Once again, spending is way down under a Democratic President

[Redfish]

Bush DECIDED not to pay for the wars?

Congress has control of spending, bub.

So we should stop calling the 2001/2003 tax cuts the Bush tax cuts? because that's inaccurate?

right, they are now the obama tax cuts.

 

[Redfish]

Bush DECIDED not to pay for the wars?

Congress has control of spending, bub.

Ok, the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS from 2001 to 2007 decided not to pay for the wars.

Feel better?

are you saying that no dems voted to authorize and fund those wars? If so, you are lying.

 

[Brain357]

just one question: 9/11/2001---------did that day have any affect on the fiscal situation in this country?

Yes, it led us into 2 wars that Bush decided not only not to pay for, but via 2 tax cuts he decided to reduce even further the revenue that would have paid for them.

Secondly, if you're going to try to let Bush off the deficit hook because of external events,

then by simple consistency you have to let Obama off the hook because of even more dramatic external events.

wrong again, the congress authorized and FUNDED the Iraq and Afghanistan fiascos. They were both stupid wastes of lives and money, but CONGRESS allowed Bush to get us into them-----everyone is responsible, to put it all on Bush is to ignore history.

To ignore he was the main pusher to go to war is just stupid.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Bush DECIDED not to pay for the wars?

Congress has control of spending, bub.

Ok, the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS from 2001 to 2007 decided not to pay for the wars.

Feel better?

What the fuck? I so love low information posters. frickin idiots and love to chage history when it suits them.

 

[Redfish]

Yes, it led us into 2 wars that Bush decided not only not to pay for, but via 2 tax cuts he decided to reduce even further the revenue that would have paid for them.

Secondly, if you're going to try to let Bush off the deficit hook because of external events,

then by simple consistency you have to let Obama off the hook because of even more dramatic external events.

wrong again, the congress authorized and FUNDED the Iraq and Afghanistan fiascos. They were both stupid wastes of lives and money, but CONGRESS allowed Bush to get us into them-----everyone is responsible, to put it all on Bush is to ignore history.

To ignore he was the main pusher to go to war is just stupid.

really, have you looked into the actions of the UN? have you looked at what both clintons said about it?, how about ted kennedy? yes, bush pushed it and it was a mistake.

What the fuck does any of that have to do with obama and the current state of our govt spending.

you libs always try to deflect from the real issues by bring up Boooooosh.

grow up and try to debate what the current president is doing to us.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Bush DECIDED not to pay for the wars?

Congress has control of spending, bub.

Ok, the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS from 2001 to 2007 decided not to pay for the wars.

Feel better?

are you saying that no dems voted to authorize and fund those wars? If so, you are lying.

Why the need to make up shit and attribute it to me?

Bush pushed for 2 tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. That's why we call them the Bush tax cuts. He also engaged the US in 2 wars, coincidentally, in 2001 and 2003. The wars, obviously, represent an additional, extraordinary cost to the government, to the taxpayers.

Instead of paying for the wars, which is what this country used to do, Bush chose to borrow the money for the wars and add it to our ever growing national debt.

That is fiscal irresponsibility at its finest.

 

[Wyatt earp]

And then combine that date with March 2000 when the dotcom/y2k/telecom crash started.

20 years of republican presidents and we get a lot of excuses. 8 years of Clinton and we get a balanced budget.

Conservatism is a religion. Facts don't matter in a religion.

Bullshit conservatism is the American way. liberalism is a fucking religion. you never ever think ahead....and why is that?

 

[Redfish]

Ok, the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS from 2001 to 2007 decided not to pay for the wars.

Feel better?

are you saying that no dems voted to authorize and fund those wars? If so, you are lying.

Why the need to make up shit and attribute it to me?

Bush pushed for 2 tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. That's why we call them the Bush tax cuts. He also engaged the US in 2 wars, coincidentally, in 2001 and 2003. The wars, obviously, represent an additional, extraordinary cost to the government, to the taxpayers.

Instead of paying for the wars, which is what this country used to do, Bush chose to borrow the money for the wars and add it to our ever growing national debt.

That is fiscal irresponsibility at its finest.

9/11/2001. any impact on the economy?


we have been borrowing 30-45% of govt spending for years, Bush did not start it. He should have tried to stop it but he did not. Obama has increased the national debt every year that he has been in office.

Bush is not responsible for what obama has done. obama inherited the current economic mess from himself------its his.

