Worst President in U.S. History

[AmericanGirl05]

late to the party but...

IMO worst President ever .... this Hussein Obama, the community leader.

It can not get worse than that I don't think.

Amnesia 2001-2009 huh? Typical right winger

Bush will be remembered as a President who was nearly as great as Warren G. Harding

Obama will be remembered as a President who was nearly as great as Ulysses Grant.

 

[Liminal]

late to the party but...

IMO worst President ever .... this Hussein Obama, the community leader.

It can not get worse than that I don't think.

Amnesia 2001-2009 huh? Typical right winger

Bush will be remembered as a President who was nearly as great as Warren G. Harding

Obama will be remembered as a President who was nearly as great as Ulysses Grant.

At least people remember who Grant was.

 

[Dad2three]

This is typical leftist logic you are trying to fight.

According to the left-ards, the economy was headed toward economic Armageddon. They literally think that every single job in the entire country was going to be wiped out.

So according to their irrational perspective, the moment Obamy signed the stealmulous bill, every single job that wasn't lost (because it was going to and they know it), was therefore saved by the stealmulous bill.

Basically, if even one job was not lost, then it obviously was saved, or created, because Darth Bush had ordered the Bank Star to destroy the planet. Thankfully Obamy Wan Nohopey, saved us all for the dark side.

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House
Back Then, Helping Boost Economic Growth Was Bipartisan

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House Center for American Progress Action Fund

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Oh right, in the right wing world of delusion, the next Prez WOULDN'T had spent ANY money and the CBO's prediction of $1.2+ trillion deficit on Jan 8, 2009 12 days prior to Obama was bogus.

EVERY other past Prez gets responsibility for their final F/Y budgets, but since Dubya didn't want the "credit" for the F/Y(that started 4 months prior to Obama) that was deteriorating, he chose not to sign a budget, that gets him off the hook? lol

You can't make this shit up.

 

[AmericanGirl05]

This is typical leftist logic you are trying to fight.

According to the left-ards, the economy was headed toward economic Armageddon. They literally think that every single job in the entire country was going to be wiped out.

So according to their irrational perspective, the moment Obamy signed the stealmulous bill, every single job that wasn't lost (because it was going to and they know it), was therefore saved by the stealmulous bill.

Basically, if even one job was not lost, then it obviously was saved, or created, because Darth Bush had ordered the Bank Star to destroy the planet. Thankfully Obamy Wan Nohopey, saved us all for the dark side.

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House
Back Then, Helping Boost Economic Growth Was Bipartisan

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House Center for American Progress Action Fund

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

Nonsense. CBO predicted Jan 8 2009 the deficit was $1.2+ trillion. WHO ever stepped in had that. You can give Obama $200 billion as they pointed out in the link I gave

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

AND 2009 F/Y DEFICIT WAS $1.4 TRILLION

Receipts in 2009 tumbled to $2,105 billion, a decrease of $419 billion, or 17 percent, from 2008. That year-over-year decline follows a small drop in revenues for fiscal year 2008 and is the largest annual percentage decline in revenues in more than seven decades.


Federal Budget Deficit Totals 1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009 Congressional Budget Office

Federal Budget Deficit Totals $1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009

CBO projects deficits based on pending appropriations legislation.

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House
Back Then, Helping Boost Economic Growth Was Bipartisan

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House Center for American Progress Action Fund

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Oh right, in the right wing world of delusion, the next Prez WOULDN'T had spent ANY money and the CBO's prediction of $1.2+ trillion deficit on Jan 8, 2009 12 days prior to Obama was bogus.

EVERY other past Prez gets responsibility for their final F/Y budgets, but since Dubya didn't want he "credit" for the F/Y(that started 4 months prior to Obama) that was deteriorating, you chose not to sign a budget, that gets him off the hook? lol

You can't make this shit up.

No, actually, you are wrong.

I am a retired Federal employee with 38 years of service. For most of my career, I worked in budget, planning and policy positions, including 12 years heading a resource management division for one of my agencies' offices. I've written budget justifications, developed operating plans, wrote budget appeals, wrote responses to OMB and Congressional questions, executed the financial plan.

Let me explain how the process works:

Agencies develop 5 year plans on a regular basis. Around May, the internal parts of the agency develop their request to the Department level based on that plan. The Secretary (or independent agency head) makes the decision as to what the Department/Agency will submit to the Office of Management and Budget; that submission is normally due to OMB on Labor Day. OMB conducts their analysis, and in a normal year, submits their mark back to the agency around Thanksgiving. At this point the Secretary has the option to appeal to the President. The agencies have till mid-December to submit their final Congressional submission to OMB, who packages it as the President's Budget which is, by law, submitted to Congress February 1.

Please note that this submission is the last time the President influences the appropriations process till he signs or vetoes the bills Congress presents to him later in the year.

Congress then holds hearings and does their own analyses. Regular order is for Congress to pass an overall budget, all of which does is create targets for the individual appropriations committees. The appropriations committees act, each chamber votes, and the final appropriation is determined by conference action and the President signs the final bill (there are 12 appropriations bills).

What has happened, particularly in the Pelosi era, was that the overall Congressional budget process was ignored, and the individual appropriations bills subsumed into a larger Omnibus bill.

