President Obama’s $3.8 Trillion Budget

More spending. What a surprise. Thanks Libs!
Posted by: fedup_11 | Feb 1, 2010 7:29:10 AM
_______________________________________
Not much more spending considering the complete economic mess the country has been in after the largest crash since the Great Depression.
“the FY2009 budget, presented by President George W. Bush, was $3.518 trillion.”

I’m confused. Weren’t the Democrat whining about Bush’s spending? Oh, right. That was just a populist ploy to get elected.
It seems what they were whining about was that he wasn’t spending enough.
Government doesn’t “create jobs.” For every dollar the government spends, one is removed from the private sector – a dollar that would have been better spent meeting a demand. Government can only ensure that there is a free environment in which commerce can take place.
And right now, they’re doing their damnedest to make sure that environment is as clogged and choked full of themselves as possible while lamenting the lack of job creation in the private economy.
Physician, heal thyself.

interesting the amnesia that sets in…just to put these numbers (and 2009 deficit) in perspective…
When you look at the nations total debt from 1999 2010, Mr Bush and the GOP congress are directly responsible for 53% of the total debt during that period, mainly due to three things: tax cuts, Prec Med Reform and the Iraq and Afghan war (all of which were UNFUNDED)…..on the other hand the Democratic Congress and Dem Presidents are responsible for 7% of that debt from deficits….during that period.
facts ARE inconvenient, however,they are necessary, when taking a prinicipled position…but then again I have yet to see a Tea Bag “patriot” have either….
Prove me wrong.

>Virtually everything else is ‘discretionary’ including military which takes up a massive chunk, education, etc.
Congress is mandated by the Constitution to maintain and fund the military. Military spending is NOT discretionary. It’s required by law.
Discretionary spending is spending like the payoffs to ACORN, the “stimulus” bill that did nothing but plunge the nation into irreconcilable debt or “green job” investments using taxpayer money. Or funding for useless high-speed trains in California.
Put down Obama’s kool aid and educate yourself. Parroting White House talking points and propaganda is not “education.”

So he wants to spend on nonsense and kill aerospace programs where we have a competitive world market advantage and the money helps maintain our position? I tell you Obama has run off the rails and is now set on destruction of US technology advantages.

Good Lt – where were you in 2003 as the deficits soared exponentially..I saw virtually ZERO conservatives making any critique of Mr Bush as he borrowed masively from the Chinese and Saudis for 6 YEARS!….
Secondly, you state “Discretionary spending is spending like the payoffs to ACORN”…..the budget is now published, can you find this item? I cannot. its just like a Tea Bag “patriot” to continue floating false memes to divert attention from the real big spenders, the so called “fiscal conservatives”..
When are you all gonna man-up to what I presume was your voting GOP between 2000 and 2008, to you share of the issue?

“Good Lt – where were you in 2003 as the deficits soared exponentially..I saw virtually ZERO conservatives making any critique of Mr Bush as he borrowed masively from the Chinese and Saudis for 6 YEARS!….”
Then you weren’t looking.
Whining doesn’t change the facts. Deficits were decreasing in Bush’s second term. That is, until Democrats took over and started jacking up spending levels again:
>When are you all gonna man-up to what I presume was your voting GOP between 2000 and 2008, to you share of the issue?
Oh, please. Stop pretending that you O-bots care about fiscal discipline all of the sudden after you quadrupled the spending and grew the deficits and national debt to unprecedented levels IN ONE YEAR. And jacked up unemployment. Screaming about the GOP and Bush isn’t goind to change the fact that these new deficits and spending woes are Obama’s fault and his problem. As is the double-digit unemployment that he has managed in one year to double with his assault on the private sector. Bush was no angel, and Obama has quadrupled down on Bush’s big spending. You’re incapable of dealing with facts.
AND BUSH IS GONE and has been for over a year. The Democrats have held Congress since 2006.
MAN UP and own your failures, Obamacrats. See you in November.

This budget, with its huge deficit, is outrageous. It should be DOA.

Good Lt. – “AND BUSH IS GONE and has been for over a year. The Democrats have held Congress since 2006.”]
Ok, so you clearly feel comfortable taking a “principled” stand now vs not doing so back then – nice – and refuse to own up to presumably putting the guys in office who ran up 53% of the debt we now have…..
So that opens you up to treating the subject as politcal and therefore being hypocritical…not very credible IMHO.
Second, Obama was not my first choice as POTUS…so I am hardly a “bot”, and I am happy to criticize him right here, right now – - he is not doing enough to reduce spending, and nor is congress…..and they need to stop it, NOW.
So are you going to man-up and gain some credibility, or live in Tea Bag, “just say no” la-la land?

SO THE SENIORS GET PUT UNDER THE CARPET, THERE IS A LOT OF SENIORS THERE ARE STILL VOTEING, WHERE ARE $250, CO PAYMENT OF THE COLA, REMEMBER OCT. OR WAS THAT A LIE ??

By letting tax CUTS for those individuals earning over $200K and less than $250K expire, isn’t that a TAX INCREASE on folks making less than $240K/yr?
__________________________________
No, it isn’t.

>No, it isn’t.
Actually, it is.
What do you call it? And “adjustment?”
Are their taxes going up?
Then it’s a tax increase.
A rose by any other name…
Thanks.

