But the Deficit is Obama's Fault! Right!

View attachment 242

 

Oh no! Numbers!

 

Gee. I wonder just who controlled the house in the years before that chart starts?

 

I can't speak for Moen, but to me it seems that as far as the RW is concerned absolutely everything that is wrong with the country is directly attributable to Obama except when it's more convenient for it not to be. If we stray in the other direction occasionally I don't think you are in a position to get too bent about it. So now that that's out of the way, I await your analysis of the data in the OP.

 

The 'Bush Tax Cuts' are really now Obama's ever since the Great Compromise. He could have led the effort to end that folly but did not. He could have vetoed an extension but did not. In fact, he added to them. Same could be said of the wars too.

 

But that graph does illustrate exactly what I have been saying. Let the Tax Cuts expire and end the wars and the rest of the budget is much more easily balanced and dealt with through spending cuts.

 

I am sure that the vast majority of the right believe that BO owns it. I am not saying that he is blameless, but IMO Pelosi and Reid bear much more responsibility.

 

The 'wars' are a bit more difficult to back away from though. The better decision was to not invade and occupy. Which is one reason why I'm grateful that Obama hasn't done that in Libya, that we will not have a presence there on their soil.

 

In order to back away from a war, you actually have to start to end it first. And Obama has just followed the Bush plan in Iraq and increased the presence in Afghanistan. And added a new conflict in Libya.

We could be completely out of Iraq by now and Afghanistan could be at least at the current Iraq stage, if not ended, by now instead of us being more involved than when he entered office. And, of course, Libya was 100% his spending.

And what do you think the odds are that he will have us completely out of Iraq by the end of this year as is supposed to be the plan? The only way Obama ends the Iraq presence is if the Iraqis give us no other choice.

 

Gee I continue to wonder why you can never point to any legislation that came out of those two years that created this mess. Even if the Democrats had passed some sort of bank busting legislation, Bush would have had to sign it. Show me the legislation. Was it the Bush Tax cuts? Was it the two unfunded wars? Where exactly was the point everything went to hell once the Dems had control of congress.....specifically.

 

According to your own words, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush era tax cuts, recovery measures, TARP, Fannie and Freddie, etc. all came from them. BTW, if I could search back I would point out numerous times where I have stated that Bush did a lousy job controlling spending.

 

How can BO's spending be anyone's fault but his own? Mutliple failed stimulus', bailouts, "shovel ready" projects, cash-for-clunkers...isn't that enough?

 

I agree that it would be nice to completely remove all our troops from Iraq, and it is possible. The main issue was stabilization of Iraq's armies and police force. I'd say that they are about as capable as they are ever going to get so for that reason we could remove most of our armies.. But another issue continues to be Irans influence. That is something that may keep us there for a lonnng time.

When we invaded I knew it would take at least a decade to leave (reasonings above), and wonder how Jr. and his administration could possibly think it would be a matter of a few weeks or months of battles ...and that we wouldn't suffer any casualties (Bush's view pre-invasion). We never should have gone into Iraq in the first place, but we broke it and must suffer the cost of repairing it.

Afghanistan is another problem altogether, and may prove the more difficult of the two (for removal of our armies). The government in place at the moment is far less stable than Iraq's, and far more corrupt. It's people are much more tribal and the culture in general makes them less capable of governing themselves. We could leave them to themselves, and let them kill each other or we can attempt to bring them more into the modern world and hope that peace sets in.

I'm saying we're ****ed lol

 

Agreed. Think most people want this to happen. We blew the Iraq thing by letting Iran's Iraqi Shia leaders take over and no body ever does well in Afgag land. It is like entering another dimension of the twight zone. Getting Omar out of North Africa may or may not help lead to the Sunni fundamentalist movement lead by Saudi land. But the fact is we need to stop going broke over arab issues and would seem if going broke is undermining our economy and would be something our foes would want.
As for the tax breaks, if the nations economy can get back on track with the above ending and this then I think most people who get it would not mind for it may translate to home values increasing, jobs increasing which is like security when ten people are not after your job, and more income just from having a booming rather then a sagging economy.

 

Funny, BO promised to have the troops back home by now, didn't he? .

 

cash for clunkers, now if that one could ever get an independent criminal investiagation. Never mind the bail outs theft of national funds.

 

The stimulus was signed by Jr., wasn't it? Not his fault though right? But it's Obama's fault right? You view everything from the right, right?

 

...and I'd agree that was a dumb statement of his. It was unrealistic to believe that it was possible and unnecessary, in that most people in America should have realized that too pre and post invasion, but failed to.

 

Dumb statement? It was actually much more than that. In fact it was the cornerstone promise of his campaign & one of many promises of his that have turned out to be lies. Can you kinda see why I have a problem with the guy? And the left just lets him slide.

 

What about the other items I listed?