There's a comic genius someplace around 1600 Pennsylvania...
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, speaking with reporters on Air Force One on Wednesday, said that President Barack Obama “has demonstrated significant fiscal restraint and acted with great fiscal responsibility” and that “federal spending is rising at its slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s."
Uhhmmmmnnnnn...
OK. Carney's next claim will be something about Obozo ensuring that the sun rises every morning.
Meantime: Federal spending has been >24% of GDP in every year that Obozo's been President--and recall, friends, that GWB did NOT SIGN the '09 budget--Obozo did on assuming office.
Only other >24% year in the entire history of the US? 1946.
Who cares if he signed the budget in 2009? There isn't a sane person alive who would have tried to balance the budget in 2009. Or cut food stamps or UI extensions or emergency aid to states. Not even Hoover (if he was still alive).
ReplyDeleteYour numbers game just looks like plain old Republican Party nonsense.
If the gummint shitcanned the Bush tax cuts today, we'd see that Obozo's spending habits are quite tame by comparison.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is, according to the Wall Street Journal Market Watch federal spending in dollars during Obama's first term will grow at an average rate of 0.4%, lower than either of Clinton's terms and far, far lower that any term of Reagan , Bush I or Bush II.
ReplyDeleteLike most everything else the GOP or conservatives say about Obama, the wild spending claim is a lie.
That opinion piece has been discredited 6 ways from Sunday, and my post reflects that.
ReplyDeleteKeep on smoking that cannabis.
"That opinion piece has been discredited 6 ways from Sunday, and my post reflects that."
ReplyDeleteCare to provide links, rather than tout YOU are the definitive source? Talk about smoking the happy stuff!
It has NOT been discredited. It has been debated.
ReplyDeleteAs far as your post "reflecting" anything, the GDP has been in the crapper since 2008, so of course spending as a percent of a shitty number is higher than normal.
No, Jimbo.
ReplyDeleteFACTS cannot be "debated."
GWB did NOT sign the '09 budget, and Obozo spent ~$700Bn on a NON-budget "stimulus" plus ~$300Bn in authorized (but not Bush-spent) TARP money.
Those are facts. You can argue all day long (and you will, of course) but the facts stand against you.
They are not facts, actually, Dadbo.
ReplyDeleteBush did not SIGN the budget, but he proposed the budget. The 2009 Federal Budget signed by Obama was only $400B (13%) greater than what was requested by Bush (a request made before the bottom fell out of the economy. Less than $460B of the Stimulus was spending. The rest, almost 40%, was tax benefits (which was not spending). Less than $300B of the Stimulus was spent in 2009.
As of the first of this year, only $133B of TARP is still owed (in other words, "spent" and not recovered). So assuming (and I don't) that all that is still owed was distributed after January 2009, only $133B could possibly be attributed to Obama.
Yah, well, argue with both the WaPo and AP. They state that the Administration is lying like hell.
ReplyDeleteNot news to me....
See: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/05/26/ap-fact-check-blasts-obama-spending-claims/
If one were to concede all the points made by AP and WaPo, Obmama would still be at an increase of 5% which is far slower than George W. Bush's 7.3% first term and 8.1% second term.
ReplyDelete