"When they dropped our credit rating, what they said was we don't have an ability to repay our debt. That's what the final word was from them. I was proved right in my position. We should not have raised the debt ceiling."
A Standard & Poor's director said for the first time Thursday that one reason the United States lost its triple-A credit rating was that several lawmakers expressed skepticism about the serious consequences of a credit default -- a position put forth by some Republicans.
Without specifically mentioning Republicans, S&P senior director Joydeep Mukherji said the stability and effectiveness of American political institutions were undermined by the fact that "people in the political arena were even talking about a potential default," Mukherji said.
"That a country even has such voices, albeit a minority, is something notable," he added. "This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns."Crowley comments, <blockquote>"They all but blame the Tea Party and in fact, hint very broadly, that this kind of first of all, confrontation, but first of all the idea that "no compromise, no nothing" that brought the US to the brink of this, is what caused that downgrade, and you said just the opposite."</blockquote>
Bachmann replies, <blockquote> for heaven's sake, the fact that we had a debate in Washington DC about not borrowing more money that we don't have certainly isn't what brought down our triple A credit rating. It was the over-spending. To blame the debate seems absurd. That's like saying that Paul Revere caused the British invasion. It didn't happen. The real problem in all of this is the over-spending and the worry that S&P has that we might not be able to pay our debt."</blockquote>
Crowley persists, unsuccessfully in suggesting that the S&P director's words contradict Bachmann's and Bachmann goes on selling the GOP's talking points, oblivious of the REALITY that the Mukerji made it clear that it was the willingness to even discuss not raising the ceiling, an idea wholly owned by the tea party, that caused the rating drop.
Then there's that bizarre allusion to Paul Revere. Well, the reality is that the British were already there. The S&P downgrade was probably already there, because the the Tea Party politicians had already said that they would consider allowing the US to not raise the ceiling putting it into default.
Stories are powerful things. But Michele Bachman can't seem to tell the difference between weak, ineffective analogies, political positions and hard reality. The hard reality was that a Standard and Poor's spokesperson made it clear what the reason was and she rejected his conclusion and reasoning.
You can't argue with a moving train and you can't argue with a reason that was given that has already led to an action that has been taken. You can disagree with the reason, but you can't dispute that the reason was the cause of the action.