Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Obama spending binge never happened

you really need to get the language correct if you want to be taken seriously

budget deficits are added to national debt

that should be an "and/or"

as LT has accurately pointed out it is the House which controls the purse strings in America, not Obama

not wanting to step on ardy's comment but a definition is not necessary however if you want to respond to his comment you may now present the case that increased spending has generated the deficits ... let me help you with an example

if Obama had proposed a budgets of 30% more than previous budgets and revenues remained flat then it would be a case of both lost revenues and overspending so you may now present that case with some factual information ... but .... i think what ardy obliquely referred to is the simple fact that the first budget was %3.53T and the current budget is $3.58T and we assume $0.5T was the deficit for each of the three budgets we get a total deficit of $1.5T ... ergo the deficits accumulated so far can not be a direct result of overspending but has a different cause ... perhaps you should explore that and present a report on your findings

Actually, the only large spending program I am aware of was the stimulus package.... lets say 900B at the outside. A program that has had far less budget impact than the various bush tax cuts

Since a tax cut is approved by Congress, that money is already taken out of the calculation during budgeting. The House turned Dem in 2007, I believe the last year that a budget was actually approved was in 2008. If a budget was passed and approved with knowlege that the funding was cut by bi-partisan tax cuts, then it is the height of irresponsibility for Congress to authorize funds above and beyond what is actually available to be spent. The fact that a budget hasn't been passed in over 1100 days has given a blank check to Obama and his supposed financial team. It has allowed him to play politics with funding and only the Tea Party has reined in Omama's spending.

There is an extra $5T that was borrowed and not repaid over the past three years. and almost $7T since Pelosi and Reed were large and in charge. For all of that money we have gotten bank failures, wasted "stimulus", union welfare, anti-business policies and taxes and 10% unemployment. The housing crash has a lot to do with these issues, but Congress as a whole did nothing about it for years leading up to the crash. It is counter intuitive to think that if you spend more than you earn your economy will improve and prosper. Eventually the bills have to be paid. This mis-administration (administration denotes control)has squandered whatever chance they had to actually accomplish anything to reduce the rising debt they are inflicting upon America. To say that Obama spending binge never happened and note a $5T deficit confirms my belief that liberalism is a self inflicted adiction, no different than a herion adiction, it is the inability of supposedly smart people to recognize the concept of financial stability. Couple that with an inate and false belief in the superiority of their cult's morals and ideas and you have the profile of a very mentally disturbed human being. I would point fingers at one or two, but they are too many to seperate from the herd of lemmings and followers who only question their mental health in the privacy of their own bathroom, tha the location where their ideas took root and make the most sense.

And I think it's important to remember that a month before Bush's second term was up (2008), Paulson begged for 750 Billion. Bush also put 25 Billion in the auto industry.

But what people really forget was the 164 Billion stimulus Bush had Congress to appropriate in Feb 2008.

So the total money Bush and his administration asked for and got in his last year in office was kissing $1 Trillion. And of course all of that money did very little to control things to come...other than bail out the very corporations who continue to reign over our government and who is are still practicing business the very same way that they did that caused our crash.

We are still in a terrible mess.

Excellent! So you agree that the idiotic tax cuts must be left in the ditch in order that we pay the bills. Very good.

There were a few lapses in your logic, like administration = control, and Congress is irresponsible and that is Obama's fault... but I choose not to get into that in favor of basking in our new-found agreement.

i continued to be amazed that people such as yourself clam to know how government works and then proceed to expose their ignorance ... i am not expert but at least when i don't know something i do the research

incorrect ... i don't think that has ever been the case ... typically Congress believes that a tax cut will increase revenues from other sources such as larger tax base from increased employment and wages ... look back to the Bush era tax cuts and see that Republicans did not reduce the budget (I know it is hard to believe in your world that political parties other than the Democratic party spends money like a profligate but it is true) ... now by every estimate those tax cuts will be the leading factor in increased deficits in the near future

this is a could go either way statement ... in some cases i would agree with you and in other cases i would disagree

