Video: “We’ve always been, and always will be, a AAA country”
posted at 5:25 pm on August 8, 2011 by Allahpundit
Ed and Tina have both written about this so here’s the vid in case you missed it. The key bit comes at 6:15. It’s a fine bipartisan bloggy tradition to goof on the president when he looks hapless at a presser, but watching this, with the market deteriorating moment by moment, all I felt was numb. This guy very clearly has run out of things to say, even with abject terror spreading in markets over Europe’s debt crisis and the possibility that America is sliding back into recession. Ironically, his big soundbite is detached from reality twice over: Not only will we not always be an AAA nation — given the scale of our debt crisis, we won’t always be an AA+ nation either — but it’s not the downgrade that drove today’s mammoth sell-off. Treasuries, as Ed noted earlier, did just fine notwithstanding S&P’s new rating. It’s broader economic fears that punished shares and that’ll keep on punishing shares for the foreseeable future. Especially since the next recession, if it happens, will be much worse than the last one.
I don’t know why he gave this speech except as a way to check the “president comments on unprecedented downgrade” box. Jen Rubin calls it horrifyingly bad, which is true, just as it’s also true that the best he could do today in terms of a concrete response to the downgrade is promise forthcoming deficit reduction “recommendations.” (Maybe public reaction to the downgrade will convince him that he has more to lose electorally by not seizing the reins of this issue than by seizing them. That’s the only thing that could get him to act.) But the deeper horror, of course, is that not all of this will be cured by dumping The One. It’s not Obama who attached that eurozone ball-and-chain to the market’s ankle, and even a Republican president will find his or her options limited amid the next financial crisis. This is an epic fail to some extent not because Hopenchange is a spent force, which it is, but because the western world’s finally been cornered economically by entitlement liabilities that were foreseeable when The One was a toddler. The bill’s come due. What else can he say?
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Breaking on Hot Air
Bobby Jindal: Paternalistic, big-government liberalism is the biggest loser here
Super Nannies: EU bans olive oils, Germany ponders Autobahn speed limit
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
Typhonsentra on August 8, 2011 at 8:36 PM
Just what did you stupid PHUCKS do when you had the White House the House and the Senate? Hell dimwit you have the Senate and the White House still. Oh and many Dems also voted against raising the limit. You’re laughable.
CW on August 8, 2011 at 9:04 PM
“We’ve always been, and always will be, a AAA country”
You lying POS, not if you have your way.
disa on August 8, 2011 at 9:06 PM
Hmmm Ohio had their rating upgraded by S and P. Hmmm without raising taxes.
CW on August 8, 2011 at 9:08 PM
Someone left the clueless doofas entrance unlocked again. These nitwits can’t find their ass with both hands, but somehow find their way in here and seem to be able to type. Let’s hope they’re smart enough to use contraception though – the thought of this shallow intellect actually procreating is a bit disturbing.
Midas on August 8, 2011 at 9:18 PM
I see American Exceptionalism is OK when it’s his agenda on the table.
Fighton03 on August 8, 2011 at 9:22 PM
CW on August 8, 2011 at 9:25 PM
TYHPON I wonder ..what were those 95 Dems thinking? ARE THEY terrorists?
CW on August 8, 2011 at 9:27 PM
“I have been… and always shall be… your friend. Live long… and prosper.”
galvestonian on August 8, 2011 at 9:40 PM
Yep, he’s ready to seize the reins of the unicorn and ride us all to someplace somewhere over the rainbow where bluebirds fly and no one ever again will have to ask, “Why oh why can’t I?”.
Buy Danish on August 8, 2011 at 9:44 PM
Dear America,
Pay no attention to the downgrade, now come see me on my bus tour.
Barack
TN Mom on August 8, 2011 at 9:52 PM
that is not exceptionalism what he said sounded like a self esteem lesson given to the losing team.
unseen on August 8, 2011 at 9:52 PM
Are you saying that tax revenues should be increased by 2% or have you been sold on a path to reducing spending all the way to 16% of GDP? I think this is the main issue that so many analysts have grappled with when analyzing the numbers. It’s an incredible complex undertaking.
