Why didn't we hear about the deficit during the Bush administration?

[Article 15]

Why didn't we hear about the deficit during the Bush administration?

When not waving the flag, Rush and Hannity bemoaned it quite often. Beck mocked and chided Shrub and the congress constantly. Guys like Boortz and Jason Lewis were going absolutely nuts. Then, there were the dems and their compliant media toadies, who pissed and moaned about it in conjunction with the tax cuts for those eeeeeevil "wealthy" people.

Whoever didn't hear about deficits exploding during Chimpy McShrub's eight years had to have been living on a deserted island, with Gilligan and the gang.

i always liked Mary Ann.........

Mary Ann > Ginger

all effin' day!

 

[Modbert]

how did you know they would let GM fail, but not Ford?

Because Obama was not going to allow the car companies to fail on his watch. Carter had the same issue in '79 I do believe it was with Chrysler. He did the same thing, gave them a loan, and they paid it back in full with interest.

Can you imagine unemployment if those three went under? It'd be insane.

And the amount that the three combined were asking for was nothing like the banks. And the argument that "Well, this is where the jobs truly are" prevailed.

And a good way to determine the company's strength is to look at the Annual Report obviously. I hadn't taken a deep look. But I just knew politics would come into play more than business.

 

[Xenophon]

No, we didn't.

Yes we did.

The fact that you had your head up your ass and missed it is your problem.

 

[elvis]

how did you know they would let GM fail, but not Ford?

Because Obama was not going to allow the car companies to fail on his watch. Carter had the same issue in '79 I do believe it was with Chrysler. He did the same thing, gave them a loan, and they paid it back in full with interest.

Can you imagine unemployment if those three went under? It'd be insane.

And the amount that the three combined were asking for was nothing like the banks. And the argument that "Well, this is where the jobs truly are" prevailed.

And a good way to determine the company's strength is to look at the Annual Report obviously. I hadn't taken a deep look. But I just knew politics would come into play more than business.

except he let GM fold.

 

[Queen]

You are right. The media is stupid.

Reagan and the two Bushes created 92% of the National Debt by lowering taxes on the rich and increasing wasteful military spending.

And yet Republicans dishonestly claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility.

Why do they keep lying?

Because people keep believing them.

The Big Lie of the Republican Party is the tax cut.

If you cut taxes and raise spending, you are actually raising taxes and passing the debt on to the next President.

I guess they don't want to accept the truth so they decided to take the thread off topic.

Oh well.

 

[Xenophon]

And yet Republicans dishonestly claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility.

Why do they keep lying?

Because people keep believing them.

The Big Lie of the Republican Party is the tax cut.

If you cut taxes and raise spending, you are actually raising taxes and passing the debt on to the next President.

I guess they don't want to accept the truth so they decided to take the thread off topic.

Oh well.

The thread isn't 'off topic.'

You missed something the rest of us were well aware of, and even were silly enough to make a thread about.

 

[Modbert]

except he let GM fold.

Well yes.

The main problem with Detroit was they were making cars that went against what America needed in a bad recession. So once the good times stopped rolling and people could no longer afford the gasoline on their hummers, what was going to happen? The obvious.

I have to say, one of the things that the Japanese do according to their traditions is to make use of every space in the car. That and saving gasoline is huge, especially now.

What you see now actually is Detroit is getting into farming more believe it or not. But it will likely not fully recover for a long time. A LONG time.

 

[Harry Dresden]

You are right. The media is stupid.

Reagan and the two Bushes created 92% of the National Debt by lowering taxes on the rich and increasing wasteful military spending.

Mark Twains protege has shown up....

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.
(Graphic from the Washington Post)

•President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.

•President Bush began a string of expensive finan*cial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.

•President Bush created a Medicare drug entitle*ment that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new govern*ment health care fund.

•President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. Presi*dent Obama would double it.

•President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama has already in*creased this spending by 20 percent.

•President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.

•President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.

As to... "Why didn't we hear about the deficit during the Bush administration?"

Answer - You didn't read the NYT or WaPo or the internet? You did not watch CNN or FOX News? In other words, what's this "we" stuff kemosabe?

Sorry you can add the debt from '09 to BUSH'S total since the budgert ending Oct '09 was passed by BUSH!!!! Do you understand how that works?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

•President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.




Ah BULLSHIT!

 

[Xenophon]

Barry raised the cap on descretionary spending by a whoping TWENTYFOUR percent when he took office.

Now the phoney bastard says he want s a'freeze' on it, AFTER he already jacked it a full one quarter higher, and you lemming defend that jackass as if he's somehow an improvement on Chimpola!

 

[Queen]

Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.
(Graphic from the Washington Post)

•President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.

•President Bush began a string of expensive finan*cial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.

