Can You Name The Smallest Government Spender Since Dwight D. Eisenhower

[Quantum Windbag]

Spent so little that we're $6 trillion deeper in debt.

Before you say something so ignorant, you could do a little research. Or not. You may not know how.

Obama was given a yearly debt of of nearly 1.5 trillion. This year is just over 1 trillion. That means he has cut that deficit by a third. At that rate, the national deficit can be taken out, with a growing economy, in just over 10 years.

And government has shrunk by, how much? You guys insist you know what you are talking about. How many government workers have been cut during Obama's first term. You guys hate him. What do you know about him? Real stuff, not the nonsense, like he's a Kenyan Mau Mau or some other nonsense.

And I'm curious. Considering the amount of money Romney has invested in China, what is it you expect him to do?

And Romney's plan to bring immigrants here with degrees. Do Republicans really like that plan? They want bosses with accents?

That is a lie.

 

[Mustang]

I'd like to know how Obama can be such a huge spender when he cannot get anything though the thoroughly retarded house of representatives for the last couple of years and then barely did before that?

Don't confuse them with questions they can't answer!

 

[SniperFire]

Spent so little that we're $6 trillion deeper in debt.

Before you say something so ignorant, you could do a little research. Or not. You may not know how.

Obama was given a yearly debt of of nearly 1.5 trillion. This year is just over 1 trillion. That means he has cut that deficit by a third. At that rate, the national deficit can be taken out, with a growing economy, in just over 10 years.

And government has shrunk by, how much? You guys insist you know what you are talking about. How many government workers have been cut during Obama's first term. You guys hate him. What do you know about him? Real stuff, not the nonsense, like he's a Kenyan Mau Mau or some other nonsense.

And I'm curious. Considering the amount of money Romney has invested in China, what is it you expect him to do?

And Romney's plan to bring immigrants here with degrees. Do Republicans really like that plan? They want bosses with accents?

That is a lie.

That guy really is just a pure troll.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Then rewritten by congresscritters, including Obama, which explains why Bush opposed it.

Now that requires substantiation.

 

[SniperFire]

Then rewritten by congresscritters, including Obama, which explains why Bush opposed it.

Now that requires substantiation.

Why not educate yourself on the topic a little, and then come back to post?

Obama 2009 Budget Projects Deficit of $1.75 trillion

President calls for fiscal responsibility and hard choices, but not yet.

Washington, DC - President Obama’s $3.5 trillion 2009 budget will spend money today and burden taxpayers for generations. Under the Presidents proposal, spending will increase to nearly 35 percent of GDP, far from the historical norm of 20 percent, and the deficit will soar to 12.3 percent of GDP, levels not seen since the height of World War II.

The proposed budget caped off a week in Washington that included both a trillion dollar ‘stimulus’ bill as well as a ‘fiscal responsibility’ summit.

In light of the dire budget proposal, The Brookings Institution sent a letter to the President warning of the devastating consequences of our out of control debt. According to the letter'

Obama 2009 Budget Projects Deficit of $1.75 trillion | FreedomWorks

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Watch out RePugs...you ain't gonna like it.

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama? - Forbes.

Forbes is hardly a Left Wing Publication.

This story is from months ago and was thoroughly debunked on arrival. Have you been living in a cave all year?

 

[Inthemiddle]

Why not educate yourself on the topic a little, and then come back to post?

Demanding proof of a negative is illogical. Windbag made the claim, it's his burden to support it.

Washington, DC - President Obama’s $3.5 trillion 2009 budget will spend money today and burden taxpayers for generations. Under the Presidents proposal, spending will increase to nearly 35 percent of GDP, far from the historical norm of 20 percent, and the deficit will soar to 12.3 percent of GDP, levels not seen since the height of World War II.

The omnibus bill Obama signed was a Bush written budget. We've already established this. Bush proposed the budget in February 2008, but he never signed it. Kinda odd, eh?

 

[SniperFire]

Why not educate yourself on the topic a little, and then come back to post?

Demanding proof of a negative is illogical. Windbag made the claim, it's his burden to support it.

Washington, DC - President Obama’s $3.5 trillion 2009 budget will spend money today and burden taxpayers for generations. Under the Presidents proposal, spending will increase to nearly 35 percent of GDP, far from the historical norm of 20 percent, and the deficit will soar to 12.3 percent of GDP, levels not seen since the height of World War II.

The omnibus bill Obama signed was a Bush written budget. We've already established this. Bush proposed the budget in February 2008, but he never signed it. Kinda odd, eh?

You are contending that Pelosi and Reid, who controlled the lame duck session of Congress, and then President Obama, signed off on a budget written by Bush?


