Obama Should Listen to This Guy

[PapaG]

Some guy who looks a lot like him said this in 2/2009.

"I promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term."

[video=youtube;SaQUU2ZL6D8]



Can anyone believe a word from this guy's mouth at this point?

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

Some guy who looks a lot like him said this in 2/2009.

"I promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term."

[video=youtube;SaQUU2ZL6D8]



Can anyone believe a word from this guy's mouth at this point?

Shame on those who believed any words from his mouth beforehand. Not saying McCain was the man. Just saying I don't believe how people were so passionate and so believing of Obama. I understand when people tell me, "Well, I hate Obama, and I don't trust him, but I hate him less and I trust that he'll suck less than McCain, so I voted for Obama." I can totally get that attitude of indifference. It's the people who put all of their faith and trust in him, and genuinely believed in him that absolutely shocks and horrifies me the same way it did when Bush was re-elected. We have a lot more blind, uneducated folks in this country than I realized. And the problem is, we can't just segregate them and send them away to quarantine from the rest of us. Unforuntately, there are a lot of idiots on each side of the fence. So basically.... we're fucked!

 

[RoyToy]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/

 

[MARIS61]

So Papag thinks Obama should have declared martial law and overruled congress and just done everything he promised despite not getting any support from the Repubs and very little from the Dems?

Or maybe the blame truly lies with the obstructionists who held this country for ransom, not the President who trusted them to act like Americans and reach agreement.

 

[Denny Crane]

So Papag thinks Obama should have declared martial law and overruled congress and just done everything he promised despite not getting any support from the Repubs and very little from the Dems?

Or maybe the blame truly lies with the obstructionists who held this country for ransom, not the President who trusted them to act like Americans and reach agreement.

Clinton got his stuff passed with a republican house and senate. It's clearly a lame excuse to blame republicans for Obama's failure to lead.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Clinton got his stuff passed with a republican house and senate. It's clearly a lame excuse to blame republicans for Obama's failure to lead.

Agreed.

Often the obstruction comes from the White House.

 

[PapaG]

So Papag thinks Obama should have declared martial law and overruled congress and just done everything he promised despite not getting any support from the Repubs and very little from the Dems?

Or maybe the blame truly lies with the obstructionists who held this country for ransom, not the President who trusted them to act like Americans and reach agreement.

Obama had 60 Senators (filibuster-proof) and a majority in congress when he took office. The GOP couldn't obstruct, even if they had wanted to do so. Instead of halving the deficit, he's now quadrupled it for three straight years. That's on him and nobody else.

 

[huevonkiller]

I love this thread.

 

[RoyToy]

Obama had 60 Senators (filibuster-proof) and a majority in congress when he took office. The GOP couldn't obstruct, even if they had wanted to do so. Instead of halving the deficit, he's now quadrupled it for three straight years. That's on him and nobody else.

Kind of interested in seeing those numbers.

 

[RoyToy]

I only ask because they're not the numbers I've seen, so I only wanted to see if perhaps mine are wrong.

With that said, I'll go ahead and post mine and we can perhaps go from there.

On January 20, 2009, the day Obama took office, the national debt was over $10T. As of today, February 13, 2012, the national debt is under $16T.

Now, being accused of being good at math has never applied to me, but I fail to see how the national debt has quadrupled every year under Obama.

Whatcha got?

 

[Denny Crane]

Debt != deficit.

The deficits have been > $1.3T each of Obama's 4 years (he just proposed his budget for year 4).

That was Obama's projections a couple of years ago. This graph is how it turned out:

 

[PapaG]

I only ask because they're not the numbers I've seen, so I only wanted to see if perhaps mine are wrong.

With that said, I'll go ahead and post mine and we can perhaps go from there.

On January 20, 2009, the day Obama took office, the national debt was over $10T. As of today, February 13, 2012, the national debt is under $16T.

Now, being accused of being good at math has never applied to me, but I fail to see how the national debt has quadrupled every year under Obama.

Whatcha got?

He was talking about the annual deficit in this YouTube clip, not debt. They're not the same thing.

EDIT - Denny illustrated this by providing a graph based on sourced numbers.

Whatcha got?

It's also true that Obama has increased the national debt by $6 trillion, but that wasn't the point of this thread.

 

[RoyToy]

I didn't read closely enough, so that is my bad.

As far the number you listed above at $6T, that number has been debated. Last I saw the exact number was $4.7T.

As far as the deficit now that I realized I goofed

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/06/romney-wrong-on-deficits-auto-bailout/

The deficit was already running at $1.2 trillion when Obama took office, and it grew to more than $1.4 trillion during his administration — an increase of far less than 400 percent to 500 percent.

As we have written twice before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected the fiscal year 2009 deficit at $1.2 trillion two weeks before Obama took office. That fiscal year started Oct. 1, 2008. The fiscal year was already nearly one-third over when Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009. After Obama took office, the deficit increased to $1.4 trillion for fiscal year 2009. At the end of the fiscal year, the CBO largely blamed the 2009 deficit on the recession, specifically a sharp decline in tax revenues and an increase in spending in response to the economic crisis — first by Bush and later by Obama.

Under Obama's watch, federal spending has remained at or near that level. In an April 2011 report, the CBO said (table 1-1) the actual deficit for fiscal year 2010 was nearly $1.3 trillion and the estimated deficit for the current budget is $1.4 trillion.

What do you say of these numbers?

Note that I'm not trying to call anyone out. I just like the discussion.

 

[PapaG]

I didn't read closely enough, so that is my bad.

