So the obummercare! oooo, it's a devil in our government!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

As for the horrible 2009 budget Obama inherited from your president, here's Obama's progress.

deficitchart_v2_0.jpg

Yep, block head would be it.

You do realize that the half that is left of Barry's record deficit is still higher than any deficit ever by even the most dim witted chief in history?

You guys that voted for this deserve exactly what you will get. If it were't for the block you stretch your hat with, you would know you fucked up but...you do with what you have.
 
As Mark Twain said, "There's lies, damned lies and statistics." For Obama to say that the deficit has been cut in half since the start of his presidency, while factually true, is absolutely hysterical as an indicator of the success of his economic policies. The national debt at the end of the Bush years was about $4.2 trillion dollars. As we all know, the economy was in a total free-fall as a result of the housing bust and pushing money into the system was seen as the only way to keep it from crashing. It started under Bush but went into hyperdrive under Obama. So, yeah, now that the economy is doing a bit better they're not feeding as much money into the system as before, but the national debt is more than four times what it was when Bush left office. Pretty much the same kind of goofy way of looking at things as a doctor who's botched a surgery saying that the patient isn't bleeding out as quickly as before once there's no blood left in the patient's system.

You are on the right track, but...

The national debt was over $5T when Bush took office, and over $10T when he left. It's now over $17T, and almost certain to be over $20T by the time Obama's done.

Obama increased the debt from his first day in office until about 3 1/2 years later as much as Bush did in all 8 years, including the bailouts and TARP and all that.

debt16t.preview.jpg
 
You're right, of course. I grabbed the wrong statistic by mistake. The national debt was at $10.7 trillion at the end of Bush's 2nd term, up from $5.9 trillion when he took office.
 
As Mark Twain said, "There's lies, damned lies and statistics." For Obama to say that the deficit has been cut in half since the start of his presidency, while factually true, is absolutely hysterical as an indicator of the success of his economic policies. The national debt at the end of the Bush years was about $4.2 trillion dollars. As we all know, the economy was in a total free-fall as a result of the housing bust and pushing money into the system was seen as the only way to keep it from crashing. It started under Bush but went into hyperdrive under Obama. So, yeah, now that the economy is doing a bit better they're not feeding as much money into the system as before, but the national debt is more than four times what it was when Bush left office. Pretty much the same kind of goofy way of looking at things as a doctor who's botched a surgery saying that the patient isn't bleeding out as quickly as before once there's no blood left in the patient's system.

You accidentally forgot to say what it was at the start of the 8 Bush years, and to blame the economic problems on the first 7 years, his wars, putting the spy agencies on a permanent war footing, and tax cut, instead of on just the last year.

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4937697411466077&pid=1.7
 
You accidentally forgot to say what it was at the start of the 8 Bush years, and to blame the economic problems on the first 7 years, his wars, putting the spy agencies on a permanent war footing, and tax cut, instead of on just the last year.

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4937697411466077&pid=1.7

Apparently you didn't read my correction, which is odd since it's right above your post. I know liberals just can't get past Bush and love to hang everything on him, but here's a little secret: not many conservatives consider the Bush presidency to be a model of financial conservatism.
 
I spent a few minutes finding ad trying to enarge that tiny chart of deficits. I gave up and just gave the link. When I posted, you had beaten me by 3 minutes. I thought you and Denny, being grizzled vets, would be familiar with the phenom of letters crossing in the mail, ships passing in the night, and starcrossed lovers trying to kiss and hitting the problem right on the nose.
 
Bye, Reagan won every state and DC and territory but Minnesota. Also with 56% of the vote. That's a mandate.

Tho defeating the incumbent idiot who was president was pretty good, too.
 
It disagrees with you!

2nd amendment.

No, not really. I think the second amendment should be changed, but I don't really have a beef with the courts interpretation of it. It is arguable, for sure, but I can't state categorically that they've ruled incorrectly.

barfo
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top