I remember when the debt was starting to get so bad in the middle of the Bush years. John Kerry ran against him, and his budget proposals were to significantly increase waste spending and the debt.... much worse than what Bush was doing.
I suppose somewhere between Clinton and Kerry's candidacy is the point in which the Democrats moved from being more fiscally responsible than Republicans (based on the fact of Clinton's debt increase being much lower than that of Reagan and the Bushes) to the Democrats being much worse (Kerry wanting to make the problem much worse than under Bush, and Obama going ahead and doing it).
dmarks, can you believe it, Bill Clinton, the best of the bunch!?......Your point is a very valid one, Les, especially when it comes to the right/neocons and military spending.
Will: Of course... while Clinton was grossly irresponsible (increasing the deficit each and every year he was in office, and digging the overall debt whole most of $2 trillion deeper), he is less grossly irresponsible than the two before, and the two after.
Less grossly irresponsible - that's kind of like being the skinniest guy at a fat camp, huh?......Yeah, Les, I kinda miss him, too (an actual, flesh and blood moderate Democrat).
I agree with RN - the conservatives ramp up the debt far more than the progressives do. Lately, (i.e., Clinton and Obama) the deficits have slowed in comparison to the republicans. Obama is trying to reduce the deficit, but let's remember that he inherited 2 wars - it's not easy to dig out of that.
Futhermore, the government uses fund accounting which is a totally separate means of accounting vs. corporate accounting. It's easy to manipulate the numbers, depending on who is doing the accounting.
Lisa G: "I agree with RN - the conservatives ramp up the debt far more than the progressives do"
Where did he do this? I can't imagine him doing it. I don't see it. And after all the one who has ramped up the debt the worst ever is the current, liberal President.
No, sorry, Lisa, I don't think RN made the partisan argument you think he did.
Did you, Les?
"Lately, (i.e., Clinton and Obama) the deficits have slowed in comparison to the republicans."
This was true for Clinton, who ran years of low deficits. But I think it is really a stretch, and perhaps evidence of your partisan bias, to make this claim about Obama who for 4 YEARS chose to run a much higher deficit than Bush did.
"Obama is trying to reduce the deficit"
Not very well, and he tried to increase it massively for years.
"but let's remember that he inherited 2 wars - it's not easy to dig out of that."
Facts on this: He made BOTH wars his own. Even increasing one of them. He could have brought everyone home by Jan or Feb 2009 but he chose not to.
Another major fact is that spending on both wars is only a small part of the deficit (if it is even part of it at all, and that is arguable).
The third one is that Bush inherited the war with Iraq. If the constant state of US patrols firing back at targets in Iraq, bombing WMD facilities, etc which had been ongoing under Clinton isn't a war, then nothing is.
Sorry, Lisa. I stick to the facts here. You won't find me blaming Bush's massive debt increase on anyone else. I have never soft-sold or deceived about Bush's debt problem. Just ask Will or Les.
You also won't find me doing the same for Obama. And you won't find me referring to Obama, up to this point the worst "debt president EVER" as someone who has been trying to bring the debt down.
Lets look at facts, shall we?
"CBO Slashes 2013 Deficit Projection to $642 Billion"
I checked and found that this supposed low Obama deficit is higher than any amount Bush ran for any of his years.. In addition to this, the deficit amount Obama chose to run the previous 4 years was two or three times the highest Bush amount (and of course much higher than bush's average yearly deficit. Sorry, you can't get away with cooking the numbers here.
The source, by the way, is from left-wing media, so you can't accuse me of using some conservative anti-Obama story.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100736620
"Futhermore, the government uses fund accounting which is a totally separate means of accounting vs. corporate accounting. It's easy to manipulate the numbers, depending on who is doing the accounting."
Exactly. This is why I look at the Treasury Department figures on the debt. The most raw, honest accounting. And guess who runs this department? Barack Obama. Again, heading off at the pass the idea that I am using any right-wing source.
In summary, when it comes to debt, Clinton was much more responsible than Bush... and Bush was much less responsible than Obama.
Heaven save us from the debt of the next President, based on this trend.
8 comments:
I remember when the debt was starting to get so bad in the middle of the Bush years. John Kerry ran against him, and his budget proposals were to significantly increase waste spending and the debt.... much worse than what Bush was doing.
