The Journal Gazette editorial page has joined the chorus of liberal drones trying to sell the incredible crock that it was the Tea Party's stubbornness that led to the Standard & Poor's downgrade of our credit rating:
Clearly, compromise will be required to develop a workable deficit-reduction plan.
What does state treasurer and U.S. Senate candidate Richard Mourdock say about the need to reach agreement?
“We need less bipartisanship and more conservative, fiscal principles in this on-going debate. Bipartisanship has taken us to the brink of bankruptcy and now to our first ever financial downgrade.”
This type of obstinate refusal to negotiate on behalf of the tea party congressional wing and its willingness to default on debt was a significant factor in Standard & Poor's downgrading the nation's creditworthiness, and that, more than other factors, is what took the nation to the brink of bankruptcy, not bipartisanship.
I just can't fathom this. Do they really believe that, or is the idea to just keep repeating the nonsense in hopes that it will stick with some people? Yes, the intransigence and brinksmanship in Washington -- by both political parties -- were cited by S&P as concerns. But only because they prevented the government from cutting $4 trillion from the debt, the minimum amount the agency felt would signal a seriousness about being fiscally responsible. If the unwillingness to deal with the crippling debt is the reason for the downgrade, how in the world can you place the most blame on the one group that has been the most insistent on dealing with the debt? This is not just economically illiterate and politically dishonest. It is felony imbecility.
Compromise with such ignore-the-obvious obstinancy? No thanks.