 

[NYcarbineer]

wrong again, the congress authorized and FUNDED the Iraq and Afghanistan fiascos. They were both stupid wastes of lives and money, but CONGRESS allowed Bush to get us into them-----everyone is responsible, to put it all on Bush is to ignore history.

To ignore he was the main pusher to go to war is just stupid.

really, have you looked into the actions of the UN? have you looked at what both clintons said about it?, how about ted kennedy? yes, bush pushed it and it was a mistake.

What the fuck does any of that have to do with obama and the current state of our govt spending.

you libs always try to deflect from the real issues by bring up Boooooosh.

grow up and try to debate what the current president is doing to us.

Adjusted for inflation, government spending peaked in 2009.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Ok, the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS from 2001 to 2007 decided not to pay for the wars.

Feel better?

are you saying that no dems voted to authorize and fund those wars? If so, you are lying.

Why the need to make up shit and attribute it to me?

Bush pushed for 2 tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. That's why we call them the Bush tax cuts. He also engaged the US in 2 wars, coincidentally, in 2001 and 2003. The wars, obviously, represent an additional, extraordinary cost to the government, to the taxpayers.

Instead of paying for the wars, which is what this country used to do, Bush chose to borrow the money for the wars and add it to our ever growing national debt.

That is fiscal irresponsibility at its finest.

Then why for the most part did obama extend the bush tax cuts in 2010 and make them perment? because the idiot didnt have another plan....... and you have the fucking nerve to call bush stupid? look in the mirror, Obama never had a plan to solve anything, His only plan was to out bullshit the American public to live in the whitehouse..... thats it......

 

[NYcarbineer]

are you saying that no dems voted to authorize and fund those wars? If so, you are lying.

Why the need to make up shit and attribute it to me?

Bush pushed for 2 tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. That's why we call them the Bush tax cuts. He also engaged the US in 2 wars, coincidentally, in 2001 and 2003. The wars, obviously, represent an additional, extraordinary cost to the government, to the taxpayers.

Instead of paying for the wars, which is what this country used to do, Bush chose to borrow the money for the wars and add it to our ever growing national debt.

That is fiscal irresponsibility at its finest.

9/11/2001. any impact on the economy?


we have been borrowing 30-45% of govt spending for years, Bush did not start it. He should have tried to stop it but he did not. Obama has increased the national debt every year that he has been in office.

Bush is not responsible for what obama has done. obama inherited the current economic mess from himself------its his.

So 9/11 is Bush's 'out', but the worst real estate bust in history, among other things, can't be Obama's 'out'?

Are you oblivious to the partisan hackery you're engaging in there?

 

[Wyatt earp]

To ignore he was the main pusher to go to war is just stupid.

really, have you looked into the actions of the UN? have you looked at what both clintons said about it?, how about ted kennedy? yes, bush pushed it and it was a mistake.

What the fuck does any of that have to do with obama and the current state of our govt spending.

you libs always try to deflect from the real issues by bring up Boooooosh.

grow up and try to debate what the current president is doing to us.

Adjusted for inflation, government spending peaked in 2009.

And who caused that inflation? damn bro......

 

[hunarcy]

Yes, it led us into 2 wars that Bush decided not only not to pay for, but via 2 tax cuts he decided to reduce even further the revenue that would have paid for them.

Secondly, if you're going to try to let Bush off the deficit hook because of external events,
then by simple consistency you have to let Obama off the hook because of even more dramatic external events.

The ignorance displayed in this post is astounding. Did you even have a basic civics class in high school?

First, Bush could not "decide" to not pay for the wars. Second, Bush couldn't cut taxes. Third, in the end, Obama's not responsible, either.

CONGRESS authorizes spending. CONGRESS is the only body that can authorize borrowing money on behalf of the United States. All of the things you are blaming Bush for and defending Obama for have very little to do with them.

The Executive Branch must issue bonds to borrow money in the amounts authorized by Congress, which then spends the money as they see fit. A President, ANY President, can only spend the money that was appropriated by Congress and HAS to spend in for the purpose that money was appropriated. The President can suggest and/or ask, but it is up to Congress to decide. A President can even veto a spending bill, but in the end, it's up to Congress because they can override the veto.

So, when you go back and look at your chart, look at which Party controlled the House of Representatives when spending skyrocketed and which Party controlled it when spending was slowed. Both Parties have things of which to be ashamed, but you simplistic folks who treat the President as if he's king have the MOST for which to be ashamed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

really, have you looked into the actions of the UN? have you looked at what both clintons said about it?, how about ted kennedy? yes, bush pushed it and it was a mistake.

