It' s not very hard to see GOP polices made this mess. So no I'm not clueless as you.

Off to work, you peps have fun!!!

I'm sorry, but how are GOP policies responsible for the past 4 years when the majority in congress has been Democratic in one or both Houses? Lol, get a clue buddy.

As to the financial crisis, literally none of the Bush policies are cited. lmfao.

"The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.

Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.

Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.

Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.

The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.

Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.

Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.

Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.

The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.

An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.

Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up."

Source: http://www.factcheck.org/2008/10/who-caused-the-economic-crisis/

Edit: War has cost us roughly $1.4 trillion over 10+ years now. http://costofwar.com/

I see all the same right wingers have not left. LOL you all are full of it.

Actually obama only had 2 months until republicans had enough in the senate to start filibustering everything. So there you go.

This isn't at all relevant to the topic at hand, I suggest you read the OP prior to posting. This is about budgets, so the fillibuster isn't at all relevant as there has been no budget for the duration of the Obama administration's tenure.

How about some info than some stupid site that looks like nexgenwars.

"The most recent major report on these costs come from Brown University in the form of the Costs of War project,[1] which said the total for wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan is at least $3.2-4 trillion.[2] The report disavowed previous estimates of the Iraq War's cost as being under $1 trillion, saying the Department of Defense's direct spending on Iraq totaled at least $757.8 billion, but also highlighting the complementary costs at home, such as interest paid on the funds borrowed to finance the wars and a potential nearly $1 trillion in extra spending to care for veterans returning from combat through 2050.[3]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War

Why even talk to these guys. There just as nutz as the old white guys in the tea party.

My favorite thing about graphs is how incorrect it always seems some peoples graphs are or how irrelevant they are.

They either are using % or other ways of using numbers that are misleading, or else they are representing one thing while saying another. Such as showing a graph of a presidents time period and blaming him, or praising him yet ignoring say who holds congress. Or other factors.

Don't want to get into which side is right and who's fault what it. Just find it amusing how often someone comes into a thread about politics and posts a graph they found online. They post the graph and say "this graph shows I win, end thread" Then to only be refuted by 10 people explaining clearly in detail how that graph is misleading, wrong, and usually posting a counter graph that does not get argued about.

You cited wikipedia and then referred to costofwar as "some stupid site". The irony is almost too great.

Costofwar is a sourced cite, did you even read it?

Total costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan allocated by Congress to date – which include funding through the end of the current fiscal year on September 30, 2012 – are $1.38 trillion, with $807.4 billion to Iraq and $570.9 billion to Afghanistan. These figures include both military and non-military spending such as reconstruction.

Brown probably included nonsense in order to inflate their number, this one is based upon facts. Maybe read the sourcing for the website prior to calling it stupid, yeah? These are numbers taken straight from congressional record. Doesn't get any more credible.