Post
Experience Project iOS Android Apps | Download EP for your Mobile Device
It's official and even being reported (quietly) by left of center CBS News. Obama has officially added more to the deficit in 3 years than Bush added in 8. ttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/ Go head koz kids. Lets all blame it on Bush and Reagan and maybe you can also call me a racist for providing a link.
TwylaMarie TwylaMarie 41-45, F 20 Answers Mar 20, 2012

Your Response

Cancel

I think the fact that he has blatantly made decisions that waste money and undermine the economy as if he is purposely trying to sabotage this country is reason enough for me not to vote for him.<br />
* side note, if you give "Rules For Radicals" a quick read, you will see that he is using those concepts to encourage discontent and class warfare.

Best Answer

Well, I don't think he's the anti Christ, as a matter of fact he seems to be an intelligent and generally nice guy. It's just that I don't like his politics. I'm sure a few of my good friends agree with him 100%!

Best Answer

defecit Shmecifit....Obama has added more common decency than Bush, that's why I will Re-elect him

Best Answer

Selling our children into economic slavery is "common decency." Lying to us on his election ("I will halve the deficit in my first two years") is common decency? Don't know if you've noticed, but Bush isn't on the 2012 ballot. Romney is going to be though and he's a better choice.

Best Answer

Western corporations have been selling other peoples children into economic slavery for generations. Just look at what has been happening in Africa as farmland that should be used to feed the starving is being used to produce tobacco and coffee beans in order to pay off debt that cannot ever possibly be repaid

Best Answer

Haven't been to Africa other than a brief stop, so don't know the economic conditions, but they make the same claims about China and Indonesia which I have been to. I guarantee you that everyone outside the factories there would rather be inside. The Chinese (and Indians) are getting their own apartments instead of living with their parents, buying motorcycles, cars and tvs and living a life they never dreamed of - all because corporations that used to be here are there.

Best Answer

I know. I am just highlighting the hypocrisy now that the boot is on the other foot. I bet you were not complaining during the good times. Perhaps if you had of been things would have been different.

Best Answer

actually, Death, I'm a chronic complainer. I was a total whiner during the whole Bush Presidency. Haven't really been happy with anything since the about '99. :)

Best Answer

lol I will leave you to it then :p

Best Answer
3 More Responses

Yeah I wouldn't make it personal though. Obama just followed the same Keynesian thinking as Bush and every president before him stretching back to FDR. Also the Fed as usual stepped in to make things as bad as possible so that it could justify it's existance.<br />
<br />
Obama is just the front guy for a general ideology or idiotology prevelent in the American economic/political system in a kinda "We're all Keynesians now" way. Even if Ron Paul gets in next time he'd have to fight the entire political establishment to get things through.

Best Answer

It's funny how when he said he could cut the deficit in half, everyone was "Obama is gonna do this, lets vote for him." and now it's like, "Well of course the deficit is going up." I thought young people weren't supposed to be so jaded and the younger people seem most resigned to the idea of economic slavery for their generation.

Best Answer

It's the wisdom of youth; if it's not sexy like socialism and communism then they're not interested. No-one wants to hear that the solution is are boringly simple as capitalism.

Best Answer

BUSH STARTED WITH A SURPLUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<br />
<br />
<br />
GODDAMNIT!!!!!!!!!!

Best Answer

Sean - Go to the official records and show us all where the dip was in the deficit. You won't. Through enormous economic activity associated with the rise of the internet, a war draw down and raising taxes, Clinton got closer than anyone and if you read my writings I am very complimentary of Clinton, but the idea of a surplus is a DNC talking point that does not really stand up to scrutiny. Also, he got that surplus under a pure GOP congress that was pretty idealogically driven to cut taxes and improve the business climate, so he didn't do it alone.

Best Answer

what are you talking about? look its very simple.
If I start with a million dollars and I spend 1 million and 10 dollars my deficit is what? 10 dollar.
if the next guy starts with -10 dollars and spends 20 bucks guess who has a larger deficit?
**** me running

Best Answer

Seancurios- Just because the DNC says it doesn't mean it was true. No department of government is as well documented as the treasury and you will not see a surplus recorded ever.