By letting tax CUTS for those individuals earning over $200K and less than $250K expire, isn’t that a TAX INCREASE on folks making less than $240K/yr?
___________________________________
No, it is not a tax increase on those earning LESS than $240 K/yr.

>Some of you don’t seem to realise what this economic collapse did to local, state and national budgets
The states were bankrupt long before this because they never controlled SPENDING.
The “stimulus” was primarily a bailout of state governments that were overextended because of profligate SPENDING. You can raise taxes to 100%, and all you’ll succeed in doing is driving out taxpayers and businesses while not balancing your budget if you don’t get the SPENDING under control.
And it’s not “revenue.” Businesses generate revenue. When government takes money in, it’s called a “receipt.”
Again, I’ll repeat because you seem to be having trouble grasping this (as does your Congress and President):
IT’S THE SPENDING, STUPID.
That will be the bumper sticker of 2012 when Obama gets tossed out.

As a journalist, when journalism really counted, I covered state and federal government. So yes, I have a good understanding of how the budget is built and presented and what is incorporated under broad and generally confusing headings. It should also be noted that Congress is responsible for funding and ultimately spending is the result of the approval of congress. It should also be noted that the budget is not an absolute document. It is a general guideline of spending for the programs in place, proposed and anticipated for the next fiscal year. Even if approved, our government does not have to stay within that spending and congress can, and has, approved “emergency” appropriations on an ongoing basis. I would urge all posters to review the areas where spending is anticipated. At the end of the day, would you spend your own money to go into additional debt to fund these programs? Well, that’s what Obama wants to do. Spend our money and put us further in debt. Someone, someday will have to face up to the free spending ways of our government in the past 60 years. At this rate, it won’t be us. It will be our grandchildren. Next time you look your grandchild in the eyes, be sure and explain to him or her what we received today that will be worth the sacrifice they will have to make tomorrow.

>No, actually he is trying to get the country through a major economic collapse left by the Bush administration.
Congress controls the spending and approves it. Democrats have controlled Congress since 2007. Spending increased over GOP levels once Democrats began writing legislation in 2007. Unemployment jumped once Democrat policy was implemented.
You aren’t entitled to your own facts. Sooner or later, you’re going to have to deal with them.

Some waste is needed to get into certain parts of the economy that otherwise would starve and cause a plague to spread throughout the rest of the economy…some waste is actually necessary….REMEMBER, DEMOCRATS money TOO CAN TRICKLE DOWN….

Good LT, you keep telling people to get the facts but yet your don’t have them yourself. Yes the Congress has been controlled by the Democrats, but even if they pass a bill or a budget guess who has to sign it!!! The President, Bush signed therefore agreed with the democrats on the past budgets. The Democrats did not have a controlling majority, and by controlling I mean the 2/3 needed to override a presidential veto. You say that Parroting the White House is not education but neither is repeating everything you hear from Fox News, Beck, Rush, Hannity, and all the other fear mongers on Fox. The Republican way seems to be rewrite history and blame the democrats for everything.

Gov’t agencies and jobs will have to and should be cut. It shouldn’t take five (or more) agencies to administer the same program (which may or may not be needed). How many clerks, secretaries, and administrative assistants does any one dept./agency need? Congress should also be required to make measurable staff cuts, as well.

Posted by: Good Lt. | Feb 1, 2010 9:05:47 AM
Again, better research would give you a fuller concept of what is going on . . .
Monday, July 1 2002
“President Bush announced an Administration effort to increase home ownership rates among African Americans and Hispanics by 5.5 million by 2010.
The plan would provide down payment assistance to 40,000 minority homebuyers each year . . .
“Bush’s plan would be closely tied to some $440 million in minority loan programs offered by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. President Bush commended Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s efforts . . . “

I am so sick of being called a bigot by bigots who think that the only reason I disagree with Obama is because of his skin color. I could not care less what color he is, but they (the people claiming I am racist) sure seem to care what my skin color is. I disagree with the man’s policies. I happen to judge people by the content of their character, maybe those who call other racist should do the same.

Just stop spending money on overseas troops. Recall all overseasUS troops.
We dont need troops in other countries

Posted by: Good Lt. | Feb 1, 2010 9:05:47 AM
I can see you have no idea what really caused the finacial crisis we are in. Your just spouting right wing talking points. Start reading. You might learn something.

Ordermonger: I agree! I’ve just about had it also with the horrible Republican attitude. They bash everything this president says or does since day one. WHERE was everyone when this mess was being made? NOW you expect Pres. Obama to fix it overnight? and sorry but people making over $200,000 should pay more taxes. Most people don’t make high salaries and should have tax cuts. Some of the republicans should be ashamed of themselves! and yes a few Dems also. Stand behind the president and help him instead of hindering him. Nothing will get done and you know what? WE WILL ALL FAIL!

Posted by: T-ROC | Feb 1, 2010 9:01:19 AM
How about this hypothetical analogy: I used to eat 7000 calories a day, but now I’m down to 6800. Can’t wait to see the pounds disappear!
You have fallen for Obama’s trap: First Bush and now Obama (who makes Bush look like a tightwad) have jacked up spending and deficits to a level that threaten our well-being on many levels and now Obama comes back with “Look how much money I am saving!” Your expectation that we who know better should applaud?
This is not a partisan issue – The government is spending way, way beyond it’s means. Has there ever been a society/state/civilization in human history that has failed because it spent too little?