I have yet to see a viable, detailed path to cutting spending to anything under 19% of GDP. Not given our aging population, interest payments on the debt, and massive defense commitments around the globe.
bayam on August 8, 2011 at 9:55 PM
It was 20% when Obama took office, Bayam. Let’s start there.
Chuck Schick on August 8, 2011 at 10:04 PM
“We’re all AAA in my book”
Saying it doesn’t make it so Mr. President.
This reminds me of how all the teams get trophies and told they are all winners.
multiuseless on August 8, 2011 at 10:06 PM
DOW futures down 255.00
bluefox on August 8, 2011 at 10:17 PM
With you at the helm, you incompetent clown, we will be a scroomed country!
btw, OPEN CHALLENGE TO GENERAL COLIN POWELL
$15,000 for 3 hours of the Perfumed Prince’s (a lead player in the Mia Lai coverup which he was promoted for) time. I am sure he will say no as he is a big chicken.
Lon Chaney on August 8, 2011 at 10:22 PM
You big dope, the ratings’ agencies have been warning that our debt now and in the foreseeable future is unsustainable. No tax increases would ever begin to unravel this mess, especially when nearly half of Americans pay no taxes and have been taking a free ride for decades.
Learn to read and then immerse yourself in some facts and fundamental economics.
onlineanalyst on August 8, 2011 at 10:22 PM
Obama is AAA. Affirmative Action Ass.
Lon Chaney on August 8, 2011 at 10:23 PM
Obama is AAA. A-ffirmative A-ction A-ss.
Lon Chaney on August 8, 2011 at 10:24 PM
translation
AshleyTKing on August 8, 2011 at 10:26 PM
What a jerk to keep taking up valuable TV air time to say essentially nothing. The market went down another 3% when it realized he was only giving a stupid pep talk. This guy is an egomaniac and a time wasting menace.
Chessplayer on August 8, 2011 at 10:27 PM
Kerry (Democrat) has been in the senate for what, 25 to 30 years?
Rubio (Republican/Tea Party) has been in the senate for 7 months.
Kerry has been in the senate about 50 times as long as Rubio, so therefor Kerry is innocent and Rubio is to blame.
You are insane.
Lon Chaney on August 8, 2011 at 10:27 PM
This happened on Obama’s watch . Hey that is the liberal rule.
CW on August 8, 2011 at 10:28 PM
Great point …these tards are something.
CW on August 8, 2011 at 10:29 PM
Remember that raising tax rates does not necessarily translate to increased revenues, especially with your Giehtners and Kerrys dodging taxes any way they can.
Raising revenues ain’t going to touch the rate of growth of spending on entitlements. You’re just kicking the can down the road, liberals.
John the Libertarian on August 8, 2011 at 10:29 PM
Even Obama knows it is his fault or he wouldn’t be claiming we are still AAA. If he really thought it was the Republicans and Tea party’s fault he would be saying the rating should be far lower.
Lon Chaney on August 8, 2011 at 10:30 PM
Hey, bayam, Sorry, sport, but three items that O said were non-negotiable were his O-care, high speed rail, and green jobs. All of these are drains on America’s productivity and economic growth. They require massive outlays of taxes, are not demonstrably growth-oriented, and hamper the areas where the country could revive the engines of real revenue.
onlineanalyst on August 8, 2011 at 10:38 PM
Six bullet points and revenue is not mentioned.
The 6th bullet point
“new fiscal pressures” is subject to interpretation, however combined with higher general government debt trajectory, one would have to conclude they are talking about raising the debt ceiling again!
Revenues are mentioned in the 3rd paragraph, but it is in the context that the Dec. 2010 agreement tween Congress and the President that taxes would not be raised on ANYONE for 2 years!
This is clarified in the 6th paragraph
Again in the context that the Dec. 2010 agreement tween Congress and the President that taxes would not be raised on ANYONE for 2 years!
Seriously, do you know what your reading/comp level is?
Do you know what the word “specifically” means?
No it doesn’t, either your a liar or an idiot, or both!
