I Apologize

Whatever you say.

Obama increased the deficit by $1 trillion in his first year in office. Adjusting for inflation, your Lord's first year spending was about 21% of what Clinton spent his entire 8 years in office. He's shattering spending records.

That's real, despite what you'd like to believe.

LOL...show the math. I bet 1 year VIP membership you can't.

Sorry but the president does not control spending so you have to look at who had control of congress. Who ever made that chart does not understand government and the function of each house and the president. Also those numbers seem very low compared to the first year of Obama and a democrate controled congress.

Wow. That's just unbelievable. The notion the President doesn't drive spending and the overall budget via his 1) agenda 2) ties on Capital Hill 3) party politics and 4) oh yeah he's the President.

C'mon man. Any President who wants to balance the budget can veto any bill, spending or otherwise, in a heartbeat. Then Congress must pass said bill by 2/3 to override veto. The pt is any President who really wants to put the hammer down can do so.

The notion Reagan and the retarded Bush were fiscal conservatives is just asinine nonsense.

LOL...show the math. I bet 1 year VIP membership you can't.

I don't gamble, but here:

FOXNews.com - Obama Shatters Spending Record for First-Year Presidents (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/24/obama-shatters-spending-record-year-presidents/)

In fiscal 2009 the federal government spent $3.52 trillion -- $2.8 trillion in 2000 dollars, which sets a benchmark for comparison. That fiscal year covered the last three-and-a-half months of George W. Bush's term and the first eight-and-a-half months of Obama's.
That price tag came with a $1.4 trillion deficit, nearly $1 trillion more than last year. The overall budget was about a half-trillion more than Bush's for 2008, his final full fiscal year in office.


US Federal Deficit - Charts Tables History (http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_deficit)

Is $1.4 trillion (2009 US Defecit) - $410 billion (2008 US Defecit) about $1 trillion? A 2nd grader would tell you yes.

I don't gamble, but here:

FOXNews.com - Obama Shatters Spending Record for First-Year Presidents (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/24/obama-shatters-spending-record-year-presidents/)

In fiscal 2009 the federal government spent $3.52 trillion -- $2.8 trillion in 2000 dollars, which sets a benchmark for comparison. That fiscal year covered the last three-and-a-half months of George W. Bush's term and the first eight-and-a-half months of Obama's.
That price tag came with a $1.4 trillion deficit, nearly $1 trillion more than last year. The overall budget was about a half-trillion more than Bush's for 2008, his final full fiscal year in office.


US Federal Deficit - Charts Tables History (http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_deficit)

Is $1.4 trillion (2009 US Defecit) - $410 billion (2008 US Defecit) about $1 trillion? A 2nd grader would tell you yes.

Pssst, the 2009 budget was Bush's budget (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget)....I know, you didn't know that did you? Of course you did.

Truth is your boy Bush done fucked shit up real bad and passed on a disgusting budget outlay to Lord Obama...I know you don't want to admit it and love kicking Obama in the nuts but your people done fucked shit up. They cut taxes, spend a ton, used budgetary gimmicks to hide spending, and finally kicked the ball to our savior, Lord Obama.

Listen, smart guy, I fully understand that Dems tax and spend but I can't understand why you think your angelic GOP doesn't tax and spend. It's crystal clear to me that they spend, and spend, and suck the life U.S. budget time and again yet you lot pretend they're more fiscally conservative than Dems. I don't get it. You really think McCain would have spend less than Obama? GTFOOH with your bullish.

Pssst, the 2009 budget was Bush's budget (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget)....I know, you didn't know that did you?

Truth is your boy Bush done fucked shit up real bad and passed on a disgusting budget outlay to Lord Obama...I know you don't want to admit it kick Obama in the nuts but your people done fucked shit up. They cut taxes, spend a ton, used budgetary gimmicks to hide spending, and finally kicked the ball our savior, Lord Obama.

I'm not a political science expert nor a financial one, but wasn't Obama in office for 8 of the 12 months of the fiscal year? Wasn't all the spending that increased the deficit by such a huge number due in part to legislation pushed through by your Lord? I know a chunk came from pre-Obama policies/legislation, but your Lord certainly isn't helping.

LOL. What moron drew this cartoon? Like Firstdown said, the spending approvals come from Congress, plus whoever conveniently drew this put McCain on there after W instead of the current President, who's out of control spending has us facing a deficit larger than Reagen, H.W., and W. combined. Our deficit is currently about 10% of the GDP. That's scary as hell.

I know, I know, it's all W's fault. :doh:

check out the date on the cartoon

And don't call Bush my boy. That he certainly is not. He was as fiscally irresponsible as they come. Again, don't mistake my party affiliation as blanket support of Obama's predecessor.

I'm not a political science expert nor a financial one, but wasn't Obama in office for 8 of the 12 months of the fiscal year? Wasn't all the spending that increased the deficit by such a huge number due in part to legislation pushed through by your Lord? I know a chunk came from pre-Obama policies/legislation, but your Lord certainly isn't helping.

Regardless of whether he is in office or not Bush's budget is in effect until September 2009. The budget doesn't change unless if there is a supplemental request by Lord Obama which in fact did (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:eaiGd5_KRusJ:www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/budget_amendments/supplemental_04_09_09.pdf+2009+supplemental+approp riations+act&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESj1Rbyyy_fL9rSN2Pr8zP-2XqBBmcU9UaQR3h6KDNHO1PEFCSJkbSn0MJMsKZAhEyMa2AKdb Gyu3Jk0N6NrSu4jLFOWJGrTI8aKw1SnByTF-9YSX2JdPDdROPu02Zstcgj7cf6m&sig=AHIEtbRIRZZ2CIF9JjLZA5nMOxuTRHPMBg) to support the ongoing military effort.

Going forward with his 2010 budget Obama includes all military spending for the war effort in the budge unlike his predecessor who hid war spending from the budget by constantly using supplemental requests.

And don't call Bush my boy. That he certainly is not. He was as fiscally irresponsible as they come. Again, don't mistake my party affiliation as blanket support of Obama's predecessor.

My larger point is fiscal conservative line is complete bullish...sorta like hope and change.

Pssst, the 2009 budget was Bush's budget (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget)....I know, you didn't know that did you? Of course you did.

Truth is your boy Bush done fucked shit up real bad and passed on a disgusting budget outlay to Lord Obama...I know you don't want to admit it and love kicking Obama in the nuts but your people done fucked shit up. They cut taxes, spend a ton, used budgetary gimmicks to hide spending, and finally kicked the ball to our savior, Lord Obama.

Listen, smart guy, I fully understand that Dems tax and spend but I can't understand why you think your angelic GOP doesn't tax and spend. It's crystal clear to me that they spend, and spend, and suck the life U.S. budget time and again yet you lot pretend they're more fiscally conservative than Dems. I don't get it. You really think McCain would have spend less than Obama? GTFOOH with your bullish.

Nice addendum. Typical constant condescension from you. It's so unnecessary.

Wasn't McCain proposing a spending freeze?

You really don't pay attention to what I say, probably because you're the smartest person on this site and view all of us as political neophytes. I'm certainly not trying to prove that I know more about politics than you (I know I don't) or anyone else.

I'm a registered Republican, but I don't really care for either party all that much (changing my registration to independent at some point prior to the first Tuesday of November), or the state of American politics in general.

Saying stuff like "your angelic GOP," and "your boy Bush" doesn't really jive with anything I've said.

For the LAST time, my criticism of Democratic policy is not an endorsement of all things GOP.