GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Sorry, Mr. President, you can’t blame W for this

by

Budget deficit moves closer to $1 trillion mark:

The federal budget deficit is on pace to break the $1 trillion mark for a third straight year. Record deficits are putting pressure on Congress and the Obama administration to come up with a plan to rein in government spending.

Already, the deficit through the first eight months of this budget year is $927.4 billion, according to the latest report from the Treasury Department released Friday.

Three years ago that would have ranked as the highest ever for a full year. Instead, this year’s deficit will likely exceed last year’s $1.29 trillion imbalance and nearly match the $1.41 trillion record reached in 2009. The budget year ends on Sept. 30.

In the article is AP’s Economics Writer, Martin Crutsinger, frequently references the growth of the budget deficit in early years of the Bush Administration, without addressing the increased security costs in the aftermath of 9/11.

He also doesn’t mention that inthe three years preceding the swearing-in of a Democratic Congress in 2007, deficits were declining. Despite Mr. Crutsinger’s attempt to blame Bush for these deficits, Democrats controlled Congress for each of the three fiscal years the federal government ran trillion-dollar deficits, including the current one.  And for the last two, there has been a Democrat in the White House with the power to veto their spending bills.

A power he failed to exercise.

UPDATE:  In case, you don’t believe me, take a gander at this chart:

Comments

  1. As I understand it, according to the progressive Democrat left, the reason we have a $1.6 Trillion ($1,600 Billion) deficit is because we undertax the rich by $70 Billion (the difference between the Bush tax level and the level Obama wants).

    Progressive leftist Democrats are not good at maths.

  2. And, Obama *must* run $1.6T deficits because the economy was ruined back in the Bush days (when he had 1% inflation and 5% unemployment) by his $100-400B deficits.

    Ditto.

  3. For 2008, 2009 and probably part of 2010 I thought that Obama was as good politically as Bill Clinton was. By that I mean a politician who was able to connect with the voters, sway the establishment to his program, play the “triangulation” game well, etc. Yet he has shown through gaffe after gaffe after gaffe that he is definitely not. Sure, the man has his own talents but I’m really surprised at how much he has trashed his own presidency. I never voted for Bill Clinton but I have give him his due: he was smart enough to work the system for his own political benefit. Obama is not. Perhaps that is a good thing in a way but living through Carter II isn’t pleasant. Of course, if the GOP doesn’t put forth a strong candidate with crossover appeal than it doesn’t matter how bad Obama is politically I think he’ll win. Rick Perry or Rudy Giuliani may be that man, but I personally will only vote for the latter. The others haven’t much of a chance IMO.

  4. Is it a coincidence that so much of the progressive agenda would be advanced by an economically debilitated USA? The progressive left says that Americans consume too much of the Earth’s resource and enjoy too high a standard of living compared with the rest of the world. A diminished US economy reduces both our standard of living and the share of resources we consume. A diminished economy also will destroy our ability to maintain a strong military, which progressives also hate.

    Isn’t the progressive left’s agenda better served by a weakened US economy than a strong one?

  5. Since Obama signed Porkulus into law, any deficit talk from Obama is laughable; furthermore, with ObamaCare & increasing the deficit 4 times in 2 years when the Democrats controlled the Congress just pushes Obama further over the cliff with the economy & national debt. President Obama will still try to blame W though.

  7. Yeah V, NO chance that Libya is just a war for (Europe’s) oil. How dare you think it. Nothing to see. Move along.

    You think Gaddafi was safely in his box?** What do you know?

    Hey, I bet the people who support Obama on Libya are a bunch of war-mongereing “chicken hawks” – people who have never actually fought a war.++

    (** Yes, Gaddafi was safely in his box. No more nuke ambitions, no more terror ambitions. Quite unlike Saddam in 2003.)
    (++ Since supporters of Obama are leftists… um, quite possibly. On average, they enlist less.)

  8. Yes, I have had similar experiences with Democrats and liberals who try and blame Bush for our current deficits. I respond with something like “yes, Bush increased the deficit, and I opposed him for it at the time. But Obama is Bush on steroids. Look at the numbers.”

    The usual response is that they try to change the subject.

  9. Whenever I see that deficit chart, I always feel the need to preemptively point out that not only did the deficit increase dramatically between fiscal 2007 (budget passed before the Democrats assumed control of congress) and 2008, but that the 2009 budget wasn’t ever signed off on by Bush because congress refused to pass a budget while he was still in office since they expected to win the presidency. The Democrats just passed a series of continuing resolutions for most of the budget instead. The final 2009 budget wasn’t approved and signed off on until March 2009, two months into the Obama administration.

  10. Sorry the graph takes my breath away.
    THe numbers have gotten so large, so big that it is hard to fathom.
    What is a trillion dollars.
    What is 14 trillion dollars.
    The numbers are so big that I think the average American can’t relate to the mind boggling nature. Obama is benefiting from that.l

  11. Gene, I disagree. Obama is out of options aside from more “stimulus” & printing more money; given the high unemployment, inflation, & job stagnation, Obama is panicking while it’s only June! Obama is in big trouble, yet he has no clue how to get out of the hole he dug himself.

  12. When Obama is shown WITHOUT being surrounded by like minded socialists, he does look very befuddled. He looks a bit embarassed like he himself knows he is out of his depth. Will the media start to confront him like they did Weiner when they realized he was playng them?