Democratic Party downgrade

John Hinderaker at Powerline clearly explains why, contrary to the Democrats' childish "he did it; it's the Tea Party's fault", S&P's recent action is  really a Democratic Downgrade. 

"What did the Democrats do with respect to federal debt during the four years they controlled both Houses of Congress?" Hinderaker asks.  Why they just merrily rolled along, increasing the debt without any plan, short term or long term, to repay it. 


Here is a summary of the deficits the Democrats racked up during that time:

FY 2008 -- $460 billion
FY 2009 -- $1,410 billion ($1.4 trillion)
FY 2010 -- $1,300 billion ($1.3 trillion)
FY 2011 -- $1,600 (estimated) ($1.6 trillion)

Of the $14.5 trillion national debt, nearly $4.8 trillion-one-third of the total-was incurred during that four-year period when the Congress was exclusively controlled by the Democrats. Moreover, and equally important, during that time the Democrats did nothing to assure the markets that they have a long-term plan to deal with the country's burgeoning debt. On the contrary, for more than two years the Congressional Democrats have refused to adopt or even to propose a budget! If you are looking for the reason why rating agencies have lost faith in the ability of our government to get its spending and debt under control, you need look no farther.

The Democrats didn't even propose a budget!  But why should they?  Tax increases, er revenue enhancements, especially on the rich, will cover everything.  That's what happens when ivory tower academics take over, as they have in the Obama administration, instead of business people who fly on their company's private jet because the company's accounting department figured out that was cheaper in the long run. 

Actually, many of those newly elected last November are small business people--not billionaires and/or private jet owners--but they all know the need for a budget and the difference between profit and loss. 

The Tea Party gets it.  The Democratic Party doesn't.