Half of us can do simple math,
—
Very true. A portion of the other half are learning and that’s precisely where obama’s headaches are coming from.

>They bash everything this president says or does since day one.
You must have slept through/been in coma during the Bush Administration.
>WHERE was everyone when this mess was being made?
WHERE ARE YOU now that this mess is being worsened by an out-of-control federal government who runs the printing presses 24 hours per day as if that’s “the solution?”
5% unemployment wasn’t a mess – that’s what it was under Clinton and the Democrats couldn’t have been happier. 5% under Bush was “too high” and “proof that Bush hated blacks/poor people.”
10% unemployment under Obama is actually a genuine mess…and the Democrats couldn’t be happier.
>Stand behind the president and help him instead of hindering him.
We are helping him. We’re providing a voice of opposition that he (and you) desperately needs because he’s incapable of seeing limits on his power and his spending.
When the GOP flips Congress, you’ll resume your role as people irrationally and hatefully opposed to everything Congress does.

Doesnt look like he is going to stop descriminating against Single tax payers anytime soon. More money for education ..are you kidding me.. every kid has their own tutor now and they are idiots ..where is this money going to go … paying for driver to take teachers to school .. talk abut your re-election speeches. Everything he is doing is trying to get votes .. nothing about fixing the real problem. Stop dividing this country Obama with your policies. Tax everyone equally and make people accountable for their decisons. Stop making 50% of this country carry the other half because they are to lazy to work.

updated 8:07 p.m. EST, Tue November 13, 2007 Bush vetoes spending bill, tells Congress to cut the pork
Bush says most of Congress “acting like a teenager with a new credit card”
Bill would have funded agencies, but also a prison museum, sailing school
House panel chairman: Bush’s veto “not responsible and not credible”
Democrats to schedule override vote, but Bush GOP allies confident about veto

Where there is waste eliminate it. I guess we can start with Pelosi and Reid!!!!

Posted November 13, 2007 10:52 AM
by Mark Silva, and updated
President Bush has vetoed another spending bill: A $150.7-billion Labor, Health and Education appropriations bill.
This is the second spending bill that Bush has vetoed for over-spending (he also vetoed a children’s health insurance bill over objections for its extension of benefits). And Congress overrode the president’s veto of the other spending bill, a water resources development act.

Good lt,
“‘These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.’”
I’m sure most intelligent democrats are aware of this. What is interesting about Barney, is that instead of hiding under a rock in shame which he should have, he criticized any republican he could see, for something he certainly was partially responsible for.
Many here just want to blame Bush for anything and everything. It is one of Obama’s most detestable character flaws in that he can’t take responsibility for anything. Dems complain that republicans don’t want to give Obama a chance, blaming Bush for Obama’s failures seems to be the only thing they can think of.

Nov 14th, 2007 Bush vetoes education spending billEscalating his budget battle with a Democratic Congress, President Bush on Nov. 13 vetoed a spending measure for labor, health, and education programs that would have provided $63.6 billion for the U.S. Department of Education, a 5 percent increase over 2007 spending and 8 percent more than Bush had sought.

Obama multiplies Bush mistakes and liberal democrats think it will be accepted because “Bush did it too”? Bush left office with atrocious approval numbers. Obama will not see a second term.

Not only were Fannie and Freddie overseen and regulated by a Bush appointee – an old school friend of his James Lockhart – who advised Bush that both were strong and stable.
Bush also had a chance to make some MAJOR changes to Fannie and Freddie but failed because he was “was unwilling to compromise when his former Treasury secretary wanted to cut a deal.”
Like Republicans today, Bush failed to make compromises and sunk the entire endeavor.
NY Times
“The regulator Mr. Bush chose to oversee them — an old prep school buddy — pronounced the companies sound even as they headed toward insolvency.”

Do these deficit projections count on the heathcare bill passing AND cap and trade passing?

This is a spendthrift President, of that, there is little doubt.

Boy the republicans were “spending cowboys”, greasing the palms of their cronies from 2001 to 2006….creating a DEFICIT of a total of 8 Trillion in 5 years…Detracted the American people with 2 WARS, AND SCREAMING TERRORIST(!!!)AS IF THESE THUGS ARE SUPERMEN, AND WE SHOULD BE ‘SCARED’, while making believe they were doing something for the elderly with the Medicare Advantage program, that threw billions at the Healthcare Industry, TAX CUTS for only 1% of Americans and DIDN’T PAY for ANY of these programs. Cut PELL GRANTS to KEEP the Citizens Uneducated and STUPID, lagging behind every country “except Haiti” in innovations, energy, manufacturing and investing in IT’S own People. PEOPLE MAKES THE COUNTRY!!!!!!! AND NOT A HAND FULL! Sat and Watch the Financial System Tank while Employment plummeted for years, telling the American people the financial system WAS STRONG. 2 Months before these Gangsters rode off to Texas and else where to their BRAND NEW RANCHES and CONDOS, they sent their “front” man, Paulson to strong arm the America People for 780 bil…they had “time” to spend 350 bil ( and didn’t bother to tell us where and what on they spent it..and we didn’t ask or screamed about it)…yep, see you in November and 2012. No problem.