Rolling of the floor, laughing my considerable ass off!

 

[Inthemiddle]

You are contending that Pelosi and Reid, who controlled the lame duck session of Congress, and then President Obama, signed off on a budget written by Bush?

As I said, if you want to allege that Pelosi and Reid butchered Bush's budget, you need to substantiate it.

 

[SniperFire]

You are contending that Pelosi and Reid, who controlled the lame duck session of Congress, and then President Obama, signed off on a budget written by Bush?

As I said, if you want to allege that Pelosi and Reid butchered Bush's budget, you need to substantiate it.

I need to substantiate that Congress controls spending?

ROTFL

 

[Freewill]

Watch out RePugs...you ain't gonna like it.

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama? - Forbes.

Forbes is hardly a Left Wing Publication.

No, i would not believe it, from the WH itself:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z1.xls

 

[Inthemiddle]

I need to substantiate that Congress controls spending?

ROTFL

Well you've just substantiated one thing. You're an idiot.

Now, let's get back on target. Bush is the one who submitted the 2009 budget. Can you show any indication that what came through Congress was substantially different than what Bush submitted?

Also, if you are going to switch the blame for budgetary measures to Congress, you must do so consistently, to include blaming John Boehner for the current budget.

 

[SniperFire]

Just a few of the add-ons from Obama in the 2009 budget:

'$2 billion for children’s health insurance. On Feb. 4, Obama signed a bill expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Program, covering millions of additional children (a Democratic bill Bush had vetoed in the previous Congress). “CBO estimates that the act will increase mandatory outlays by $2 billion in 2009,” CBO later stated (page 5).
$114 billion in stimulus spending. Obama signed the stimulus bill Feb. 17. While headlines proclaimed a $787 billion price tag, about 27 percent of the total was actually for tax cuts, not spending. And most of the spending didn’t take place until after fiscal 2009. CBO initially put the total spent in fiscal 2009 at $107.8 billion, but the following year it revised the figure upward to $114 billion, in a report issued in August 2010 (page 13).
$32 billion of the “omnibus” spending bill Obama signed on March 11, 2009, to keep the agencies that Bush had not fully funded running through the remainder of the fiscal year. The $410 billion measure included $32 billion more than had been spent the previous year, according to a floor statement by Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, the top-ranking Republican on the Appropriations Committee. (See page H2790 in the Congressional Record.) “An 8 percent—or a $32 billion—increase in 1 year on top of the stimulus package is simply unnecessary and unsustainable,” he declared.
A case can be made that Obama shouldn’t be held responsible for the entire $32 billion increase. The $410 billion was only $20 billion more than Bush had requested, according to Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, the appropriations chairman. (See page H2800.) And CBO later figured the increase amounted to only $9 billion over what it was projecting on the assumption that the levels Bush approved for the first part of the year would be extended for the entire year (page 5).
But it was Obama who signed the bill, so we assign responsibility for the full annual increase to him, not Bush.
$2 billion for deposit insurance. The “Helping Families Save Their Homes Act” that Obama signed May 20 had among its many provisions some changes to the federal program that insures bank deposits. CBO later estimated that would increase fiscal 2009 outlays by $2 billion (page 54).
$31 billion in “supplemental” spending for the military and other purposes. Obama pushed for and signed on June 24 another spending measure. The press dubbed it a “war funding” bill, but it actually contained $26 billion for non-defense measures (including funding for flu vaccine against the H1N1 virus, and for the International Monetary Fund) in addition to $80 billion for the military.
Only a portion of the total $106 billion it authorized would actually be spent during the remaining three months of fiscal 2009, however. Sen. Kent Conrad, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, stated on June 18: “ The conference report includes $105.9 billion in discretionary budget authority for fiscal year 2009, which will result in outlays in 2009 of $30.5 billion.” (See page S6776.)
Here again, a case can be made that Obama isn’t responsible for the entire $31 billion. Economist Mitchell argues that $25 billion in military spending should be assigned to Bush, because “Bush surely would have asked for at least that much extra spending.” But he didn’t. So rather than speculate, we’ll assign it all to Obama, who asked for it.
$2 billion in additional “Cash for Clunkers” funding. Obama signed this measure Aug. 7, providing “emergency supplemental” funding for a stimulus program that offered $3,500 to $4,500 to car owners who traded in an old car for a new one with higher fuel economy. Nearly all was spent in fiscal 2009. (See page 959.)
$20 billion for GM and Chrysler bailouts. At one point the government had paid out nearly $80 billion to support the automakers. But some of this was Bush’s doing, and much has been repaid and will be in the future.
Here’s how we arrived at our $20 billion figure for Obama:
By the time Obama took office, Bush already had loaned nearly $21 billion to the two automakers from funds appropriated originally for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and had committed the government to lend $4 billion more. But Bush left decisions on further aid to Obama, who poured in additional billions.
By the end of the fiscal year, the Treasury had made approximately $76 billion in loans and equity investments to GM, Chrysler and their respective financing entities (some had already been repaid). But for budget accounting purposes, not all of this was counted as federal spending under the TARP law. That’s because the government stood to receive loan repayments with interest, and held nearly 61 percent of the stock of the reorganized General Motors. What was counted as spending was — in rough terms — the difference between the estimated future value of those assets to taxpayers and their initial cost.
Treasury put the net cost of the GM and Chrysler support during fiscal 2009 at $45 billion (see page 110, the “Total subsidy cost” line under the heading “AIFP,” for Automotive Industry Financing Program). That’s the amount officially booked as a federal outlay for fiscal 2009.
We assume — we think reasonably — that the $25 billion committed under Bush would have been lost had Obama done nothing. So we subtract the full amount of Bush’s commitment from the net total of $45 billion that Treasury initially estimated for fiscal 2009.
For the record, the ultimate total cost of the auto bailout is now estimated to be lower than initially expected. It is put at $21 billion by the Treasury Department (see page 5) and and only $19 billion by CBO (see Table 3). But those lowered estimates don’t affect what was booked as spending in fiscal 2009.'