In the 19th paragraph it states that even with the lapsing of the Bush tax cuts and if that brought more money into the gov. we would stabilize at ‘AA+‘, that is the current downgraded rating!
Did you even read this report you linked?
Obviously you didn’t understand it, it’s 7th grade English!
Gezzzzzz why can’t we get intelligent trolls here?
DSchoen on August 8, 2011 at 10:47 PM
bayam: There would be plenty of “new revenues” if our nation were freed from the punishing and arbitrarily fanciful regulations that are denying us the right to unleash our natural resources. Direct and peripheral jobs would explode, generating new “revenues.”
onlineanalyst on August 8, 2011 at 10:47 PM
The patient weighs 847 pounds.
The doctor says “Yeah, he needs to eat less, blah, blah, blah, but he really needs to work out more.”
Really Right on August 8, 2011 at 11:00 PM
I agree with you on rail but not clean energy- not when China is massively subsidizing energy R&D. The only path to US energy independence is a combination of natural gas and renewable energy sources. The revenue that can be generated from clean energy can support tens of thousands of white and blue collar jobs. Look at the investments made by KP and other top VC firms and its clear that private capital is sold on the viability of alternative energy, esp. as oil prices continue to rise.
That’s right, just as job growth ‘exploded’ under Bush when regulations were better for oil companies. If you actually believe that the US economy can be driven by natural resources, you’re truly out of touch. This country is relatively poor in natural resources compared to Canada, Russia, and OPEC.
bayam on August 8, 2011 at 11:23 PM
bayam: Do you not understand that energy companies have R&D departments? In fact, most manufacturing sectors do, as well? These companies plow a lot of their profit into research and development because their intent is to profit through growth. When government bleeds corporations through taxation, the monies for independent R&D diminishes.
Government subsidies squander capital and pay off the bureaucrats. Government does not grow jobs.
onlineanalyst on August 8, 2011 at 11:31 PM
He’s a AAA disaster.
NoLeftTurn on August 8, 2011 at 11:39 PM
ASo where are the jobs obama? Robust job and economic growth tloerate a lot of budget sins. U6 unemployment of 17% is patheticas.
seven on August 8, 2011 at 11:45 PM
“We’ve always been, and always will be, a AAA country”
I give this sentence a B+.
Physics Geek on August 8, 2011 at 11:47 PM
Uh-oh! Chicken Little gets some
factskryptonite:http://hotair.com/archives/2011/03/10/crs-report-shows-much-higher-us-oil-gas-reserve-levels-than-previously-thought/
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/03/are-we-sitting-on-unlimited-fossil-fuel-resources/
John the Libertarian on August 8, 2011 at 11:47 PM
President Stuart Smalley.
Ward Cleaver on August 9, 2011 at 12:02 AM
Looking to his right “No matter what people may say, we’ve always been, and always will be,” look to his left “a triple-A country.”
He can’t even look the American people in the eye to say something as simple, as important, as that!
He has to READ IT OFF A TELEPROMPTER!
MaggiePoo on August 9, 2011 at 12:13 AM
Brilliant Satire!
First of all, “natural resources” include many variables that you are too feeble to grasp.
Our National Parks are a “natural resource”. And what most people, including you, don’t know is that those National Parks are collateral for our National Debt. They also generate more revenue than they consume, but the Democrats who controlled Congress from 2007 until 2011 have been trying their best to cut off their funds. Cloward-Piven, y’know.
http://www.npca.org/park_assets/NPCA_Economic_Significance_Report.pdf
The US has more natural resource coal than any other country in the world, but O’bama and your Democrats are trying to shut that down.
“Natural Resources” also include oil and natural gas; we have a lot of both of those as well, but your Democrats won’t let us extract them.
In fact, right now, the Democrats running EPA want to put the West Texas oil industry out of business, solely to possibly save a tiny lizard.
“Natural Resources” also include such things as solar and wind power; yet prominent Democrats like Teddy “The Swimmer” Kennedy tried to shut down wind farms in their own back yard. Here in New Hampshire, a new wind farm project just 30 miles down the highway from Mark Steyn’s place was recently approved despite a ferocious fight put up by an isolated pocket of Democrat Party “voters” at the nearby Plymouth State University.