What the fuck does any of that have to do with obama and the current state of our govt spending.

you libs always try to deflect from the real issues by bring up Boooooosh.

grow up and try to debate what the current president is doing to us.

Adjusted for inflation, government spending peaked in 2009.

And who caused that inflation? damn bro......

Make your point if you have one. Adjusted for inflation, government spending peaked in 2009.

Period.

 

[hunarcy]

And who caused that inflation? damn bro......

Mostly the blame for that lies with the Federal Reserve and its policies.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yes, it led us into 2 wars that Bush decided not only not to pay for, but via 2 tax cuts he decided to reduce even further the revenue that would have paid for them.

Secondly, if you're going to try to let Bush off the deficit hook because of external events,
then by simple consistency you have to let Obama off the hook because of even more dramatic external events.

The ignorance displayed in this post is astounding. Did you even have a basic civics class in high school?

First, Bush could not "decide" to not pay for the wars. Second, Bush couldn't cut taxes. Third, in the end, Obama's not responsible, either.

CONGRESS authorizes spending. CONGRESS is the only body that can authorize borrowing money on behalf of the United States. All of the things you are blaming Bush for and defending Obama for have very little to do with them.

The Executive Branch must issue bonds to borrow money in the amounts authorized by Congress, which then spends the money as they see fit. A President, ANY President, can only spend the money that was appropriated by Congress and HAS to spend in for the purpose that money was appropriated. The President can suggest and/or ask, but it is up to Congress to decide. A President can even veto a spending bill, but in the end, it's up to Congress because they can override the veto.

So, when you go back and look at your chart, look at which Party controlled the House of Representatives when spending skyrocketed and which Party controlled it when spending was slowed. Both Parties have things of which to be ashamed, but you simplistic folks who treat the President as if he's king have the MOST for which to be ashamed.

The Republicans controlled the Presidency and the Congress from 2001 to 2007.

That's when the wars started, that's when the taxes were cut, that's when spending increased every single year, that's when triple digit deficits came back.

 

[Wyatt earp]

And who caused that inflation? damn bro......

Mostly the blame for that lies with the Federal Reserve and its policies.

no kidding, but we elected a weak POTUS....the Fed loves democrat presidents.

 

[hunarcy]

The Republicans controlled the Presidency and the Congress from 2001 to 2007.

That's when the wars started, that's when the taxes were cut, that's when spending increased every single year, that's when triple digit deficits came back.

That is mostly correct, though the Democrats took control of the House of Representatives in 2007 after the elections of 2006. But, your obsessive need to lay the blame at the feet of the President is the issue. The President can ask, beg or even command, but it's all irrelevant. The true blame is with Congress.

 

[hunarcy]

And who caused that inflation? damn bro......

Mostly the blame for that lies with the Federal Reserve and its policies.

no kidding, but we elected a weak POTUS....the Fed loves democrat presidents.

Although Presidents appoint Fed Chairmen, he has little influence and no control over them. That's the way Congress intended it when they created the Fed.

 

[RKMBrown]

And ignoring republican spending apparently.

OK, lets see now. the national debt was around 9T when obama took office, today it is around 17T. almost doubled in less than 5 years. all previous presidents created a debt of 9T and now under obama it has gone up to 17T.

yes, GOP presidents have engaged in deficit spending, but obama has created an entire new definition of deficit spending.

this is an undeniable FACT. spin as you wish, obama is the worst president in history.

Bush was handed a balanced budget and made a disaster of it. Obama was handed 2 wars, slow economy, and huge deficits. Bush was supposed to be small government conservative. What a joke. Liberals at least don't run on small gov.

Lies. Bush was elected to a dot.com bust. Democrats in congress voted for war in the ME. Then the turn coat democrats ran against the WAR they were for to get full control of congress. Then the DEMOCRATS RAN UP THE SPENDING. Then Obama voted for and promoted the largest deficit budget spending in the HISTORY OF MANKIND. Then Obama promoted illegal immigration, offshoring of our jobs, inshoring of workers, welfare programs are being used by more people than ever in history. Half the democrats in this country are pretending to be disabled. Bush.. yeah he was a DEMOCRAT PRETENDING TO BE A CONSERVATIVE alright.. and how is that supposed to be evidence that democrat spending is better than conservative values?