FactCheck.org : Obama’s Spending: ‘Inferno’ or Not?

 

[SniperFire]

I need to substantiate that Congress controls spending?

ROTFL

Well you've just substantiated one thing. You're an idiot.

Now, let's get back on target. Bush is the one who submitted the 2009 budget. Can you show any indication that what came through Congress was substantially different than what Bush submitted?

Also, if you are going to switch the blame for budgetary measures to Congress, you must do so consistently, to include blaming John Boehner for the current budget.

Logic is not your long suit, is it?

Obama had a de facto Super Majority when he signed his budget in '09. He could do anything he wanted.

Boehner, not so much.

LOL

 

[SniperFire]

I need to substantiate that Congress controls spending?

ROTFL

Well you've just substantiated one thing. You're an idiot.

Now, let's get back on target. Bush is the one who submitted the 2009 budget. Can you show any indication that what came through Congress was substantially different than what Bush submitted?

Also, if you are going to switch the blame for budgetary measures to Congress, you must do so consistently, to include blaming John Boehner for the current budget.

I gave you the list of over $200 billion add-ons, moron.

And, his Super Majority could have cut spending in any non-discretionary area they wanted to.

Epic Failure.

LOL

 

[mex]

there's a difference between spending money and printing it. If you print money, it's worthless. By definition, you can't spend something that is worthless.

you libtards can return to your regularly scheduled circle jerk.

Worthless to whom?

anyone who spends money.

gas prices have tripled since The Annointed took office. Most people think that's because the eeeeevil oil companies are gouging us... but for those paying attention, they know gas prices haven't risen... in reality, the value of the dollar has fallen, due to the 6 trillion in additional borrowing The Annointed has accomplished in his short 3.75 years.

Good ol' quantitative easing.... keynesian economics at its finest.... "spend yourself out of debt."

 

[rightwinger]

Spent so little that we're $6 trillion deeper in debt.

What did Obama spend $6 trillion on?

dude. That is just his over budget-spending.

$6 trillion is a lot of money

Which Obama expenditures came to $6 trillion?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Then rewritten by congresscritters, including Obama, which explains why Bush opposed it.

Now that requires substantiation.

What part?

 

[mex]

i visit a candy store and spend 25 cents.

Obama visits the candy store and spends five dollars.

I return to the store and spend 50 cents. A 100 percent increase over my last visit.

Obama returns to the store and spends six dollars. A 20 percent increase over his last visit.


A liberal writes an article, "obama smallest candy store spender".

Read it. See if i am lying.

.

yep

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why not educate yourself on the topic a little, and then come back to post?

Demanding proof of a negative is illogical. Windbag made the claim, it's his burden to support it.

Washington, DC - President Obama’s $3.5 trillion 2009 budget will spend money today and burden taxpayers for generations. Under the Presidents proposal, spending will increase to nearly 35 percent of GDP, far from the historical norm of 20 percent, and the deficit will soar to 12.3 percent of GDP, levels not seen since the height of World War II.

The omnibus bill Obama signed was a Bush written budget. We've already established this. Bush proposed the budget in February 2008, but he never signed it. Kinda odd, eh?

Obama wrote three budgets, none of them got a single vote in Congress, does that mean we aren't spending any money, or does it mean that congresscritters rewrote the budget?