By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
richardhutnik said:
badgenome said:
richardhutnik said:

As far as bad with numbers, how did Dubya do in regards to the deficit?  There was talk about halving it to under his administration.

Bush was pretty shitty, to be sure, but he's small potatoes next to Obama, who will double the national debt according to his own spending plans. Also, you know... Bush isn't the president anymore.

First few years for Obama, and you bring up Bush as a baseline.  You do know what the federal deficit what when the last administration left office right?  You also know that Obama happened to add the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to the deficit, unlike the last administration.  It is important to be accurate with the info:

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/dont-blame-obama-for-bushs-2009-deficit/

What you have is individuals out of power complaining about deficits, and those who are in power saying there is a crisis.  We had a Bush crisis, and now there is an Obama one, regarding the deficit. 

I've read that Cato piece before, and I can't entirely agree with it. Obviously, as he had veto power and the fiscal year began on his watch, Bush bears plenty of responsibility for 2009's deficit. However, spending originates in Congress, and Congress is and was Democrat controlled. Senator Obama voted with his party ~97% of the time, but despite that, he promised to do some sort of aboutface on deficit spending once he became president. Predictably, he's done no such thing. Quite the opposite, as we now have the status quo on steroids.