MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell discusses the irony and implications of S&P's decision with Robert Reich, former labor secretary under President Clinton.
Analysis on S&P downgrade
-
Mon Aug 8, 2011 10:20 PM EDT
Leave a Comment:
- 2012
- 2011
- 2010
Discuss this post
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
About The Last Word
The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell airs at 10pm ET, Monday through Thursday on MSNBC. The show channels O'Donnell's extensive background in politics and entertainment.
I can't believe I had to listen to a commercial about the benefits of fracking from Exxon Mobile to see this video. I will NEVER watch your program again and I will NEVER watch MSNBC again.
Lawrence has NO say in the comercials on his program.
Julie- you are obviously a right wing wacko because you have made a statement that paints your position and doesn't allow leeway.
LOL yeah exxon never runs advertising on any other network. Silly teabaggers and their blind hatred.
Oh for pete's sake, I watch commercials JUST to play games!!! Everybody has to watch online commercials one way or the other, so just deal with it.
Dear Lawrence: where were you this morning while Joe Scarborough was interviewing the S&P president? Thanks for your coverage. Joe makes me sick, though.... arghhhhh
oh, and Mr Reich as well. Don't miss
his delicious column @ the huffingtonpost today?
Mr. O'Donnell,
How can you legitimately cover the economy and the government and the perquisites of oil company when Exxon pays The Last Word's bills? We need news about fracking and oil sands that is not tainted by money.
Sincerely,
Jane Resh Thomas
I cannot belive you forced your viewers to watch a pro-fracking commercial from Exxon Mobile in order to view this.
<p>Lawrence - Love your analysis usually but this S&P rant was a bit too blindly partisan. the appalling congressional stewardship of the country that S&P describe is totally correct and has been borne out again today by Cantor's unrepentant message to the faithful. Obama came up short, wildly miscalculating trying to do business with the Tea Partiers and should have held firm to a clean debt ceiling raise demand. The accounting error at S&P is insignificant in the grand scheme of things - the balance of debt to GDP 10 years out is unsupportable by any model. I am a commie liberal and I believe S&P have it 100% right: the US is a bad economic bet. We really do need that "change" about now.
The point is its not their function to critique our politics. Their job is to rate our credit worthiness. And American debt is still the preferred safe haven for the world. We have never defaulted and we never will.
i believe it's not "politics" in the narrow sense of democratic vs republican that S&P are troubled by, it's "the politics" in the broader sense and what that really comes down to is the people. i am an Obama supporter etc but when he came out yesterday and said "This is the United States" as a reminder of our infallibility all I could think of was the plaintive wail "This is Rome!" as it all came to an end. This not our grandfathers' United States. This is something altogether different.
I cannot believe you made me watch a pro-fracking commercial from Exxon Mobile in oder to see the video!
I can't believe you people have no clue about who pick what advertisments. Lawrence has NO say. They get advertisers for MSNBC, some specify which program, most don't. The advertising dept or producer pick the ads.
Yes they are a disgrace. Listen, Lawrence. Look at what is going down in Wisconsin. God Bless Wisconsin. They will get their Senate back and they are going to recall that crazy Govenor. The nation in 2012 will do the same. No matter how much money the Kock Brothers have and the Carl Rowe(s). The middel class, working class will regain the House and make the Senate Stronger. We will re-elect President Obama. We have the power, i.e., the People (vote). I encourage ALL OF MY LATINO BROTHERS AND SISTERS, to stand strong and vote DEMOCRACTIC. Not just my Latinos, but all as ONE - AMERICANS! Lets re-elect President Obama, regain the House, and make the Senate stronger. Lets pass the Dream Act, lets end discrimination at ALL levels. We need to voice our opinion and unite. That's why this country is named the United States of America, the key work, UNITED! Lets create jobs, make the rich and corporate america pay their fair share. Lets make Justice Sotomajor the Chief Justice. Lets regain the Supreme Court. Lets get Presidents Obama's nominees appointed.
Latino's, the Black people and the White trash in this Country are being played by Democrats....Educate yourself............
So you place 'Latino's and black's' along side 'white trash'.....Not to hard to figure what you are all about now is it. So smart white educated people know whats best for this country, correct? Seems to me they are the ones that got us in this mess to begin with, correct?
Terry McRath, Try to educate yourself on "Respect"!!!! Its, "Latino Americans, Black Americans,and White Americans???? Try to have a little dignity, to your Bigotry??? Thanks
Larry, so how do you really feel about the S&P? I agree with your pointed prose, thanks!
You Lawrence, and the network you work for are idiots. All the entitlements given since FDR to the current Jerk in the White House are no worse than what Bernie Madoff did.......And he his in prison. Think about it.