This sort of like Yahoo telling the world your personal data for a profit. Nothing is sacred anymore on the internet. Thank you Yahoo for telling the world all about me. Yes, Yahoo there are some things that are no one’s business but you have to have them to use your email and your news page. Good bye Yahoo.

Bush HAD to do what he did! Clinton left him a mess. Do you see how stupid you sound liberal democrats?

great only 2 years 11 months left whew i was getting worried their for a second. good thing about me and my husband we can survive this economy for a good 6 or 7 years oh yeah thats right its called saving is easy if you got the brains to do it and were just middle class people im a clerk my husband is a self empoyed plumber its just him and his partner. amazing what people can do for themselves.

Bush HAD to do what he did! Clinton left him a mess.
____________________________________
The Obama administration was left the biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression – let’s just ignore that shall we? Let’s just pretend that never happened.

jojo wrote: “More money for education ..are you kidding me.. every kid has their own tutor now and they are idiots ..where is this money going to go … paying for driver to take teachers to school ..”
Teacher in many school systems, including Maryland, took a pay CUT when the recession started and will likely NOT see a raise until two years after the recession ends.
Meanwhile the average teacher, who makes less that $50,000 and crams more hours of work into the school year than the average full-time worker, is spending an average $700 per year out of his/her OWN pocket for school supplies.
And yes, some kids are idiots. When the teachers have parent conferences about those kids they usually instantly understand why he/she is having problems.
But the public, middle-class area high school at which I taught has also had students with perfect SAT scores, students who have gone on to become college valedictorians, and students successful in life – including one who sold his IT business to IBM for $50 million.
Your comment on teachers getting drivers and blaming them for an education system 99% of them detest but can’t do anything about is thoughtless and undeserved.

How about reducing the billions in Medicare fraud now? This was highly toted as the way to pay for the health care reform that the dems were trying to pass. Finding and eliminating fraud should be a priority regardless of the statu of healthcare reform. Also, Pres. Obama needs to take out that scalpel of his. Any item in the budget that does not support or advance the national interests should be targeted for cuts. That means no more federal funding for golf courses or swimming pools that local governments won’t fund, no more research grants for studying the sex habits of flys, no more planes or weapons that the military doesn’t want (but some high powered senator wants since it impacts jobs in his district.

=== fire all the GOP in Congress and the House===
I’m sure you realize Obama didn’t hire them and can’t fire them?

===When does double-digit unemployment, record government deficits, an unsustainable growing national debt, and national security lapses become Obama’s responsibility?===
You might as well give it up. They are never going to admit that the deficit Obama “inherited” was a budget from a democratic house and senate, a budget Obama voted on while senator, and Bush had threatened to veto, hence democrats had to wait on Obama to get it passed.

“What percentage of our annual budget goes to pay interest on our debt?”
With an expected uptick in interest rates (which will occur given current exceptionally low rates), interest paid on our national debt will exceed the annual Defense budget.
Great job, DC elites.

That Deficit was the BIG LIE Bush told about IRAQ….they were supposed to Fund the TROOPS

And I’m NOT saying this is Not the President’s obligation to Fix it….Since they couldn’t….then get back and out of the WAY!

Do these deficit projections count on the heathcare bill passing AND cap and trade passing?
—
The agreement that came of Copenhagen’s agreement to agree was due yesterday. I’ve not read of it happening. Thankfully.

And for all of the “whiners and LIARS” that has walked around for 8 years with Blinders on…..”WE can’t go where we need to go, until we know where WE can from”

I too blame the teachers for poor education of students and welfare (idiots having lots of other idiots is bringing down the American Iq average). I taught my kids to read, write, and history etc BEFORE THEY started school seeing has how bad so many unionize idiot teachers are. To be honest after my daughter’s math teacher’s child brought a gun to school, I remain more alarmed at what the teachers are teaching my kids. I can’t even begin to count how many inaccuracies the teachers have told my kids regarding history and math. In fact, they don’t even claim to teach history—they progandize instead of the PC Social studies because you know the truth is too much to handle I guess. And no, I don’t attend school functions anymore because the teachers have ONE agenda—more money more money more money and yet my kids have always been well above the average peer of theirs.

I can see why the past 8 years needs to be forgotten…but it is impossible considering the depth of the Mess our country is in.

The Supreme Court ELECTED Bush in 2000…there were a Surplus in our Treasury, left by Clinton.

Those disastrous Bush years…When a “jobless recovery” meant 5.5% unemployment and deficits were measured in billions rather than trillions… I’m glad Obama is now in charge to save the day!

I am sure I’m not the only one who would wonder when people complain about their grandson living in poverty and they are posting away on the internet, are they helping their grandson?

I cannot ignore the prior 8 years, and concentrate on 1 year. Because I’m not that naive to believe that this HUGE MESS didn’t occur in 12months. This was a Process and Not an Event, as some of you would want the American people to believe. We know better….and it is just as Valid as it was in the years 2000-2008. What do you think WE were talking about for those years?