Best Answer

SEAN IS THE VOICE OF REASON- TWYLA GETS OFF BY THE WORD

Best Answer

Just cause you cite it and write it doesn't make it true

Best Answer

I dont think its the DNC that said when bush took office there was a surplus but ok whatever dude

Best Answer

This is CBS news - perhaps the most left wing of the big three Babz. Home of perky Kaite Couric the Palin slayer and Dan Rather - he of the forged military records that were supposed to bring down Bush. I didn't write it and I didn't quote from it. It's just reality. But you believe Sean because, Treasury Department numbers aside, he knows that there was a surplus because the DNC and Dailykoz told him so.

Best Answer

Clinton did not leave a surplus, there was a PROJECTED surplus in a budget that left no wiggle room for events like the 9/11 attack and Katrina, also it was accomplished by adding the social security fund to the general fund.

Best Answer

I think bringing clinton into this conversation will do nothing more than confuse it. Lets just focus on was there a large surplus when Bush started or was there not.

Best Answer

no he didn't

Best Answer

Sean - I placed links elsewhere on this issue that show in no uncertain terms there way no surplus. Period. Go look it up for yourself or see my note on the other message you posted.

Best Answer

I have links that say global warming is a fact. would you like to exchange links? oh wait I also have one that says we never went to the moon

Best Answer

surplus?? stop smoking that stuff and come back to reality!

Best Answer

here is the thing. if there was not a surplus as every news organization was saying during the time then that is fine, it just means bush spent more then we thought.

Best Answer

Go to to the treasury dept website. Look at the numbers. No surplus. They are the official record keepers. No need to argue with me. Go look. Easy to find.

Best Answer

Check the treasury dept. please don't trust me. Go see for yourself

Best Answer

Go to the treasury dept. look it up. The numbers are all on line.

Best Answer
14 More Responses

Obama has tried to clean up Bush's disaster..But that's not enough to get re-elected. the country needs more help and voters are ready for a replacement. He needs to work hard to keep his position.

Best Answer

What about a trillion dollar stimulous, losing $18 a share and counting by buying controlling interest in a car company that feelsl like the Chevy Volt is the right answer, investing a half billion in a solar panel company that goes belly up 8 months later, and signing a $900 billion dollar healthcare overhaul that is now priced at $1.7 trillion is helping to clean up anything?

Best Answer

Thats because Obama had to pick up the pieces of war that Bush left for him. Bush also left the economy at tatters, he left it worse that what he got .

Best Answer

More finger pointing. So he spends more in 3 years than Bush did in 8 and it's all Bushes fault. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

Best Answer

come on now, you really think all those blind democrats are going to admit that Obama can do any wrong??? They like to blame everyone else but their own stupidity

Best Answer

you need to read more and not listen to gossip and the finger pointing...still waiting for Obama to "fix" the economy...is spending more then any other president in history his way of doing that????

Best Answer

you fail to ever acknowledge what the expenditures were for, silly, they are for the people OF this country, not the people who own this country with their corporate manipulation of power, like cheney.

Best Answer
1 More Response

Puppets get chosen ... doesn't matter who gets elected

Best Answer

Sometimes Hatter, I fear you might be correct. Or at this point it might just be that we're all sitting on a runaway train. I'm hoping we can find someone who will at least try to break the strings or put on the breaks.

Best Answer

Its only because they now only audited the federal reserve for the first time in 100 years on Obamas watch. I'm not supporting Obama, I'm telling you this things come a long way. The corruption is deep and its begining to show now

Best Answer

To be fair, that was part of it. And while I think the "$16 trillion" being trumpeted is pure BS, it is something that was done and I credit Ron Pauls tenacity to get it done. But it's hard to make the argument that the results of this audit are the source of this spending. I think we all know that the fed reserve nonsense is still sitting out there as bad news and it's one of the reasons why I saw our recession is far from over and that we need to cut spending further.

Best Answer

I see a depression. Or at least massive inflation in prices of basics like foodstuffs and fuel. If you've got money you need to be wise with it now, not tomorrow. Tomorrow might be too late

Best Answer

Amen on that Blahback.

Best Answer

I don’t see why people can not dislike Obama for reasons that are not complete ridiculous because there actually are very good reasons to not like him. The only problem with those reasons is that they are activities that the right actually support.