As far the number you listed above at $6T, that number has been debated. Last I saw the exact number was $4.7T.

As far as the deficit now that I realized I goofed

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/06/romney-wrong-on-deficits-auto-bailout/





What do you say of these numbers?

Note that I'm not trying to call anyone out. I just like the discussion.

Factcheck is technically wrong, since $800 billion TARP bailout (most of which has been repaid, but not put back into the deficit) was considered a loan, and should not have been counted as a deficit unless it wasn't repaid.

Not sure what your point is, though. We haven't had TARP for 3 years now, and still deficits are running over $1 trillion.

Did you watch the video?

 

[RoyToy]

I was just presenting some numbers. Not exactly trying to make a point or statement.

 

[PapaG]

I was just presenting some numbers. Not exactly trying to make a point or statement.

Which part of "I will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term" needs clarity?

 

[RoyToy]

That's not what I responded to, though.

I responded to the quadruple comment.

 

[PapaG]

That's not what I responded to, though.

I responded to the quadruple comment.

Depends on "factcheck.org", or Obama talking about the known deficit in 2/2009.

I'll stick with what Obama said on halving the deficit, be it $1.2 trillion or $330 billion. You can continue, though. It does bring up interesting points about how deficits are incurred, and how few people know the difference between "debt" and "deficit".

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

Depends on "factcheck.org", or Obama talking about the known deficit in 2/2009.

I'll stick with what Obama said on halving the deficit, be it $1.2 trillion or $330 billion. You can continue, though. It does bring up interesting points about how deficits are incurred, and how few people know the difference between "debt" and "deficit".

And that's why, despite the recession and all of the economical turmoil, for the most part, accountants (and other similar-minded financial people) have had relatively good chances of finding jobs. And the good ones haven't had to worry about being on the chopping block.

 

[RoyToy]

You can look at it however you want

Still doesn't change the fact I was talking about the quadruple comment, and if you were correct in making that assessment. There sure seems to be a whole lot of gray area there, and I wonder why one person would use one number, while another person would use different number.

Thoughts?

 

[RoyToy]

I'm going to add some information to this thread

http://1x57.com/2011/12/15/bushs-de...-obamas-deficit-spending-1-4-trillion-so-far/

Quite the contrast.

I guess the overall question is: Whose numbers should we look at? Who's closer to the truth?

Thoughts?

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Clinton got his stuff passed with a republican house and senate.

Clinton was also White.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm going to add some information to this thread

http://1x57.com/2011/12/15/bushs-de...-obamas-deficit-spending-1-4-trillion-so-far/

Quite the contrast.

I guess the overall question is: Whose numbers should we look at? Who's closer to the truth?

Thoughts?

Obama gets to propose the budgets.

Before Bush left office, he proposed the first ever $3T budget. Obama scrapped it first thing and proposed a $3.6T budget. If he stuck with the $3T budget, he'd have added half what he has to the federal debt.

The senate hasn't passed a budget in almost 3 years.

The previous budget (2011) he proposed failed to pass the democratic party controlled senate by a 97-0 vote. Not even his own party, not one senator, thought he was making fiscal sense.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/163347-senate-votes-unanimously-against-obama-budget

And your chart is bullshit. Obama spent lots of money, for example, on Iraq and escalating the war in Afghanistan. HIS choice. The buck stops where?

 

[RoyToy]

And that's where the gray area lays, which is kind of what I've been getting at.

 

[Denny Crane]

And that's where the gray area lays, which is kind of what I've been getting at.

What gray area? If he had the ability to up the spending by $600B, he could have kept it the same or cut it. He chose to spend $5T of borrowed money. His choice. Where does the buck stop?

The cost of Obama:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/painful-cost-obama_629745.html

BTW, who made that chart you linked to? A teeny bit of research will lead an intellectually honest person to the conclusion the data is deliberately twisted and misrepresented.

 

[RoyToy]

I'm just presenting the numbers from the other side.

Like for instance you used heritage

Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

I used factcheck, a site that is looked at as more of a lefty site.

And then your use of TWS

from wiki

Many of the magazine's articles are written by members of conservative think tanks located in Washington, D.C

Who do we trust?

 

[Denny Crane]

Trust the govt. figures.

Bush had a ~$400B deficit in 2008. Add in TARP for 2009 and you get $1.2T.

Is that $1.2T structural? No. Because TARP was a one time emergency lump of spending. And Obama spent half of it. The deficit should have gone back to $400B the following year. In fact, if TARP money was repaid, that $400B would be less accordingly.

With the $1.5T sized deficits each of Obama's years, you cannot possibly blame Bush for it. He left a $400B structural deficit to Obama.

Now get this. The govt. actually spent a few $trillion more under Obama that's not on the books. The Fed printed money to pay down over $2T of the previous debt (not deficit!). So you might say bush added $3.4T in 8 years to the debt, net $1.4T after QE1 and QE2. Obama's contribution to the debt starts looking like the $9T it really is.

 

[RoyToy]

Do you think the people that use different numbers are liars?

 

[PapaG]

Clinton was also White.

You seem like miserable person, Chris. You only show up on the Blazer board to jump on the Blazers when they are getting worked, and you post trollish shit like this in the OT section and try to act like you're a rational human being.

 

[PapaG]

Do you think the people that use different numbers are liars?

Do you think a person who promises to cut the deficit in half by the end of the first term, and instead increases it, is a liar?

Or did we somehow end up in a new thread, and the video of Obama saying that isn't in the original post?