2008…Bush deficits grew by 8 trillion…2 Wars, Medicare Advantage Program, and Tax Cuts for the top 1% billionaires……All UNPAID FOR!

“I cannot ignore the prior 8 years, and concentrate on 1 year. Because I’m not that naive to believe that this HUGE MESS didn’t occur in 12months. This was a Process and Not an Event, as some of you would want the American people to believe.”
I blame FDR.

Actually, I think she wants it both ways. Let’s see, Obama’s adminstration starts on the day we begin to create jobs, as far as jobs go. If we have problems with Iran, we have to just cut those dates out of his term and back date them to Bush.

It is hard to believe that we are looking back at the good old days of the Clinton Presidency. The one thing that we had for 6 of the 8 years of his administration was a divided government. What happened in Massachusetts was an indication that people don’t want one party rule!

Under all administrations, there has not been a true budget surplus (they collected more of our money than they spent) since the 1950s. Once “they” started spending the Social Security trust funds, the accounting “adjustment” left the impression that “they” collected more of our money than they spent. Party pointers miss my point: they are ALL to blame and most of us conservatives have been saying this all along, regardless of who was in the White House. As it relates to my grandson, I help teach him to work hard at whatever he does, save what he can, only buy what he needs, share with others less fortunate and always keep an eye on government. Jefferson said it best: the government that is large enough to give us everything we want is large enough to take everything we have. In the event that we the people never learn our lesson, I want my grandson to be able to take care of himself without having a government take, as Lyndon Johnson said, “from the haves and give it to the have nots.” Clinton did not leave a budget surplus any more than Carter was responsible for the mess he passed to the next guy. It is an accumulation of mismanagement by individuals whose primary interest is in growing government in order to get re-elected. Only when we force who ever is in charge to shrink government will we regain control. But based on the posters continued finger pointing, I suspect that my grandson will still be worrying about his grandson when poor old Uncle Sam’s then current president announces a $100 trillion budget and $200 trillion debt.

sara … Not sure where you get your numbers, but they seem wrong. Clinton never had a surplus. And yes, Bush did grow debt significantly. BTW, you have to go back to 1957 to find a surplus. Here’s the numbers from the treasury:
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75

“Never going to happen. We will NEVER forget 9/11 and an unecessary war that costs thousands of lives. The repubs may want us to forget, but not going to happen !!”
Well even though Clinton kicked the can down the road on 9/11, and Bush never blamed him, I’ll always remember it as a national tragedy and not a democrats fault. Why don’t you pretend you love America, and joing the rest of us.

GOOOH is looking better all the time! It is a plan to replace all 435 members of the House with non-partisan citizen-candidates! It sounds refreshingly like the what the founders’ intended. Google the website, check it out and get involved!

When Obama says we had a 200 billion surplus under Clinton, he’s repeating an often-used lie that is based on Congress’s goofy accounting. A true surplus would reduce the debt.

Tax cuts leads to lower monies taken in…besides, WE TRIED that, and some suggested the rich would create and employ America, and saw nothing wrong with that policy….well Why didn’t it work for 8 years.

“I cannot ignore the prior 8 years, and concentrate on 1 year. Because I’m not that naive to believe that this HUGE MESS didn’t occur in 12months. This was a Process and Not an Event, as some of you would want the American people to believe.”
Posted by: tjp612
________________________
Obama said it himself during his campaign. “The question is not whether or not you are better off now than you were 8 years ago. It’s whether you WILL be better off four years from now.”
Bush had a deficit o 4.8 billion. Deomocrats whined and belly-ached about how this deficit was going to hurt our children and grandchildren and all of humanity for generations and generations.
Today Obama’s budget is being revealed wth a budget defitic of 1.3 TRILLION. If a deficit of 4.8 was so bad, how is a deficit of 1.3 trillion better?
As to the “unjust” wars you mentioned, not only are they still going on, but YOUR party voted for them back in 2002.
So you tell me. How are we better off now than we were under Bush?

“some suggested the rich would create and employ America, and saw nothing wrong with that policy….well Why didn’t it work for 8 years.”
Don’t know about you, but I’ve never worked for a poor person…
The Bush years were disastrous – I mean, why would we ever settle for 5.5% unemployment over 8 years when we can have 10%+ funemployment under Obama!

The Bush deficit spending came to 4 trillion in 8 years. An average of 500 billion a year. When Bush came into office we had internet stock era bubble collapse and that devastated the economy. Bush turned around the 3/1999 to 3/2001 economic collapse, dealt with 9/11 by revamping a FAILED domestic security infrastructure, and prosecuted TWO wars successfully. During which the far left (Marxist/Progressives) hateed on him for all he was worth. Now the Neo-Marxist/Progressives have come to power in America and all I see them do is LIE, increase government power, and spend money like it’s nothing. I remember the old Soviet Union and the LIES it fed its’ people, and thanks to a sycophantic media and the Obama administration I feel like I am living in the Old Soviet Union. America was founded on Truth, maybe we should get back to telling the Truth. A Neo-Marxist is a Progressive, and the current Democratic party is full of them.