I suppose somewhere between Clinton and Kerry's candidacy is the point in which the Democrats moved from being more fiscally responsible than Republicans (based on the fact of Clinton's debt increase being much lower than that of Reagan and the Bushes) to the Democrats being much worse (Kerry wanting to make the problem much worse than under Bush, and Obama going ahead and doing it).
The rEpublicans (so called conservatives) solution to debt...
More debt.
Now, there we have it in a nutshell.
Tic Toc, Tic Toc, Tic Toc... & the beat goes on.
The truth shall set the nation free.
But...
dmarks, can you believe it, Bill Clinton, the best of the bunch!?......Your point is a very valid one, Les, especially when it comes to the right/neocons and military spending.
I did not see dmarks comment before posting mine (obviously) but with respect to Bubba is right on.
Never thought that one day I would be saying I kinda miss the guy.
Will: Of course... while Clinton was grossly irresponsible (increasing the deficit each and every year he was in office, and digging the overall debt whole most of $2 trillion deeper), he is less grossly irresponsible than the two before, and the two after.
Less grossly irresponsible - that's kind of like being the skinniest guy at a fat camp, huh?......Yeah, Les, I kinda miss him, too (an actual, flesh and blood moderate Democrat).
I agree with RN - the conservatives ramp up the debt far more than the progressives do. Lately, (i.e., Clinton and Obama) the deficits have slowed in comparison to the republicans. Obama is trying to reduce the deficit, but let's remember that he inherited 2 wars - it's not easy to dig out of that.
Futhermore, the government uses fund accounting which is a totally separate means of accounting vs. corporate accounting. It's easy to manipulate the numbers, depending on who is doing the accounting.
Lisa G: "I agree with RN - the conservatives ramp up the debt far more than the progressives do"
Where did he do this? I can't imagine him doing it. I don't see it. And after all the one who has ramped up the debt the worst ever is the current, liberal President.
No, sorry, Lisa, I don't think RN made the partisan argument you think he did.
Did you, Les?
"Lately, (i.e., Clinton and Obama) the deficits have slowed in comparison to the republicans."
This was true for Clinton, who ran years of low deficits. But I think it is really a stretch, and perhaps evidence of your partisan bias, to make this claim about Obama who for 4 YEARS chose to run a much higher deficit than Bush did.
"Obama is trying to reduce the deficit"
Not very well, and he tried to increase it massively for years.
"but let's remember that he inherited 2 wars - it's not easy to dig out of that."
Facts on this: He made BOTH wars his own. Even increasing one of them. He could have brought everyone home by Jan or Feb 2009 but he chose not to.
Another major fact is that spending on both wars is only a small part of the deficit (if it is even part of it at all, and that is arguable).
The third one is that Bush inherited the war with Iraq. If the constant state of US patrols firing back at targets in Iraq, bombing WMD facilities, etc which had been ongoing under Clinton isn't a war, then nothing is.
Sorry, Lisa. I stick to the facts here. You won't find me blaming Bush's massive debt increase on anyone else. I have never soft-sold or deceived about Bush's debt problem. Just ask Will or Les.
You also won't find me doing the same for Obama. And you won't find me referring to Obama, up to this point the worst "debt president EVER" as someone who has been trying to bring the debt down.
Lets look at facts, shall we?
"CBO Slashes 2013 Deficit Projection to $642 Billion"
I checked and found that this supposed low Obama deficit is higher than any amount Bush ran for any of his years.. In addition to this, the deficit amount Obama chose to run the previous 4 years was two or three times the highest Bush amount (and of course much higher than bush's average yearly deficit. Sorry, you can't get away with cooking the numbers here.
The source, by the way, is from left-wing media, so you can't accuse me of using some conservative anti-Obama story.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100736620
"Futhermore, the government uses fund accounting which is a totally separate means of accounting vs. corporate accounting. It's easy to manipulate the numbers, depending on who is doing the accounting."
Exactly. This is why I look at the Treasury Department figures on the debt. The most raw, honest accounting. And guess who runs this department? Barack Obama. Again, heading off at the pass the idea that I am using any right-wing source.
In summary, when it comes to debt, Clinton was much more responsible than Bush... and Bush was much less responsible than Obama.
Heaven save us from the debt of the next President, based on this trend.
Post a Comment