Best Answer
1 More Response

If you're looking at debt as a % of the GDP (which everyone does) Then look at any historic graph about what happened around 1981 when Reagan took office. There's no question about where the debt started. What is in question is whether or not they were necesary changes needed to stimulate economy and growth. I will agree with you about the latter Bush though. Even though the deficit still increased after Bush took office, it had peaked and was on the decline until he lost both the house and the senate, from which it took an unprecedented increase all the way up through today. Whether these changes are necessary and will help, or spiral us into disaster, time will tell. But if you want to talk about overspending, take a look at what F.D.R. did. And also look at where the national debt ended up at the end of the F.D.R./Truman administration. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. Don't get me wrong, I tend to vote conservative on most issues. But basing an entire election on us vs. them is "cutting off our noses to spite our faces."

Best Answer

It's funny how many people want to blame Reagan for using using deficits to get us out a long (10 year) malaise. I don't get it. I I borrowed money to buy a house (a wise purchase) then the next guy used my account to by a mansion that would be my fault? How about if the next guy used it to buy a castle? Still my fault? The next guy uses it to buy a castle that has jet engines? Still my fault? Reagan used deficit spending to end the cold war and get us out of Carter and Fords economic funk, but there's no reason why two Bushes, a Clinton and an Obama needed to keep using it.

Best Answer

Um, so was that an agreement or disagreement? I never blamed Reagan for using the deficit. I merely cited both his use of it as a precedent for Obama using it, with F.D.R as an example of when it unarguably seemed to have worked. You might just have easily bought that house, lost your job and went bankrupt (not a wise purchase) but you wouldn't have known that until after you had already spent it. But to me, it seems you are condemning Obama for trying the same techniques as Reagan and F.D.R. I have a whole slew of problems with Obama, but spending isn't on the top of the list. My philosophy is to go without a house at all and live in a cardboard box, until I can afford to buy the house. So in my opinion, they all suck.

Best Answer

Peyote - Obama spent as much already as Bush did in 8 years. That's not buying a house, that's buying the castle with jet engines and having it cloned.

Best Answer

If we don't get our debt under control we are in trouble.

Best Answer

Do you think it would be different if someone else was in office?

Best Answer

Absolutely do. A trillion was spent on a stimulus that no GOP person would have signed off on and that didn't help. (Unemployment went to 10.7%) At least $56 billion was spent on new rules put in place by Obama. I could go on and on.

Best Answer

The West is in its death throes as it China sweeps away all before it economically. The best anyone can do is delay the enviable. You have a standard of living that your grand children will not be able to imagine.

Best Answer

Actually - I'm not that pessimistic. Our debt versus our assets are not outrageous - we just have to be willing to put them to work. I kind of see this as a possible hostile acquisition thing if you know business. We can start putting our assets to work better or we can weight until China invades and takes what they want.

Best Answer

you always do.

Best Answer

I do. Looking at government as a business is good perspective,. anyone who doesn't thing governments can go out of business due to bad financial management should read up on Greece.

Best Answer
2 More Responses

have to agree - he's an atavistic bufoon........

Best Answer

What are all the President Obama haters going to do if the Mittster wins, then crashes and burns. The president isn't the one that needs replacing, it is all the political hacks in crongress, whom would Who®e out their mother for fifty cents. Term limits. Look how long those @ssholes like, Kennedy, Byrd, Helms, Thurmond served. H€ll they almost died on the floors of congress and others who served since Washington was President. The only thing these lifelong Senators & Representatives care about is getting richer from insider trading and getting laid by the interns. I have never fiqured out why people keep voting forthe same old Hucksters, election after election. I will not vote for anyone that have served more than two terms. We need a shot of Young Blood in Congress.

Best Answer

We have lots of young blood. Thank god for people like Paul Ryan

Best Answer

Paul Ryan is a fruitcake. We need more moderates not people leaning so far left or right they they are blind to anything except "My Way Or No Way" this goes for both parties. The best don't get elected, he with the most money gets elected, and that is just wrong.

Best Answer

so sad... booooo hoooooooooo

Best Answer

It is one of many reasons to get rid of him.

Best Answer

He is a puppet like every other..

Best Answer

I see your point but I don't have it in me to answer political questions today.

Best Answer

Related Questions