Odd that ABC doesn’t mention that the 2009 budget included the one time TARP, auto bailout and Fannie and Freddie bailouts. ABC seems to want to give the impression that President Obama is not spending a trillion dollars+ more each and every year. We averaged 4.4% growth under the Bush/Republican leadership and revenues increased dramatically. Once Democrats took Congress in 2006, it’s been all downhill for the economy with the steepest descent occurring once we had a Democrat President to go with the Democrat Congress. When will we learn that elections do have consequences?

Obama’s communist party—party of fools.

blah blah blah marxist. blah blah soviet. blah blah blah.
Anybody who compares a sitting American president to a Marxist is a loon and hates our country to boot. This is a two way street. You’re no different than the fringe liberals who called Bush a Nazi.

This budget proprosal is irresponsible….way past reasonable. Nobody could be this dunb. The deficit is destroying the economy, stopping growth; destroying jobs.
Cut foreign aid by 75%.
Cut the rediculous $100 billion immediate jobs stimulous in it’s entirety.
Cut Education Department by 50%. Education by the Constitution is the responsibility of the states. At least half the education budget does nothing.
Cut labor Department expenses BY 50%.
Cut Health and Human Services by 50%.
Now you’ve a reasonable budget.

“Anybody who compares a sitting American president to a Marxist is a loon and hates our country to boot. This is a two way street. You’re no different than the fringe liberals who called Bush a Nazi.”
There are significant differences between a “Marxist” and a “Nazi”.
Obama’s common use of class warfare, unequal support for unions vs. non-union workers (as witnessed in the “Cadillac tax” deal cut with unions), expropriation of private property (e.g., GM and Chrysler bondholders), and re-distributionalist outlook are credible data points that could be used to support an argument that Obama exhibits Marxist tendencies.
Objectively speaking, I cannot think of any parallels between GWB and Nazis.

“Don’t know about you, but I’ve never worked for a poor person…”
In large part because corporate protections prevent the owners of failed businesses from losing everything and becoming poor. Otherwise there would be lots of people who once worked for poor people.
“The Bush years were disastrous – I mean, why would we ever settle for 5.5% unemployment over 8 years when we can have 10%+ funemployment under Obama!”
Blatantly ignoring that the crash was happening before Obama was even elected, and many jobs were going to be lost either way. Should we believe Palin/McCain could have stopped unemployment from reaching 10%. -Highly unlikely!

come on mikeeeeeee, you need to do a little more research. tax CUTS have always INCREASED tax revenues. if the tax cuts go away, the federal tax receipts will DECREASE. watch and learn.

===Blatantly ignoring that the crash was happening before Obama was even elected, and many jobs were going to be lost either way. ===
Fine. Obama wasn’t elected president yet. He was, however, a voting member of the majority party. But shhhh…that’s a secret…he inherited the budget deficit that he and his party had nothing to do with.

“Fine. Obama wasn’t elected president yet. He was, however, a voting member of the majority party. But shhhh…that’s a secret…he inherited the budget deficit that he and his party had nothing to do with.”.. The pill bill wars, etc. Look at such legislation and you have your answer. Again, During the grand Bush years they passed a ton without paying for it and now it’s coming due. The pill bill was huge.

We could save about a billion a year if Obama and Pelosi would just PARK THEIR PLANES!

Your “Goodnight Moon” breakout is only partially accurate. The moon project is being abandoned, but the budget includes an increase of $6 billion to NASA’s overall budget. Part of that is to shift the target from the moon to a manned mission to Mars.

Wow’ Thanks can doers for the 3.8 trillion debt. No it is not Bushes fault. Obama and gang passed this not Bush.

obummer.

When it comes to balancing the budget he threw in this little bit about a “freeze” on expenses. This is mostly rhetoric because the freeze doesn’t take place for some time, is only in certain segments in which there is government involvement, and is miniscule in comparison to all the increased expenses added in his first year. For him to talk about freezing expenses is laughable—I have no idea how any reasonable person could swallow that. It like the old saying of “close the barn door after the horse is out”. His talk about freezing expenses now after promoting reckless spending for a whole year is contradictory—similar to all his other numerous contradictions. Telling us he is proposing an expenses freeze is like giving a baby a pacifier to keep him quiet.

Axey – I’ll bite. What fantastic legislation did the democrats pass the last two years of Bush. You recall that time? When your side called them the most do nothing congress ever? They passed nothing? Bush found his veto pen? So what passed that cost this deficit? The only thing I can think of is a small raise in SCHIP.

GLEN BECK SAYS!!!!

“Democrats postponed passing the 2009 budget while Bush was president, waiting on the savior to allow it to sail through. Because Bush threatened to veto it. But Obama stands before us and proclaims he inherited the deficit budget of 2009. He didn’t inherit. He helped birth it.”….. I can find nothing saying “the savior” signed off on this budget. I can find a history of it being Bush’s biggest ever proposed, and the democrats arguing about big cuts to Medicare and other entitlement.

I got that wrong. You’re saying Obama said he had nothign to do with a deficit. When did he say that? I’ll take direct quotes of Obama saying he had nothing to do with any of this.

You lie! Is he ever gonna spout truthful facts.

“You make it sound as if business owners who fail never become poor because of these “corporate protections”"
It only sounds like that if you think “in a large part” = “never”. -With a little lack of differentiation between corporations and other types of small businesses like partnerships mixed in.