a blatant and not inconsequential example would be the budgets of 2008-2009 ... in 2007 when budget was proposed no one had an inkling that the worst economic contraction in 70 years was imminent and thus revenues would be slashed by the downturn ... in 2008 the Bush administration rightfully decided that to cut the budget in the face of the worst economic contraction in 70 years would do more damage to the already failing economy than borrowing money to sustain it ... the Obama administration likewise furthered the concept with additional borrowed funds to save the economy from the proverbial train wreck

really??? ... you better read those continuing resolutions which Obama did not write ... the House wrote them and the president must abide by them ... no blank checks were given

ok you are going to have to explain these one at a time
what has federal deficit spending to do with a bank failure?
can you quantify the wasted stim spending (there were some cases)?
can you quantify the cost of union welfare (this is a fav of elrushbo ... are you getting this from him or he from you)
how much does "anti-business" policies cost? (gee another elrushbo fav)
which taxes? now you understand that if you have revenue it is not part of a deficit?
unemployment ... i will presume you actually know what you are talking about so could you quantify unemployment insurance payouts and show how much they caused a rise in deficits?
Now if you can't show these things I will have to conclude you are simply either blowing it out your [ ... ] or regurgitating elrushbo without understanding his lame argument

it could be but remember businesses as a matter of course borrow money to expand.

but then government doesn't control the economy except when in a contraction then government intervention can stall the downturn.

you do realize that the rising national debt has been a long term process over at least 40 years ... the point being this administration is not the only culprit as you have made them out to be

wow straight out of michael savage ... and you with all the tea people minions constitute the bastion of right thinking

gee how can i respond to the savage nation ... he is so way smarter than me ... he must be right ... i am mentally disturbed so please let me be a tea people ... [geez ... while vomiting]

I will simply make two simple notes here: One, the thread is about the lack of a "spending binge." All of this talk of ballooning deficits is really just a distraction and unrelated to the original basis for the thread. Second, that is the point. Changing the subject is the standard Republican response. When the facts do not support your argument, change the subject. No matter what, blame, blame, blame. Facts are not important, blame is, and if you don't have the facts, make them up. If that doesn't work, resort to name calling and stereotyping. It is still blaming, but now you can spread the blame to all of the "opposition." Finally, and no matter what, never accept even an iota of responsibility, fault, or error. DO NOT BACK DOWN. Any reasonableness or acceptance of responsibility is a sign of weakness and is NOT TO BE TOLERATED. Only the opposition is weak.

Now, for those interested in how all of this gobbledygook is supposed to work, may I present "United States budget process - an overview" - from Wikipedia (note, this exceeds the 150 word limit, but is not subject to copyright restriction - Wikipedia:Copyrights):
United States budget process

well elrushbo has commented and stated unequivocally that the nutting article is phony, not true etc and that even Democrats are distancing themselves from the article ... Ann Coulter commented that after conferring with AEI economists they determined that Nutting fudged the numbers ... the criticism is Nutting used 2009 as a baseline but determined that all of 2009 was from Bush budget and therefore led to erroneous conclusions ergo their original bashing is accurate that Pres Obama is a spendthrift

so i guess we have to check the facts and what we see is Congress enacted a budget of $3.52T ... received revenues of $2.1T ... using kindergarten arithmetic that means there was a deficit of $1.4T

now the proposed budget was $3.1T and was expanded to $3.5T when signed by Pres Obama in Mar after ARRA was enacted in Feb ... without reading transcripts of committee proceedings the reasons for the increase is not known but if there is some reference to ARRA then it is only worth $400B, which in turn only slightly changes the numbers of Nuttings analysis from that perspective

all in all, the conservatives still do not understand the difference between budgets and deficits ... it is no small wonder they appropriated $4T in new spending (which led directly to new debt) during the Bush administration

By the way, from the chart itself, it is clear that Nutting did shift that responsibly, but it would be too much to expect ultra-right-wing blowhards to actually read what they are criticizing. It is only important to know that it doesn't support their narrative.