“Natural Resources” also include animals; the US is the largest beef producer on the planet.
National Forests are also “Natural Resources”. Most of these are regularly harvested, otherwise the trees would grow out of control. Here in NH’s White Mountain National Forest, we literally have baby trees growing out of the bases of trunks of mature trees. They would be uncontrollable unless harvested.
Need another shovel?
Del Dolemonte on August 9, 2011 at 12:22 AM
When will you start thinking for yourself, bayam?
They don’t need to get my memo for this to be true. Here’s the math.
Deficit = Spending – Revenue
If Spending is less than Revenue, then Deficit is negative. A negative Deficit is a very good thing.
Do you really want to argue with such simply math??
I’m ready to stop playing the blame game. Yes, there need to be many sacrifices. Many people that get stuff for free need to stop getting their stuff for free, and many people that don’t pay any taxes at all need to start paying some taxes.
Btw, many people already make enough sacrifices, bayam.
Oh please. You don’t need to read a different blog to know what the smart money thinks, bayam. You just have to read my comments.
blink on August 9, 2011 at 12:24 AM
I hope this is directed at many people that get stuff for free and many people that don’t pay any income tax at all.
blink on August 9, 2011 at 12:25 AM
Lack of revenue doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of tax increases.
A lack of revenue comes from low and negative growth.
Again, where does it say that taxes need to be raised?
blink on August 9, 2011 at 12:30 AM
Another perspective on why S&P downgraded -
• 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: $14,271,000,000,000
• Recent budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000
Let’s remove 8 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
Dasher on August 9, 2011 at 12:31 AM
Duh — Liberals speak in code: … “fair and balanced” in Øbama speak means raise taxes on the rich.
Dasher on August 9, 2011 at 12:33 AM
Are you seriously giving the label of “smart money” to some guy that runs a website called Minyanville.com??
Do you know what the term “smart money” means?
blink on August 9, 2011 at 12:37 AM
I’m asking about the S&P downgrade report. Does it ever state that taxes need to be raised, or does it use the term “higher taxes” at all?
blink on August 9, 2011 at 12:38 AM
It has a lot to do with funneling money to cronies and union buddies, who then funnel money back into ones campaign coffers.
Dasher on August 9, 2011 at 12:40 AM
No spending cuts seem “viable” to a socialists like you.
blink on August 9, 2011 at 12:41 AM
The line was originally from Star Trek II, but they made a big point of repeating the line in Star Trek III. Since the line was in both movies, you weren’t really wrong in the first place.
tom on August 9, 2011 at 12:49 AM
Let China waste it’s money on many of these foolish alternative energy initiatives. If they come up with something, then we can just buy it from them. Surely, they’ll make a small margin on it, but if it’s truly viable, then we will still save.
Energy is a huge market. Credible alternative energy efforts are always funded by the private sector.
1. I have news for you. The revenue generated from oil and coal can support tens of thousands of white and blue collar jobs, too. And the CO2 they produce doesn’t mean that these sources of energy aren’t clean.
2. Please list the clean energy (other than natural gas) that can support tens of thousands of white and blue collar jobs without revenue subsidies!??!?!
Private capital was sold on the idea of flooding the internet with dot com and fiber optic companies, too. Again, please tell me which of these KP greentech portfolio companies will provide a homerun exit for KP?
Um, are oil prices rising right now?
Producing more domestic oil most certainly will help the US economy. How on earth can you claim otherwise???
blink on August 9, 2011 at 12:54 AM
Typhonsentra and bayam, even if Keynesians at S&P did call for higher taxes, that wouldn’t mean that taxes should be raised.
We can’t let a rating agency predisposed towards socialism dictate fiscal policy to our country.
blink on August 9, 2011 at 12:58 AM
Good idea, let’s abandon high growth industries of the future to China and just import more products from Asia. That’s been a real winning formula for US job growth and wealth creation over the past decade. Replacing foreign oil with foreign solar tech is about the worst outcome imaginable.
