When I say "no change", I am referring to all the things people hated about Bush. List the top 2 things you hated about Bush, and then look at what Obama has done for those three things. The overall consensus, was:

#1 The War

#2 The Economy

Obama has expanded the war effort, and is leaving troops in the maximum amount of time allowed under the bush treaties. Bush exploded the deficit and expanded government. Obama takes office, and exploded the already bloated government, and expands it.

These are the "same as usual" things we are talking about.

These numbers should grow each year with GDP. Why then when GDP is going to drop 12%, they go up 50%?

That's your assessment.  Many economists would say the exact opposite, that the government's share of GDP should substantially increase when GDP drops for the health of the economy.

Well, with how many economists were claiming that the housing market wasn't in a bubble in 2006/2007 and didn't see the impending credit crisis until it had already become a massive problem do you really feel confident that economists have a strong understanding of the economy?

The economy really isn't that complicated and, much like a forest fires are needed to have a healthy forest, you must have economic downturns in order to keep your economy healthy. Government intervention to prevent companies from failing is like protecting trees with pine-beetle infestations from the forest fire; in the long run the government is doing more damage because the lack of moral hazard will lead to other companies making the same mistakes without fear of the consequences. Unemployment is like burnt trees that have collapsed on the forest floor, and when the government produces government jobs it is like taking this burnt material away from the forest to make it look neater; but the burnt material is the nutrients that lead to the forest re-growing stronger than it was before, and the unemployment leads to an affordable and motivated workforce which is necessary for the next generation of companies.

The health of the economy is best maintained by the government staying out of the way of people, allowing them to develop the technologies and products of the future, and to encourage them to sell their products to as many people as possible (through free trade).

They aren't imaginary.

Just because we aren't fighting conventional wars now doesn't mean we won't ever fight convenional wars again.

It's planning for the future so you aren't caught off guard.  History is littered with countries who were taken out because they weren't prepaired for a new or a ressurgent form of combat.

No, many economists would say we need to temporarily spend our way out of a recession by employing people to do work that betters the country. None say we need to massively increase out entitlement program permanently when we already spend more money then we bring in.

It's not rocket science. 

No, many economists would say we need to temporarily spend our way out of a recession by employing people to do work that betters the country. None say we need to massively increase out entitlement program permanently when we already spend more money then we bring in.

It's not rocket science. 

Looking at the pie chart, I believe that China is lying about the amount of money they spend on the military. They are probably spending 4x what they are reporting.

And what do you think they're going to say if we accuse them?

US: "Hey china, you're lying about your expenditures"
China: "No we're not"
US: "Oh ok. Fine"

But anyways, yeah, I think the United States should stop "bailing out" other countries and have them take care of themselves. I'm not sure about what the WW2 treaty conditions were, but I think some countries aren't even allowed to have militaries due to the conditions.

We should take a look at that again and adjust it so the United States could cut back on their military spending.

 If not for third world immigration and illegal immigrants from Mexico, the US population would be stable instead of increasing. These groups are also high consumers of expensive social services. If we get that under control, we'll be able to get the budget under control.

"18 billion is nothing" OBamas campaign

"Look at this 17 billion I have shuffled around thank me"