•President Bush created a Medicare drug entitle*ment that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new govern*ment health care fund.

•President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. Presi*dent Obama would double it.

•President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama has already in*creased this spending by 20 percent.

•President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.

•President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.

As to... "Why didn't we hear about the deficit during the Bush administration?"

Answer - You didn't read the NYT or WaPo or the internet? You did not watch CNN or FOX News? In other words, what's this "we" stuff kemosabe?

Sorry you can add the debt from '09 to BUSH'S total since the budgert ending Oct '09 was passed by BUSH!!!! Do you understand how that works?

Just another bit of that graph thats false.

OK that explains one more trillion of Bush's addition to the national debt. There's still another 3 trillion not showing on that graph.

It's just a false graph.

 

[Queen]

•President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.




Ah BULLSHIT!

LOL! It's a Heritage blog. What do you expect?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

which rock were you living under?

point me in the direction of all those tea baggers who were out there screaming about the bush deficit spending.

why do you think bush's poll numbers were in the 30's, and bad through most of his second term given the fact that we are pretty much a 50/50 nation. I'll help, it's because right of center people were angry about bush's spending.

but where were the public tea parties!!!!!!!!!??????

 

[Ragnar]

Sorry you can add the debt from '09 to BUSH'S total since the budgert ending Oct '09 was passed by BUSH!!!! Do you understand how that works?

Apology accepted.

Do I understand how that works? No. I've never met a man, woman, child, philosopher or vegetable who gets how the government works. However I do recall how lame-duck Bush was treated by the congress his last couple months. His dumb idea's were thrown out or altered to make room for the the new regime's equally dumb idea's. And, in so far as the dumb idea's they aggreed on, they passed. That includes TARP part uno that according to some in this thread "SAVED US FROM A GREAT DEPPRESSION"

The Stimulus, February 9, 2008 – At a bush league price of only $168 billion, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) passed, and President Bush signed the first measure that economists assured us would save the economy. The core of the bill was tax rebate checks for more than 111 million U.S. households (a carbon copy of the tax cuts in Obama’s current stimulus plan). Also in the bill thanks to hard lobbying from Pelosi: increased limits on the size of mortgage loans that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could buy. Remember when the left still thought government could keep the bubble from bursting?

The Housing Bailout, July 30, 2008 – A bill that David Broder praised as proof that “Congress Works“, the ‘08 housing bill again increased the limit on size of the loans Fannie and Freddie could buy, put taxpayers on the hook for an increased $300 billion in new FHA lending authority, cut local governments a check for $3.9 billion to buy foreclosed properties, and provided $15 billion in temporary tax breaks for home buyers. Oh … and it also gave the Treasury Department the authority to buy Fannie and Freddie stock … but don’t worry … those government sponsored entities could never fail.

TARP I: The First $350 Billion, October 3, 2008 – Originally sold to the American people as an acutely targeted program to rid the financial sector of toxic mortgage assets, the Troubled Asset Relief Program quickly lost all coherence. First the money was used to inject capital into select U.S. banks, but then Secretary Hank Paulson announced he would purchase stock in non-bank financial firms and provide federal financing for investors in securities backed by consumer debt such as car loans, student loans, and credit cards. The last of the first $350 billion was swallowed by the failing auto giants General Motors and Chrysler.

TARP II: The Second $350 Billion, January 15, 2009 – Following the required formal request from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, the Senate failed to stop the second $350 billion TARP funding mere days before President Obama was sworn in. The world is waiting with bated breath to find out how Tax Cheat Timothy Geithner plans to blow his first $350 billion, but already his plans have been all over the place. Early in January, Geithner made it clear his plans would be as incoherent as Paulson’s, promising to “broaden its scope … to municipalities, small businesses, homeowners and other consumers.” Now Geithner is singing a tune closer to Paulson’s original vision including more government purchases of bank equity, with strings attached, including loan modification programs. We’ll see what happens.

The Mother of All Stimuli, sometime next week, 2009 – Already clocking in at over $1.34 trillion over ten years, Obama’s Trillion Dollar Debt Plan is Bushonomics on steroids. The bill is a straight forward attempt to permanently redistribute spending and power away from the private sector and toward government at the cost of trillions of dollars in tax dollars from our children.

The Seven Floats of the Bush-Obama Borrow-Bailout Parade | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

 

[Queen]

point me in the direction of all those tea baggers who were out there screaming about the bush deficit spending.

why do you think bush's poll numbers were in the 30's, and bad through most of his second term given the fact that we are pretty much a 50/50 nation. I'll help, it's because right of center people were angry about bush's spending.

but where were the public tea parties!!!!!!!!!??????

