BUSH DEFICIT VS. OBAMA DEFICIT IN PICTURES.
According to Heritage, Obama will quadruple the deficit this year.
But when a Republican is President,running up deficits is “unpatriotic”:
Obama’s trillions dwarf Bush’s ‘dangerous’ spending
By Byron York
Chief political correspondent 2/24/09
Pelosi and Reid called Bush’s budgets “dangerous” and “unpatriotic,” but with Obama, they’ve changed their tune.
Back in 2006, when Democrats were hoping to win control of the House and Senate, party leaders worked themselves into a righteous outrage over the issue of out-of-control federal spending. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called the Republican budget “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic” because it increased the amount of U.S. debt held by foreign countries. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., accused Republicans of going on “an unprecedented and dangerous borrowing spree” and declared GOP leadership “the most fiscally irresponsible in the history of our country … no other president or Congress even comes close.”
Good thing we had those super smart democrats to tell everybody how terrible and dangerous deficits are for America and the burden it will put on our future generations.
Hey no problem baby, deficits are “beneficial” now:
White House Budget Director Orszag: “Elevated Deficits Are Beneficial”
“During an economic downturn like we’re experiencing the deficit gets elevated which is not only natural, it’s beneficial because it helps bring the economy back up to the potential output level. In other words, the key problem we face right now is the gap between how much the economy could produce and how much it is producing. The whole point of the Recovery Act is to fill in that gap and part of that means a temporary elevated deficit.”
White House Budget Director
February 26, 2009
democrats go from deficits being “unpatriotic and dangerous” to “beneficial and necessary”.
It’s all Bush’s fault.480 billion deficit combined with the 700 billion Tarp (that democrats said we had to have) is the
Reporter’s question to Orszag:
a related question, you know, when you all unveiled this budget you talked a lot about fiscal responsibility, and the end result is spiraling debt, basically. And I’m wondering if you see this task force as a means to begin to address that.
MR. ORSZAG: Well, let me answer that second question first. Again, I don’t know what spiraling debt you’re referring to, but we’re inheriting a budget situation that is a mess, and that we’re working our way out of.
“WHAT SPIRALING DEBT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!!!!”
Somehow quadrupling the debt is “beneficial” and not “spiraling debt”, but Bush’s less than 25% of this debt is “inheriting a budget that is a mess”.
This is why liberals are always having to announce how “intelligent” they are because it does not show.
This economy is 100% Obama’s and the democrats now.
Their spending and deficits dwarf anything from our previous Presidents combined.
We have a man who has never run a for-profit company, who cannot even fill out his own income tax properly, now firing the heads of large manufacturing firms.
On top of that, Congress wants to limit “excessive spending.” Hmm…which business or entity has blown (pledged) enough money in the past 70 days to equal that of the US GDP? (see previous posts). How about we have Congress set an example first and allow TAXPAYERS to set their pay grade and perks (like free unlimited health care and travel).
Here’s the solution to America’s deficit: Take Bill Gates money! If Obama’s economic plans are so great, and thus helps Obama indirectly promote them via Obama name-dropping him in townhall meetings, then let Gates pay for the national deficit when the bills come due and there is no more money that can be tapped out of the middle-class workers (middle class being those people who actually go to work as opposed to people supported by the government).
I wrote to my Representative, William Clay, this past week to ask him why he supported Obama’s spending bills. Specifically, I wrote to him and asked:
Dear Congressman Clay,
As a young professional who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal, I am worried about the amount of spending the Obama administration is spending. Specifically, I am concerned that spending $1.5 Trillion dollars on bailing banks, businesses, and debt beat homeowners will not pull the economy out of a recession but, will instead, sink the US into a deeper recession with a higher amount of debt. Considering the amount of reform that Obama wants to push through Congress comes in the form or entitltement programs, how do you propose that taxpayers pay for all these spending once the different nations that bought our debt want their money back?
Here is the response I got.
March 13, 2009
Dear Ms. XXXXX:
This will let you know I received your recent Email message commenting on the federal budget.
I appreciate having the benefit of some of your thoughts about our nation’s spending priorities. Please be assured that I will give thoughtful consideration to the issues you raised as I work to represent the interests of the First Congressional District of Missouri in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Thank you for your communication. I hope you will continue to feel free to keep me apprised of your interests and opinions in the future.
Wm. Lacy Clay
Member of Congress
I hope that voters, like me, toss you out of office the next chance we get.
Seriously, that’s the best answer you can give? That’s not an answer! It only says “thank you for writing to me but I really don’t care what you have to say.”
Arizona congressman Jeff Flake, who is fed up with the process, recently tried to get the House ethics committee to investigate links between congressional earmarks and campaign contributions.
Not surprisingly, his resolution died – despite the support of nearly all House Republicans, including those who represent North Texas districts, and 17 Democrats, including Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Austin, the sole Texas Democrat in Flake’s corner.
Therein is the problem. Most in Congress lack the will to police themselves, preferring to rail against wasteful earmarks while discreetly fattening up spending bills with pet projects. Flake and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Dallas, who doesn’t earmark any project, are among the few exceptions.
When President Obama promised Wednesday to attack defense spending that he considers wasteful and inefficient, he opened a fight with key lawmakers from his own party.
It was Democrats who stuffed an estimated $524 million in defense earmarks that the Pentagon did not request into the 2008 appropriations bill, about $220 million more than Republicans did, according to an independent estimate. Of the 44 senators who implored Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in January to build more F-22 Raptors — a fighter conceived during the Cold War that senior Pentagon officials say is not suited to probable 21st-century conflicts — most were Democrats.
- Anti-Catholic Legislation
- Atlas Shrugged
- Bills I Support
- BO – Biography
- Capping Pay
- Credit Crisis
- Disenfranchise Voters
- Equal Opportunity
- EU Ratification
- Food Stamps
- Former Obama Supporters
- Free Market Economics
- Free Press
- Free Speech
- Global Warming
- Going green
- Government Debt
- Health Care
- Liberal Business
- Mark Levin
- Michelle Obama
- Minister of Culture
- Neutral Govt
- Obama & Bush
- Obama – Cabinet
- Obama – Domestic Policy
- Obama – Foreign Policy
- Obama – Fundraising
- Obama – Housing Bill
- Obama – Spending Bills
- Obama – Stimulus Bill
- Obama Budget
- Obey Obama
- Personal Amusement
- Personal Debt
- Political Attacks
- Preventing Credit Fraud
- Record Collections
- Redistribution of Wealth
- School Shootings
- Science and Politics
- socialized medicine
- Space exploration
- Strange but True
- tax cheats
- Tax Cuts
- Tea Party
- The Left
- Tolerant Liberals
- Town Hall
- United Nations
- Useful Idiots
- Voting Rights