What kind of question is that- venture capital involves higher risk opportunities that are difficult for a layperson to analyze. You need to ask a venture capitalist.
Great argument- let’s assume that the free markets are wrong and should be ignored. Of course, if you invested in those internet bubble companies Amazon, PriceLine, eBay, and Netflix you had a different perspective. Even with fiber optics, the market and VC firms accurately predicted the technology’s ascent (but obviously their timing was 6 years off).
bayam on August 9, 2011 at 1:12 AM
Higher tax rates wouldn’t even touch the deficit at this point. It’s highly unlikely that raising the tax rates would even bring in thin dime of revenue, because our economy is already in a recession, and raising taxes will just make the recession worse. It’s hard to get more income tax out of less income.
But it would accomplish forcing the conservatives to break their pledges to the American people who voted them into office, handing the House over to the Republicans.
Which is your real reason for begging for even a small tax increase: to make sure that the Republicans are seen as promise-breakers, so that people will vote for the Democrats who promise to take care of them.
Give it up. Boehner didn’t fall for it, and neither will anyone else. With the possible exception of John McCain.
tom on August 9, 2011 at 1:22 AM
Chump… Barry is starting to look like even he doesn’t believe the crap he’s selling.
-
RalphyBoy on August 9, 2011 at 1:41 AM
Question #1… what are these “high growth industries of the future” you speak of? Name them.
Question #2…you obviously can’t refute my 12:22 AM post with credible facts. Care to have a go at it now?
Del Dolemonte on August 9, 2011 at 1:53 AM
Except, we’re not.
Great going Obozo. Always remember; “never let a crisis go to waste”.
Anti-American, Marxist traitor.
KMC1 on August 9, 2011 at 2:04 AM
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/08/revenge-of-the-rating-agencies-%E2%80%9Cthese-are-not-the-bonds-you%E2%80%99re-looking-for%E2%80%9D.php
Del Dolemonte on August 9, 2011 at 2:07 AM
1. Hey, Idiot. Just because China invents something doesn’t mean that we wont be able to use it. They would definitely want to sell it to us in order to make money on the sale. If there’s a value proposition for a buyer, then we would help our energy needs by buying it. If there is no value proposition for a buyer, then it’s a good thing that we didn’t waste our money developing it anyway.
Additionally, any good energy concepts developed by anyone can possibly be reverse-engineered. We’re under no obligation to honor patents issued by the Chinese government. There’s nothing wrong with allowing them to waste their money on questionable efforts.
You never hear people in New York saying, “We better invent everything that’s being developed in California because if we don’t then California will be able to use it and we can’t.”
You never hear people in Florida saying, “We better invent everything that’s being developed in Texas because if we don’t then Texas will be able to use it and we can’t.”
Why do you think the two above statements are true? It’s because the people in California are developing stuff so that they can sell it to the people in New York, and the people in Texas are developing stuff so that they can sell it in Florida. And why would people in New York and the people in Florida buy the stuff? – Because they can save money or increase productivity by buying it.
Again, it doesn’t make sense to spend American money chasing questionable initiatives just because someone else might invent something valuable by throwing their money at it.
2. Are you actually calling alternative energy a high growth industry?
1. There’s a negligible risk of this ever happening, but you’re not even remotely smart enough to know this. Not enough energy from the sun hits the earth for solar to be used to truly replace oil as a source of energy for transportation needs. This being said, I’ve repeated stated my support for electric cars to replace 33% of the vehicles on US roads, and I think that solar cells imbedded on the body of the vehicles can help with battery charging. However, the primary charging source will be grid power (which will never be solar), and a natural gas engine.
2. Why is it the worse outcome imaginable? What’s so bad about replacing foreign oil with foreign solar tech?
3. Why do you think it would even be bad at all? If foreign solar tech is more efficient to buy and use, then this country would be much better off buying an using it. If foreign solar tech isn’t more efficient to buy and use, then this country shouldn’t buy it, and we definitely shouldn’t have wasted our money developing it, right?
Ha ha. So on one hand you brag about all the great clean tech investments Kleiner Perkins is making and then you immediately admit that you’re not smart enough to know if the investments are good or not. At least we’ve finally forced you to admit that you don’t know much about venture capital – despite your claims from a few weeks ago.
