Who's to Blame for the Deficit Numbers?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Obama's 09 deficit exceeds all eight years of Bush red ink

National debt when Bush took office: $.5.5 trillion

National debt when Bush left office: $10.5 trillion

Total red Ink under Bush:........... $.5.0 trillion

Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion

Falling for obviously fuzzy math:.... PRICELESS

0.625 trillion a year for every year bush was in office.

obama - 1.5 trillion in one year. fuzzy math indeed!

You read the headline I quoted from the other post, yes? The claim is that Obama's deficit in 2009 (it's really Bush's budget seeing that FY 2009 started in October 2008) exceeds all of Bush's deficits combined (Bush's 8 years of red ink). That's just plain false.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The policies of the Bush administration, which included tax cuts during a time of war and a floundering economy, are clearly the primary source of the current deficits. The Obama administration policies that are beginning to give the economy a needed jumpstart -- the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in particular -- place a distant third in contributing to the 2009 and 2010 deficit numbers.

[Ban Hammer 13,491]

Obama's 09 deficit exceeds all eight years of Bush red ink

National debt when Bush took office: $.5.5 trillion

National debt when Bush left office: $10.5 trillion

Total red Ink under Bush:........... $.5.0 trillion

Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion

Falling for obviously fuzzy math:.... PRICELESS

0.625 trillion a year for every year bush was in office.

obama - 1.5 trillion in one year. fuzzy math indeed!

You read the headline I quoted from the other post, yes? The claim is that Obama's deficit in 2009 (it's really Bush's budget seeing that FY 2009 started in October 2008) exceeds all of Bush's deficits combined (Bush's 8 years of red ink). That's just plain false.

i'm using your numbers!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Obama's 09 deficit exceeds all eight years of Bush red ink

National debt when Bush took office: $.5.5 trillion

National debt when Bush left office: $10.5 trillion

Total red Ink under Bush:........... $.5.0 trillion

Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion

Falling for obviously fuzzy math:.... PRICELESS

0.625 trillion a year for every year bush was in office.

obama - 1.5 trillion in one year. fuzzy math indeed!

You read the headline I quoted from the other post, yes? The claim is that Obama's deficit in 2009 (it's really Bush's budget seeing that FY 2009 started in October 2008) exceeds all of Bush's deficits combined (Bush's 8 years of red ink). That's just plain false.

i'm using your numbers!

Chuck, it ain't that hard to understand that a blatantly false claim was being made. That false claim being that Obama's 2009 deficit exceeds all the red ink that Bush has accumulated over the 8 years he was in office. You know that's a false claim so what's wrong with just accepting that the facts tell a different story. Besides, the '09 deficit is not Obama's alone. Bush submitted the FY '09 budged.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Bush approved tax cuts, but didn't pay for them. Bush expanded Medicare, but didn't pay for it. Bush launched two expensive wars, but didn't pay for them. Bush took a quarter-trillion-dollar surplus, and then handed off a $1.3 trillion deficit to his successor. "It's not George W. Bush's fault"? C'mon.

[Ban Hammer 13,491]

Obama's 09 deficit exceeds all eight years of Bush red ink

National debt when Bush took office: $.5.5 trillion

National debt when Bush left office: $10.5 trillion

Total red Ink under Bush:........... $.5.0 trillion

Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion

Falling for obviously fuzzy math:.... PRICELESS

0.625 trillion a year for every year bush was in office.

obama - 1.5 trillion in one year. fuzzy math indeed!

You read the headline I quoted from the other post, yes? The claim is that Obama's deficit in 2009 (it's really Bush's budget seeing that FY 2009 started in October 2008) exceeds all of Bush's deficits combined (Bush's 8 years of red ink). That's just plain false.

i'm using your numbers!

Chuck, it ain't that hard to understand that a blatantly false claim was being made. That false claim being that Obama's 2009 deficit exceeds all the red ink that Bush has accumulated over the 8 years he was in office. You know that's a false claim so what's wrong with just accepting that the facts tell a different story. Besides, the '09 deficit is not Obama's alone. Bush submitted the FY '09 budged.

so you're gonna continue to shift blame to bush for how long?

might i draw your attention to the line of yours Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion - that's obama's 2009 projected deficit - your words. he owns it.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Charles' strategerie of arguing....continually ignore the obvious facts and pretend he's right.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Obama's 09 deficit exceeds all eight years of Bush red ink

National debt when Bush took office: $.5.5 trillion

National debt when Bush left office: $10.5 trillion

Total red Ink under Bush:........... $.5.0 trillion

Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion

Falling for obviously fuzzy math:.... PRICELESS

0.625 trillion a year for every year bush was in office.

obama - 1.5 trillion in one year. fuzzy math indeed!

You read the headline I quoted from the other post, yes? The claim is that Obama's deficit in 2009 (it's really Bush's budget seeing that FY 2009 started in October 2008) exceeds all of Bush's deficits combined (Bush's 8 years of red ink). That's just plain false.

i'm using your numbers!