Remember Madoff was one of those the Republicans loves, the millionairs and billionaires, or he tried to be a member of the Republican club. The I only give a dam about the rich club. Alot of those Wall St. guys ought to be right were Madoff is. The biggest jerk was the one who left this mess for this President. Remember him. Let me remind you two wars not paid for, tax cuts for the rich, not paid for, prescription drug plan not paid for. Thanks to that jerk the U.S. will be trying to dig itself out of the mess his eight years caused. It amazes me that some people complain when the middle class or poor gets anything from the Government, but when the rich gets from the Government that is just find with the Republicans. Like Michelle Bachman who talk about big government spending, but didn't stop her from taking big government money for her husband's heal the homosexual clinic, or her father in law farm.
Another "Brilliant statement Terry McRath" Your true lunacy is showing again? A GED will help???? Try it?
"John Boehner got 98% of what he wanted again today. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 634 points today is the worst one day point drop since December 2008. 98% of that drop would be 621 points which according to Boehner's claim are assignable to him and House Republicans who say they got 98% of what they wanted in the deficit reduction deal, which preceeded the sharp decline in the stock market which began last week."
That has to be the dumbest remark I've heard all day.
I had to back off the screen to avoid the poison that was directed toward the public with such deceit. The Democrat controlled Senate and White House wouldn't even listen to anything that actually was dedicated to saving money and securing our future. What if Boehner had said he got 0% of what he wanted today. Do you think the Democrat Controlled Senate and White House would have come up with something that actually put this country in a better financial situation? I don't think so.... The proof is in the pudding. The Democrats have controlled both houses since 2006 Congress and complete control 2007. Congress controls the spending and the Senate either agrees or not. Bush couldn't do anything. He was a lame duck the last two years of his presidency. What have they done to put this country in a better financial situation? You're required to tell the truth this time and the answer is, nothing. It's been down hill since 2006 when the Democrats took over Congress and absolute downfall from 2007 when both houses were controlled by the Democrats. I can see you think all your viewers are idiots, but you're mistaken. I just can't understand why you want to mislead the people this way.
Actually the Democrats did come up with something better.The 4 trillion dollar deal that included cuts and revenue that Beohner walked away from.S&P has been quite clear on the fact that there would have not been a downgrade if that plan had been impemented.
Hey Larry,
You are an idiot. Speaker Boehner was referring to a negotiation about the debt ceiling, not about how the stock market will perform until the end of time. No wonder no one watches your show, or better yet your network.
Hey, hope you are gonna talk about how one of President Obama's strategist wants to kill Romney tonight on your show. Oh darn, even if you do no one will see ya!!!!
Although you keep hearing Reagan raised the debt ceiling 17 times, it amounted to raising the debt ceiling by 2 trillion dollars over 8 years. I think that is ridiculous. They should have been thinking of other ways to avoid national debt, as far as I'm concerned. Bush raised it 7 times amounting to 5 more trillion during his 8 years as president. It was getting a little out of hand, don't you think? Obama has raised the debt ceiling 4 times since he took office in 2009 amounting to 5.5 trillion during his 2 years as president. Now, I don't want to put the blame on any one president, since each had to deal with congress spending and that's a pretty hard job in itself, but Bush did have to deal with a Congress and Senate controlled by the Democrats the last two years of his presidency and those increases amounted to 2.7 trillion during that time. What a wimp! Now ole Clinton had it made. The Congress and Senate was controlled by the Republicans when they took over both houses after Clinton's first year and he only raised the debt ceiling by 2 trillion during his presidency. I don't know. All I know is when Reagan became president we had a 1 trillion national debt ceiling and now we have approximately a 16 trillion debt ceiling and liken to our own personal affairs, when we have a $500 house payment we might be able to handle it, but if it multiplies $500 times 16 and then we have a $8000 a month house payment it can get to be pretty difficult. I should say, when we owe $100,000 on our house we may be able to handle the payments, but if we keep refinancing it until we owe $1,600,000 on it, you get the idea.
Maybe if bush had not borrowed 1 trillion dollars from the Chineese to pay for a tax cut to the top 2% that has lasted more than ten years, we might not have needed to raise the debt limit so high.
The big difference was that Clinton and Reagan both worked with members of the opposing party.
The other option would be to hold numerouos press conferences, making sure to berate and name call, making sure to frame issues in an exact way and do everything possible to work against them. Then complain vehemently whed the quid-pro-quo occurs.
Really, Julie- that's what you care about? The problem with your attitude is it is much akin to an ostrich with its head in the sand. You make a tempting target for passers by.