===I can find nothing saying “the savior” signed off on this budget. I can find a history of it being Bush’s biggest ever proposed, and the democrats arguing about big cuts to Medicare and other entitlement.===
He signed the budget into law.
Are we not arguing for the same thing? Bush’s approval among republicans and independents dropped, not because of Iraq, but because of the out of control spending. Shouldn’t we both be arguing that Obama is not only mimicking Bush’s spending habits, but putting them on steroids? If you were against Bush’s deficit spending, why aren’t you against Obama’s?

“I will more politely respond that your analogy is getting ragged unless you’re claiming Bush was a Marxist too.”
The middle class misses the good ol’ days of Bush unemployment statistics (5.5% over 8 years, 9.5% U6 unemployment vs. 17% now).
BTW – Obama points out “U.S. companies are shipping our jobs overseas”. These jobs do not “belong” to the U.S. government, they belong to the employer. Tax policy, regulations, and other cost drivers determine in large part where employers choose to locate operations. But I sense that you are one of those who believes these jobs “belong” to the U.S. government or the American people. If the U.S. govt. is interested in keeping positions in the U.S., it should compete for these positions as other countries do – A great place to start is through lowering of corporate taxes (U.S. just behind Japan as highest in the world among “1st world” economies). But Obama (with his re-distributionist/expropriationist outlook) will not do this. Obama also mentioned in the SOTU he wants more access to markets and would like to see approval of the lingering Free Trade Agreements with Colombia, S. Korea, and (I believe) Panama (held up by union-owned Democrats) – we’ll see if he means it.

“If you were against Bush’s deficit spending, why aren’t you against Obama’s?”
9 out of 10 doctors of the economy agree you can’t cut spending during a bad recession.

===9 out of 10 doctors of the economy agree you can’t cut spending during a bad recession. ===
So your argument is Bush spending is bad. Obama spending is good. You might as well say republicans evil, democrats good. It makes as much sense.

===Well…I do say that. Not always, just in the vast majority of cases. It’s just that Bush had the option not to spend and did so anyway while Obama doesn’t have as many choices with this bad economy. ===
I’ve never seen you not say it. Bush was dealing with a recession when he took office. And then 9/11 happened. In 2007, the recession was returning. I do not understand why Obama has no choices during a recession but Bush did? You should just stick to good/evil.

From 1976 to 2008, Dems have been in the White House for 12 years, GOP for 20 years. On average, the Debt has increased 141,25 billion $ a year under a DEM president, 475.8 billion $, under a GOP president. Lets’s give GWB a pass on his last 2 budgets – in which Debt increased by 2.9 Trillion $ – since he was going into the worst recession in 75 years and looking at a financial system on the brink of collaspe, which means less revenue, unemployment benefits increase, TARP that had to be passed, etc. Even doing so, the average yearly debt increase for the remaining 18 years of GOP presidencies stands at 367 billion $. That is why I have a problem when people equate the DEMS as the big spenders and the GOP as the fiscally responsible party. I also did the math for the same period with the unemployment rates. Since many will say that the GOP tax cuts are good for the economy and employment, let’s see if there is some truth to that! Under DEM presidents, average unemployment rate was 5.78%. Under GOP presidents, 6.31%. In this case, I left 2007 and 2008 in, since the unemployment rates for these 2 years IMPROVE the average (2007: 4.6%, 2008:5.0%) It would have been 6,48% otherwise. So I’m here shaking my head and wondering: Has the GOP been so unlucky that only THEY got elected in hard times, and that the DEM only got the good years? Naah! Deficits have been high in good times, higher in bad times. I even tried taking out the 2001-2003 recession unemployment numbers while leaving in the 2007-2008 ones and the average comes out to 5,87%, STILL higher than the DEM average, although marginally. From the discourse I can read, I would have expected a massive difference in favor of the GOP on both counts, especially after removing the worst GOP years in both categories. Did not happen; any explanations?

“Poor, poor Obama – He inherited the need to spend so much money and incur such large deficits!”
If you guys would have the courage to admit that the last financial crisis wasn’t caused by sentimental Democrats writing mortgages for poor people we could acknowledge that the housing bubble and it’s associations within the securities and derivatives markets was inflated by people with plenty of money–and despite our current economic condition there are many of them right now too–who were looking around for something to invest in when the Fed and the SEC pulled out alot of the stops. Let’s get that investment energy directed toward green technology; high tech batteries and motors and solar cells etc. If we don’t want our air to look like China’s–and despite what many right-wingers will tell you it is purely a choice–this is going to be profitable.

“Let’s get that investment energy directed toward green technology; high tech batteries and motors and solar cells etc. If we don’t want our air to look like China’s–and despite what many right-wingers will tell you it is purely a choice–this is going to be profitable.”
It’s interesting that in the U.S. we use as much or more gasoline and coal now than we ever have, yet when was the last time our our was as clean as it is today? Is your comparison with China a scare tactic or are you simply uninformed?
What about nuclear? Nuclear requires less govt. subsidies per KW produced than solar, wind, and biomass.