No, I don’t. You definitely do, but I definitely don’t.
You, Idiot. That’s not my assumption. I’m quite definitively stating that investment capital doesn’t always know what’s right. Investors have a herd mentality (haven’t you ever heard this?), and the herd often makes the wrong bets. Unfortunately, VC’s been misled about CO2 issues, and have deployed an excessive amount of capital based on a false premise.
Ha ha ha ha ha!!! Are you honestly attempting to counter my point with a scant four examples? Do you really need me to list the amount of capital invested in failed B2C and B2B companies between 1998 and 2000?
I am soooo happy that you’re making my case for me.
VCs ALL lost money on every single fiber optic investment that they made at the time. There isn’t a single fiber optic company that has a higher valuation now then they did in 2000 or 2001. And the successful creation of all companies started after that period ruins your argument. We would have been much better off letting China waste all that money on fiber optic technology, and then simply buying it out from them at bargain basement distressed prices – pennies on the dollar.
A smart investor would have simply waited for the fiber optic bubble to pop, and then cherry picked the technologies that offered the most promise at a fraction of the amount of capital spent developing such technologies.
In 2006, it was possible to spend $10 million to purchase a fiber optic company that had expended $100 million of investor money developing their technology. I predict the same outcome for alternative energy technologies. Excessive capital is chasing too few ideas without any promise of robust ROI or even EROEI. I’m not saying that useful technology won’t be developed, but it’s very likely that the investor/buyer that sits on the sideline will be the winner.
bayam, you don’t have enough experience with these issues to be second guessing me about this.
blink on August 9, 2011 at 2:31 AM
this sounds like some platitude a mom would say to her kid after he got a bad grade….”you’re always an A+ student to me, I don’t care what grade that teacher gave you…”
how motivating./
ted c on August 9, 2011 at 6:31 AM
It’s like watching a third grader run for hall monitor with this guy…
SuperCool on August 9, 2011 at 6:55 AM
It appears that Wall Street was not impressed by Scooter’s speech.
kingsjester on August 9, 2011 at 7:17 AM
He has already been largely tuned out but from now on, whenever he speaks, no matter what he says, the only word people will here is downgrade: “Now let me be downgrade….My downgrade has always been….No matter what some downgrade might say, we have alwasy been and always will be a downgrade country.”
curved space on August 9, 2011 at 7:20 AM
We’re good enough, we’re smart enough, and Ddggone it, people will always say we’re AAA!
MNHawk on August 9, 2011 at 7:21 AM
barry o’downgrade gives a speech
barry o’downgrade flies on his plane
barry o’downgrade late for a meeting
barry o’downgrade plans his vacation
barry o’downgrade dances the conga
barry o’downgrade cuts his birthday cake
barry o’downgrade visits training camp
could be a series of marxist children’s books…
ted c on August 9, 2011 at 7:28 AM
Not while YOU are in that whitehouse.
tx2654 on August 9, 2011 at 9:15 AM
You do know what that D stands for, right? Here, let me help. It stands for development. I notice you didn’t say CLEAN energy R&D, even though in the previous sentence, you specifically mention CLEAN energy. Why the disconnect?
Let me help you again. China is building a new coal fired power plant every week. That is referred to as development. It takes massive amounts of money (aka subsidization) to build even one of these plants. You knew the talking point you used referred to this money, not some idiotic CLEAN energy R&D, but you lied about it anyway. Let me give you yet another clue. The Chinese are smarter than to put large amounts of money into something unless they KNOW it already works. Us? Not so much, and all because of people like you. Thanks moron.
runawayyyy on August 9, 2011 at 4:21 PM
Watch this guys answer to ” its the Tea parties fault” I love this guy. make it go viral!!!!
http://moonbattery.com/?p=912#comment-7192
ColdWarrior57 on August 9, 2011 at 8:52 PM
I just saw this video. Too funny and honest NSFW
http://minx.cc/?post=320000
ColdWarrior57 on August 11, 2011 at 11:51 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3