Wake up America. This country is in deep trouble because for decades we have walked around with blinders on.
This commentary should get a Pulitzer.
Oh, by the way, I really liked that Exxon Commercial!
Way to go Lawrence.As usual you are right on the money.Keep up the good work.
Actually, fscuttle the vote on that was 0-97 in the Senate against it.
Sorry, that was Obama's budget.
That means 0 for it and 97 against it in the Democrat Senate.
Sorry, that was Obama's budget.
Lawrence: I think that you are wrong about the S&P downgrade.
(1) We should not have a debt limit that is separate from the budgeting process. It is destabilizing.
(2) House Republicans managed to convince me that they would allow some sort of selective default if they did not get what they wanted. I think that the President and Reid were also convinced. I also think that this will happen again, after all, McConnell says so. Not good.
(3) No one can argue that we have a sustainable deficit. It is too high. It’s risky to let it continue and it’s risky to try and reduce it too fast. Risk is one of the things that goes poorly with AAA ratings.
(4) Because some mortgage securitization group at S&P was totally wrong on many ratings does not mean that the sovereign ratings group at S&P must be wrong on everything forever. Bad argument.
(5) Every entity: sovereign, state, corporate or municipality that gets a downgrade has the exactly same reaction: denial and anger. So my advice is to leave the rage to the professionals at Treasury. BTW, according to Reuters, Italian prosecutors raided the offices of Moodys and S&P and seized documents. This is probably not the way to show markets that you can deal with problems.
(6) My problem with S&P is timing. They could have waited a few months while Europe (hopefully) comes off the boil. That is a genuine lapse in judgement.
Love the show. BNI
Lawrence, you are truly ignorant. You sit there and complain about republicans and blame them for everything thats wrong with our country. Our economy was bad before Obama, now it is WORSE!!! Unemployment was low before Obama, now it is LOWER!!! Seems like your pointing the finger at the wrong people. All the dem's want to do is spend spend spend and say, "lets just tax the rich to pay for it." Our country could have avoided a decrease in their credit rating by simply cutting $4 trillion. S & P said that, why do you think republicans didnt want to raise the debt ceiling?!?!?! BTW, I like how Obama sat there and turned down every republican bill and didnt come up with one himself. He's a terrible leader and will be remembered as being worse than Jimmy Carter.
We never lost it during the Depression. The S & P warned the US that it wanted to see $4 trillion in budget cuts & revenue increases. The Democrats refused to give the 4 trillion in cuts that were not partially offset by revenue increase.
Problem with the Democrats approach was that S & P wanted $4 trillion in cuts plus revenue increases. Democrats would not give the requested $ 4 trillion in cuts despite the S & Ps warnings. The GOP didn’t want the revenue increase without the required cuts. Since Democrats were unwilling to do the necessary cuts, the GOP refused to increase revenue. As a result, we have been downgraded, and Moody’s is threatening to downgrade the US too.
A president offers leadership in times of trouble, and works to find solutions. Obama did not even try to get the needed cuts without negating them with equal revenue increases for a zero sum cut.
S & P was not fooled by Obama & Democrats attempts at smoke & mirrors cuts. They requested a real cut of $4 trillion from the budget that Obama & Democrats refused to meet.Now we have a warning from China that the days of easy borrowing are over.
'The GOP did not want the revenue increases without the required cuts'. Guess you missed the Goober norquist story of the no tax pledge. If you believe the reichwingnuts would have increased taxes if they had gotten every cut they wanted then your in a fantacy world, along with your BS post.
sixpick, what was the grand deal? President Obama offered 4 trillion in cuts to try to get the republicans to put taxes on the table, 3 to 1. boehner agreed to it, knowing that his caucus wouldn't. the GOP didn't want tax increases no matter how much the democratic party would have cut.
TAX REVENUES WERE NEVER GOING TO BE A PART OF THE DEBT CEILING FIASCO, NO MATTER HOW MANY TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN CUTS THE PRESIDENT PUT ON THE TABLE.
the republicans and baggers were never going to agree to 4 trillion in tax hikes ("negating them with equal revenue increases for a zero sum cut"). how does the president negotiate with immovable objects?
grover norquist has the republican party and the baggers by the balls.
Suzzette- There are sevral blogs on the MSNBC site that clearly show Obama got exactly what he needed to get, and that he played Republicans for fools. They were putty in his hands. Thankful Mom and others have been very adament about that fact.