This was based on an April 2010 Poll: —- Eighty-six percent of economists polled feel the U.S. recession will end in the second half of 2009. That’s the takeaway from the latest Blue Chip Economic Indicators survey of PRIVATE economists released this week. With such steep declines in the fourth quarter of 2008 and first quarter of 2009, more economists are becoming convinced the bottom is hit.
—- The turnaround in the U.S. economy will be driven in large part by increased consumer spending, say most economists, which should be “bolstered by the government’s stimulus package”. —-

GOP presidents have raised the DEBT on average 3.37 times what the DEMs did. What is so hard to understand?
In the last 15 years, The US had 12 budget deficits,Canada 1. Our economies are similar in makeup, although not in size. Why this discrepancy?

pjoesmith | Feb 1, 2010 4:05:46 PM: Your point is? Can you distinguish between a BUDGET and and end-of-year result? OH! Sorry, I just figured out your point: Clinton raised the debt by 1,3 Trillion$ while Bush increased it by 6,1 Trillion$ over the same number of years! Yeah, I think GWB sucked too…

Yep, they both sucked and so does Obama. But your numbers on Bush are high (try 4.4 Trillion). Vote them all out!

pjoesmith | Feb 1, 2010 4:23:38 PM: I’m using the *&?%$@ numbers YOU posted! 09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75 minus 09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06. How do YOU get 4,4 Trillion$. Remember, FY 2001 is the final result of the last Clinton budget passed in October 2000, and FY 2009 is final result of the last GWB budget passed in October 2008.

pjoesmith | Feb 1, 2010 4:23:38 PM: OK, you don’t like Obama and/or the Democrats for you own personal reasons, and no sensible argument or verifiable numbers – Even those you post yourself! – will change that. As much as I respect the right for everybody to have his/her opinion, I disagree on your analysis of the facts. Take care!

Whatever | Feb 1, 2010 3:43:11 PM: FYI: Many Conservatives actually take credit for the Clinton “surpluses” saying that it was because of a GOP Congress control of otherwise runaway Democratic spending that there were surpluses for those 3 years! Either way, Clinton can’t win, right?

pjoesmith | Feb 1, 2010 4:51:37 PM: I wrote in mt post: FY 2009 is final result of the last GWB budget passed in October 2008, just to prevent this question as It seemed clear you did not know what the year in FY … meant. FY 2010 Started Oct 1 2009 and will end Sept 30 2010. That is the first Obama budget.

pjoesmith | Feb 1, 2010 5:21:11 PM: Obama could not re-write the budget in January ’09, because the money is already attributed to agencies and programs, which in turn, make capital expenditure plans, hire people, buy equpment and make commitments. It also takes some time after the investiture to choose a cabinet and department heads, create a budget committee and so on… This being said: — OK, you don’t like Obama and/or the Democrats for you own personal reasons, and no sensible argument or verifiable numbers – Even those you post yourself! – will change that. As much as I respect the right for everybody to have his/her opinion, I disagree on your analysis of the facts. Take care!

Ok … here you go:
Date Federal Debt
——— ———————
1/20/2009 – 10,626,877,048,913.08
1/29/2010 – 12,278,635,997,966.88
So Obama’s only added 1.65 Trillion to debt. Feel better?

So Obama’s only added 1.65 Trillion to debt. Feel better?
Posted by: pjoesmith | Feb 1, 2010 5:49:53 PM
____________________________________
The FY2009 budget, presented by President George W. Bush, was $3.518 trillion. This budget covered October 2008 – October 2009.
So – much of the Obama figures you quote are actually out of a Bush budget.

pjoesmith | Feb 1, 2010 5:49:53 PM: Obama added 358 billion$ to the debt since his FY 2010 budget was enacted. I hope it brings a little smile on your face ;-)

joe, you’ve lived a sheltered life if you think POTUS — which you make a big deal out of — can just snap his fingers and poof! The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are over and all the troops are home by next weekend. Also, an inconvenient question for you: if President Obama is so bad for not using the uncommitteed money to reduce the deficit — where were you when President *Bush* LIKEWISE did not use available uncommitted money to reduce it???+++You know what I see in American politics these days, on BOTH miserable sides? “Hey, the rules have changed. We’re no longer operating under the principle of what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. When my party is the goose, X is good — but when my party is the gander, why, of course, X is BAD!!!” There’s a single-word definition of that attitude: “hypocritical.”+++Civility has disappeared from American public discourse, both in town halls and the halls of power. Democrats accusing Republicans of having a health care proposal that calls for Americans to just hurry up and die — QUICKLY. Republicans screaming about Palin’s “death panels” and the like. Am I living in a Pollyana world by believing that *most* members of both parties do genuinely want what’s best for most of us, even if they violently disagree not only on how to achieve the “best,” but even on what the “best” IS???+++Regarding the attacks on Obama, I’m increasingly dismissing them, for two main reasons. First, some attackers are mum when exactly the same thing can be said about BUSH. Second, a shocking number of people I know have finally burst out with their REAL objection to Obama: he ain’t white. Well, not 100%, good-ol’-boy white, that is.+++What crap. And I’m a white guy who grew up on a small ranch in northeast Texas; the nearest little incorporated spot in the road didn’t, and doesn’t, have a single Black person living there — so I’m not some high-faluting, meddling Yankee.