There weren't any. The tea baggers are hypocrites because they only noticed the deficit when the Democratic President took office. Then they started crying about wanting their country back.

Back from what? The Black Muslim Man Born in Kenya?

LOL!!

Wackos.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

I created LLC and trust organizations to run my business dealings through back in the early '90s. I get a fair amount of my end income out of that business structure in dividends, and I'm still nowhere near "rich".

Suffice to say you have NFI what you're talking about....Best quit while you're behind.

Thanks again, for proving my other point while you're struggling to argue with me and insult me.

The tax cuts were not for the middle class, on earned income. They were on dividends and capital gains.

taxes were cut on middle class, low class, upper class, AND capital gains.

Sadly for YOUR argument the total in $s off tax liability was cut from CAPITAL GAINS which not many low income people enjoy.

 

[elvis]

why do you think bush's poll numbers were in the 30's, and bad through most of his second term given the fact that we are pretty much a 50/50 nation. I'll help, it's because right of center people were angry about bush's spending.

but where were the public tea parties!!!!!!!!!??????

There weren't any. The tea baggers are hypocrites because they only noticed the deficit when the Democratic President took office. Then they started crying about wanting their country back.

Back from what? The Black Muslim Man Born in Kenya?

LOL!!

Wackos.

Why don't you go to Chris' so he can teabag you?

 

[elvis]

Thanks again, for proving my other point while you're struggling to argue with me and insult me.

The tax cuts were not for the middle class, on earned income. They were on dividends and capital gains.

taxes were cut on middle class, low class, upper class, AND capital gains.

Sadly for YOUR argument the total in $s off tax liability was cut from CAPITAL GAINS which not many low income people enjoy.

I know the capital gains tax was cut in half. but i dont want to hear that only the rich got the tax breaks.

 

[Ragnar]

why do you think bush's poll numbers were in the 30's, and bad through most of his second term given the fact that we are pretty much a 50/50 nation. I'll help, it's because right of center people were angry about bush's spending.

but where were the public tea parties!!!!!!!!!??????

There weren't any. The tea baggers are hypocrites because they only noticed the deficit when the Democratic President took office. Then they started crying about wanting their country back.

Back from what? The Black Muslim Man Born in Kenya?

LOL!!

Wackos.

Yup, had nothing to do with the Bush/Obama policies of late 2008, early 2009.

The Stimulus, February 9, 2008 – At a bush league price of only $168 billion, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) passed, and President Bush signed the first measure that economists assured us would save the economy. The core of the bill was tax rebate checks for more than 111 million U.S. households (a carbon copy of the tax cuts in Obama’s current stimulus plan). Also in the bill thanks to hard lobbying from Pelosi: increased limits on the size of mortgage loans that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could buy. Remember when the left still thought government could keep the bubble from bursting?

The Housing Bailout, July 30, 2008 – A bill that David Broder praised as proof that “Congress Works“, the ‘08 housing bill again increased the limit on size of the loans Fannie and Freddie could buy, put taxpayers on the hook for an increased $300 billion in new FHA lending authority, cut local governments a check for $3.9 billion to buy foreclosed properties, and provided $15 billion in temporary tax breaks for home buyers. Oh … and it also gave the Treasury Department the authority to buy Fannie and Freddie stock … but don’t worry … those government sponsored entities could never fail.

TARP I: The First $350 Billion, October 3, 2008 – Originally sold to the American people as an acutely targeted program to rid the financial sector of toxic mortgage assets, the Troubled Asset Relief Program quickly lost all coherence. First the money was used to inject capital into select U.S. banks, but then Secretary Hank Paulson announced he would purchase stock in non-bank financial firms and provide federal financing for investors in securities backed by consumer debt such as car loans, student loans, and credit cards. The last of the first $350 billion was swallowed by the failing auto giants General Motors and Chrysler.

TARP II: The Second $350 Billion, January 15, 2009 – Following the required formal request from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, the Senate failed to stop the second $350 billion TARP funding mere days before President Obama was sworn in. The world is waiting with bated breath to find out how Tax Cheat Timothy Geithner plans to blow his first $350 billion, but already his plans have been all over the place. Early in January, Geithner made it clear his plans would be as incoherent as Paulson’s, promising to “broaden its scope … to municipalities, small businesses, homeowners and other consumers.” Now Geithner is singing a tune closer to Paulson’s original vision including more government purchases of bank equity, with strings attached, including loan modification programs. We’ll see what happens.

The Mother of All Stimuli, sometime next week, 2009 – Already clocking in at over $1.34 trillion over ten years, Obama’s Trillion Dollar Debt Plan is Bushonomics on steroids. The bill is a straight forward attempt to permanently redistribute spending and power away from the private sector and toward government at the cost of trillions of dollars in tax dollars from our children.