Today’s debt ceiling developments, summarized in a single tweet:
Standard & Poor’s downgrading US credit rating to WTF.
pourmecoffee
pourmecoffee
Oh, and I also had a little (more) fun with a Drudge mockup:
Today’s debt ceiling developments, summarized in a single tweet:
Standard & Poor’s downgrading US credit rating to WTF.pourmecoffee
pourmecoffee
Oh, and I also had a little (more) fun with a Drudge mockup:
Because of course the Democrats had nothing to do with it, even though they control 2/3rds of the government today, and totally controlled the Congress in December when Reid made a conscious decision not to deal with the debt ceiling.
Yes gahrie, the Democrats had nothing to do with the bullshit that Boehner and the GOP have been putting forward involving exactly ZERO compromise and ZERO chance of happening. Their refusal to buck the Tea Party extremists and make a deal that gives both sides something but neither side everything is unquestionably bad, bad for them, bad for the economy, bad for the country.
You can go back and blame the Dems for a stupid decision over half a year ago, but that time is passed, we are here now, and NOW the GOP are being idiots and screwing the country on top of it. So yes, Boehner FAIL.
gahrie – our resident davidkian does have a point (in addition to the one at the top of his little(-used) head) … the Democrats had nothing to do with the GOP bullshit … they were far too busy NOT putting forward a budget and NOT dealing with the debt ceiling while they had the White House and supermajorities in both Houses of Congress simultaneously …
In davidkian terms, that *does* make it all the GOP’s fault (except when it’s all The Eeeevil Boooosh’s fault, that is) …
“while they had the White House and supermajorities in both Houses of Congress simultaneously”
Maybe it’s just too early in the morning for me. Was there some time when that happened? Perhaps there’s some novel meaning of supermajority?
If single tweets are under discussion …
http://twitter.com/#!/JazzShaw/status/96241514962894848
http://twitter.com/#!/iowahawkblog/status/96575610553503744
I’m still partial to the sad Price is Right horn.
Mike #4 – did the Dems not have the White House from 2009-2010 as well as not quite veto-proof majorities in House and Senate during that same period ?
You remember – when the Dems promised that unemployment would be kept below 8% and they would be the most transparent EVAH !
Has a vision of Mr. Andrews, Captain Smith, Lightoller, and Murdoch all blame casting aboard a certain liner’s bride late one April night in 1912. Then the deckchair shuffler’s union obscures the view. Similarities between that incident and the comment section of this thread are purely coincidental.
The thing is, “not veto-proof” is different from “veto proof”. To nearly anyone else, I would be astonished that this distinction needs pointing out. In the 111th Congress, the Dems were always at least 30 votes or so from a supermajority in the House, and several Senators short as well. They had majorities, but not supermajorities.
Regardless of whether or not they were the most transparent ever (I wonder which administration, in your opinion, holds that title), it is surely not much of a secret how many of them there were in Congress.