Chuck, it ain't that hard to understand that a blatantly false claim was being made. That false claim being that Obama's 2009 deficit exceeds all the red ink that Bush has accumulated over the 8 years he was in office. You know that's a false claim so what's wrong with just accepting that the facts tell a different story. Besides, the '09 deficit is not Obama's alone. Bush submitted the FY '09 budged.

so you're gonna continue to shift blame to bush for how long?

might i draw your attention to the line of yours Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion - that's obama's 2009 projected deficit - your words. he owns it.

I'm not shifting any blame here, I'm merely pointing out that an article quoted in this thread contains blatantly false claims.

As for the 2009 deficit, please familiarize yourself with the federal fiscal year - specifically when it starts and when it ends. Then come back here and tell me how Obama could possibly own the 2009 federal budget. He neither drafted nor submitted it. He wasn't even in office for the first 4 months of FY 2009. Does he own what's been added to the deficit due to his policy decisions? Absolutely. Does he also deserve credit for having successfully worked to pull the economy back from the cliff that it was about to fall off of? You betcha. Does he own that which he inherited? Technically yes, because he now runs the show. But to sit there and claim that the 1.5 trillion projected deficit is all his fault is simply dishonest. And to claim that that figure exceeds all of Bush's red ink over the 8 years he was in office is a show of ignorance, ill will, stupidity, mathematical ineptitude or any combination thereof.

[dalegg 143]

I don't have any issues with blaming the 2009 deficit on Bush's policies-afterall he did support and sign that $700 billion dollar bailout bill. Keep in mind though that if it were up to Republicans in Congress that bill would not have passed. Very few Republicans are actually referring to Bush as a fiscal conservative.

But you're telling me that we're going to have a growing deficit over the next 2 years and its still his fault... I'm not accepting that. The current Administration has the power to control that. They can complain all they want this year, but if this blame game continues in year 2 and 3 he won't be credible at all.

[Ban Hammer 13,491]

Obama's 09 deficit exceeds all eight years of Bush red ink

National debt when Bush took office: $.5.5 trillion

National debt when Bush left office: $10.5 trillion

Total red Ink under Bush:........... $.5.0 trillion

Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion

Falling for obviously fuzzy math:.... PRICELESS

0.625 trillion a year for every year bush was in office.

obama - 1.5 trillion in one year. fuzzy math indeed!

You read the headline I quoted from the other post, yes? The claim is that Obama's deficit in 2009 (it's really Bush's budget seeing that FY 2009 started in October 2008) exceeds all of Bush's deficits combined (Bush's 8 years of red ink). That's just plain false.

i'm using your numbers!

Chuck, it ain't that hard to understand that a blatantly false claim was being made. That false claim being that Obama's 2009 deficit exceeds all the red ink that Bush has accumulated over the 8 years he was in office. You know that's a false claim so what's wrong with just accepting that the facts tell a different story. Besides, the '09 deficit is not Obama's alone. Bush submitted the FY '09 budged.

so you're gonna continue to shift blame to bush for how long?

might i draw your attention to the line of yours Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion - that's obama's 2009 projected deficit - your words. he owns it.

I'm not shifting any blame here, I'm merely pointing out that an article quoted in this thread contains blatantly false claims.

As for the 2009 deficit, please familiarize yourself with the federal fiscal year - specifically when it starts and when it ends. Then come back here and tell me how Obama could possibly own the 2009 federal budget. He neither drafted nor submitted it. He wasn't even in office for the first 4 months of FY 2009. Does he own what's been added to the deficit due to his policy decisions? Absolutely. Does he also deserve credit for having successfully worked to pull the economy back from the cliff that it was about to fall off of? You betcha. Does he own that which he inherited? Technically yes, because he now runs the show. But to sit there and claim that the 1.5 trillion projected deficit is all his fault is simply dishonest. And to claim that that figure exceeds all of Bush's red ink over the 8 years he was in office is a show of ignorance, ill will, stupidity, mathematical ineptitude or any combination thereof.

i'm well aware of when the federal fiscal year begins....der!

so now you wish to back off from "... Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion" statement?

either that is the truth (as portrayed from your earlier post or you're backpedaling now.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Obama's 09 deficit exceeds all eight years of Bush red ink

National debt when Bush took office: $.5.5 trillion

National debt when Bush left office: $10.5 trillion

Total red Ink under Bush:........... $.5.0 trillion

Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion

Falling for obviously fuzzy math:.... PRICELESS

0.625 trillion a year for every year bush was in office.

obama - 1.5 trillion in one year. fuzzy math indeed!

You read the headline I quoted from the other post, yes? The claim is that Obama's deficit in 2009 (it's really Bush's budget seeing that FY 2009 started in October 2008) exceeds all of Bush's deficits combined (Bush's 8 years of red ink). That's just plain false.

i'm using your numbers!

