. Who would have thought that the same moronic idiocy that didn't work in 1929, would be the "Call of the Righties" in 2011?

Isn't it also fascinating that this alleged "dictator", "usurper", was ELECTED to the office FOUR TIMES... I guess if the PEOPLE were so unhappy, or thought he was doing such a lousy job, or that he had somehow STOLEN their country from them, they could have run a better candidate and voted him out of office... That's how it's done... Elections... (A difficult concept for you, I'm sure...if you can't suppress the vote, play games with the ballot boxes, or find enough ways to do dirty tricks on your opponents...) But if he was so bad, why didn't they vote him out and replace him?

Sorry, Nutter, but your coup d'etat rant is so much bullsh*t. And I hope you DO spend the rest of your life fighting it... Being perpetually disappointed and pointlessly tilting at windmills is the fate I would choose for you.

This is like watching a tennis match. Back and forth and back and forth.....

Fun isn't it....?

I'm just amazed at how long it's been going on, with neither of you ever changing the words.

Printsmith keep spouting the same stuff and you keep hitting it back. And on and on and on ad nauseum.

Yes, it is fun.

LJ, I appreciate your attempts to educate PS....but when people live in an alternate universe there is little, if anything, you can do to bring them back to reality.

So far I have never seen an instance where wishful thinking brought about a change in what has happened in the past, or changed the course of history. You might keep that in mind PS.