While you aren't saying it exactly- you seem to be the lone voice shying away from that theory. Else- why would it matter what G Norquist did, etc. You liberals are going to have to come to agreement on whether Obama played them or if he got his butt kicked or if he made a bi-partisan deal and both sides won some and lost some. As Boehner said earlier- negotiating (or discussing) with Obama (or a liberal) is like trying to nail jello to a wall.
you were quite the hack tonight! its astounding that you chose to blame the messenger. The US will always have the ability to pay its Debt but all bets are off that the current Congress will continue to do so. The banter turned into a game and now the game is being played by fanatics who have thrown out the rules. And you think they will always raise the debt---keep dreaming! They only down graded one click and you can bet they wanted to drop it 4 or 5 clicks but couldn't. Now the talk is that Moody's is about to drop theirs too.
And fracking is causing geological chaos wherever it is being used and you should really tell NBC and MSNBC to drop the ad.
Thank you Mr. O'Donnell for the truth about S&P. I had to admit I have been wondering who the hell is S&P. Thank You for letting me know.
We need to get rid of the S&P and the other one responsible for the downgrading of the U.S. credit, the radical Tea Republicans.
How can S&P give L.Bros., Goldman and Sachs, AIG a AAA rating then down grade the country that's never defaulted?
Yeah- the S&P took quite a hit because of the ratings pre-2008. They've vowed and promised to be more accurate. I guess, you have to be careful about what you ask for...
Supervisor ( community leader) Manager (skipped this step) Director ( congressman) Vice President ( Senator) Sr. VP (oooops skipped this step) President (opps skipped this step again) Chief Operating Officer ( oooops skipped this step again) CEO (oh yes got elected cause I am black and an articulate speaker...what a country....!!! To all the liberal progressives, blacks and latinos and apparently drugged up prozac taking whites who voted for the person currently occupying the White House...seriously? are you seriously defending the highly educated, but seriously flawed of experience and ability ,man, who is responsible for an unemployment rate of dire proportions, a debt crisis that has impeded our ability as a nation to compete globally, has done little or nothing to enhance our education system that we are still ranked 14th in math and 26th in English in the world, who does not have the fortitude and management skillset to migrate legislation through congress, who does not have the forsight to bring the country together in a cohesive manner to rectify some of our most troubling challenges we are facing, and last but not least has added a $1 trillion socialist approach to health care in our country?
the president isn't the only elected official in washington. all the republicans, baggers and democrats are elected and sent to washington to make things better for the american people.
the republicans and the baggers do not only want to make President Obama a one term president, they want to destroy him in the process.
i would seriously question who the "drugged up taking prozac" people are. President Obama is not the only one responsible for the unemployment in our country.
as for the debt crisis, that was a manufactured crisis, invented by the baggers to make our president look bad. and in regard to our educational system, it is the republican party and the baggers who want to cut spending in education, while this president is trying to do everything he can to increase the educational standard in america.
i have seen President Obama compromise over and over to try to bring the republicans on board. even when he agrees with ideas that the republicans have originally brought to the table, like the individual mandate in regard to health care (a republican idea) for example, they act like they have never heard it before. all we hear about is how much money it will cost, but we never hear about the millions of people who will have health care who don't have it now. isn't that important to anyone? my insurance costs have more than quadrupled, but people who don't have health care will have it now. i do realize that republicans do not feel this way.
it is clearly impossible for this president to bring anyone together in a "cohesive manner" when mitch mcConnel has stated his/their only purpose very clearly and forthrightly.
Suzzette- Obama appears to be doing the job you ascribe to the baggers pretty darn good himself. It's like he is in the plannig room with them. Can you imagine this conversation:
tb: ok- we need to get BO to promise 8% tops in unemployment. BO- Ok, I can do that. tp: then, we need to get BO to tout "shovel ready jobs, as if something like that exists. BO- Heck, I can do that as well. tp: Then we need to get BO to really ramp up OSHA, etc and make regulations stiff. BO- I was thinking about doing that anyway. tp: Now, if we could do something, maybe a heavily front loaded cost plan, with back loaded benefit plan for health care that would make corporations take on significant employment costs with no benefits for them for 10 years. B)- I think I can get a bill like that through. etc, etc, ad naseum
To: Lawrence O'Donnell
Re: Your S&P Rant
Your Standard & Poor's rant last night demonstrates that you know less about credit analysis than S&P knows about politics. Just because S&P got it very wrong in 2008 doesn't mean they are wrong this time. If a corporation's management team was as dysfunctional as our Congress, it would be rated "junk" or filing for bankruptcy. The Republican Party – in particular the Tea Party – is the real culprit for this mess. Don't let them off the hook by using your program to excoriate an organization, which is trying to do its job for a change.
Richard Gilgan
A Registered Independent Voter