Chuck, it ain't that hard to understand that a blatantly false claim was being made. That false claim being that Obama's 2009 deficit exceeds all the red ink that Bush has accumulated over the 8 years he was in office. You know that's a false claim so what's wrong with just accepting that the facts tell a different story. Besides, the '09 deficit is not Obama's alone. Bush submitted the FY '09 budged.

so you're gonna continue to shift blame to bush for how long?

might i draw your attention to the line of yours Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion - that's obama's 2009 projected deficit - your words. he owns it.

I'm not shifting any blame here, I'm merely pointing out that an article quoted in this thread contains blatantly false claims.

As for the 2009 deficit, please familiarize yourself with the federal fiscal year - specifically when it starts and when it ends. Then come back here and tell me how Obama could possibly own the 2009 federal budget. He neither drafted nor submitted it. He wasn't even in office for the first 4 months of FY 2009. Does he own what's been added to the deficit due to his policy decisions? Absolutely. Does he also deserve credit for having successfully worked to pull the economy back from the cliff that it was about to fall off of? You betcha. Does he own that which he inherited? Technically yes, because he now runs the show. But to sit there and claim that the 1.5 trillion projected deficit is all his fault is simply dishonest. And to claim that that figure exceeds all of Bush's red ink over the 8 years he was in office is a show of ignorance, ill will, stupidity, mathematical ineptitude or any combination thereof.

i'm well aware of when the federal fiscal year begins....der!

so now you wish to back off from "... Obama's 2009 projected deficit:..... $.1.5 trillion" statement?

either that is the truth (as portrayed from your earlier post or you're backpedaling now.

I'm not backpedaling from that 1.5 trillion projection. You just don't seem to be able to get your head around the fact that 1.5 trillion (09 deficit) is not more than 5 trillion (Bush's total red ink) which is what the claim of the article posted above was. 1.5 trillion is less than 5 trillion. Is that really so hard to understand?

And yes, I am saying that Obama is not solely responsible for that 1.5 trillion either seeing that he did neither submit that budget nor preside over the entire fiscal year.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't have any issues with blaming the 2009 deficit on Bush's policies-afterall he did support and sign that $700 billion dollar bailout bill. Keep in mind though that if it were up to Republicans in Congress that bill would not have passed. Very few Republicans are actually referring to Bush as a fiscal conservative.

But you're telling me that we're going to have a growing deficit over the next 2 years and its still his fault... I'm not accepting that. The current Administration has the power to control that. They can complain all they want this year, but if this blame game continues in year 2 and 3 he won't be credible at all.

It's the Right Wingers who get outraged and teabag each other at parties when it's Obama's policies adding to the deficit, but were all but silent while Bush kept building it up over 8 years. Selective outrage or lots of people on the Right wearing blinders? Take your pick.

[dalegg 143]

I don't have any issues with blaming the 2009 deficit on Bush's policies-afterall he did support and sign that $700 billion dollar bailout bill. Keep in mind though that if it were up to Republicans in Congress that bill would not have passed. Very few Republicans are actually referring to Bush as a fiscal conservative.

But you're telling me that we're going to have a growing deficit over the next 2 years and its still his fault... I'm not accepting that. The current Administration has the power to control that. They can complain all they want this year, but if this blame game continues in year 2 and 3 he won't be credible at all.

It's the Right Wingers who get outraged and teabag each other at parties when it's Obama's policies adding to the deficit, but were all but silent while Bush kept building it up over 8 years. Selective outrage or lots of people on the Right wearing blinders? Take your pick.

Some did sure. But c'mon a large theme of the democratic campaign was over the size of the deficit. I've seen absolutely squat in attempts to reduce that and I don't see a mass of leftists getting outraged over the growing deficit. It's all a matter of who you support. Its the way it is, but you probably didn't watch or listen, but even Sean Hannity used to criticize Bush over the deficit on TV and the radio.

Edited August 27, 2009 by dalegg

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Congress passes the budget. The President just gets to sign it.

Every Presidential budget except for one (Clinton FY1994) was dead on arrival. Republicans lost control of the House in the 2006 election. FY2008 and FY2009 are the Democrat's budget, not the Republicans, and not Bush's alone. Any spending passed since January 1, 2007, belongs firmly in the Democrat's lap.

Of course, the Republicans in Congress prior to 2007 also went on a spending spree, when the CBO provided what everyone thought were unrealistic projections for FY2001 (the so-called Clinton Surplus). When the projections were retracted in later years, the GOP leaders did nothing to reign in the spending.

Bush I engaged in what I thought was an unneccessary war. Clinton's Security team was inherently impotent, leading in good part to the attack on the US, and giving Bush II an excuse to engage in another unneccessary war. Of course, our current young President now finds himself bogged down in yet another war, something he did all by himself.

Edited August 27, 2009 by Mister_Bill

[spookyturtle 9,466]

All of the countries problems are because of Bush and the Republicans.