Because Congress never acts in time for the start of the fiscal year, they always pass Continuing Resolutions till they do. In election years, they pass CRs because they want the incoming President to be able to make his mark on the process.

CRs provide limited funding and are superceded by the annual appropriation.

Please do not EVER post any ignorant garbage to me about the Federal budget process. It was my professional life, and you just show your ignorance to me when you do.

 

[Dad2three]

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House
Back Then, Helping Boost Economic Growth Was Bipartisan

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House Center for American Progress Action Fund

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

Nonsense. CBO predicted Jan 8 2009 the deficit was $1.2+ trillion. WHO ever stepped in had that. You can give Obama $200 billion as they pointed out in the link I gave

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

AND 2009 F/Y DEFICIT WAS $1.4 TRILLION

Receipts in 2009 tumbled to $2,105 billion, a decrease of $419 billion, or 17 percent, from 2008. That year-over-year decline follows a small drop in revenues for fiscal year 2008 and is the largest annual percentage decline in revenues in more than seven decades.


Federal Budget Deficit Totals 1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009 Congressional Budget Office

Federal Budget Deficit Totals $1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009

CBO projects deficits based on pending appropriations legislation.

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Oh right, in the right wing world of delusion, the next Prez WOULDN'T had spent ANY money and the CBO's prediction of $1.2+ trillion deficit on Jan 8, 2009 12 days prior to Obama was bogus.

EVERY other past Prez gets responsibility for their final F/Y budgets, but since Dubya didn't want he "credit" for the F/Y(that started 4 months prior to Obama) that was deteriorating, you chose not to sign a budget, that gets him off the hook? lol

You can't make this shit up.

No, actually, you are wrong.

I am a retired Federal employee with 38 years of service. For most of my career, I worked in budget, planning and policy positions, including 12 years heading a resource management division for one of my agencies' offices. I've written budget justifications, developed operating plans, wrote budget appeals, wrote responses to OMB and Congressional questions, executed the financial plan.

Let me explain how the process works:

Agencies develop 5 year plans on a regular basis. Around May, the internal parts of the agency develop their request to the Department level based on that plan. The Secretary (or independent agency head) makes the decision as to what the Department/Agency will submit to the Office of Management and Budget; that submission is normally due to OMB on Labor Day. OMB conducts their analysis, and in a normal year, submits their mark back to the agency around Thanksgiving. At this point the Secretary has the option to appeal to the President. The agencies have till mid-December to submit their final Congressional submission to OMB, who packages it as the President's Budget which is, by law, submitted to Congress February 1.

Please note that this submission is the last time the President influences the appropriations process till he signs or vetoes the bills Congress presents to him later in the year.

Congress then holds hearings and does their own analyses. Regular order is for Congress to pass an overall budget, all of which does is create targets for the individual appropriations committees. The appropriations committees act, each chamber votes, and the final appropriation is determined by conference action and the President signs the final bill (there are 12 appropriations bills).

What has happened, particularly in the Pelosi era, was that the overall Congressional budget process was ignored, and the individual appropriations bills subsumed into a larger Omnibus bill.

Because Congress never acts in time for the start of the fiscal year, they always pass Continuing Resolutions till they do. In election years, they pass CRs because they want the incoming President to be able to make his mark on the process.

CRs provide limited funding and are superceded by the annual appropriation.

Please do not EVER post any ignorant garbage to me about the Federal budget process. It was my professional life, and you just show your ignorance to me when you do.

Got it, you are one of the MORONS who "thinks" Gov't will just stop spending money IF Dubya doesn't sign bills and just pushes it off to the next guy AND LIKE EVERY OTHER US PREZ IN HISTORY, DUBYA SHOULDN'T BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS FINAL F/Y BUDGET. F*kkkking amazing!!!
'
How Much Did Obama Add?

But it’s also true that Obama signed a number of appropriations bills, plus other legislation and executive orders, that raised spending for the remainder of fiscal 2009 even above the path set by Bush. By our calculations, Obama can be fairly assigned responsibility for a maximum of $203 billion in additional spending for that year.


Here’s how we arrived at our $203 billion total: We combed through all the appropriations bills signed by Obama for 2009, plus other legislation that CBO said also resulted in increased spending. We also examined the budget effects of Obama’s decision to bail out General Motors and Chrysler using funds previously appropriated under TARP. And here’s what we found:

• $2 billion for children’s health insurance.
• $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
• $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.
• $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
• $31 billion in “supplemental” spending for the military and other purposes. ... 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.
• $20 billion for GM and Chrysler bailouts.

Other big domestic programs that don’t require yearly appropriations, including Social Security and Medicare, continued to operate as they had under Bush. One big fiscal 2009 spending increase resulted from an unusually large 5.8 percent cost of living increase that took effect just before Obama took office. That was an anomaly, as we explained in “Social Security COLA,” posted Sept. 23, 2009, and there would be no COLA at all for the next two years. The same 5.8 percent COLA also was given in 2009 to millions of federal retirees, military retirees and disabled veterans and their survivors.

So by our calculations, Obama can fairly be assigned responsibility for — at most — 5.8 percent of the $3.5 trillion that the federal government actually spent in fiscal 2009, which was 17.9 percent higher than fiscal 2008.

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not


DISHONEST RIGHT WINGERS, I HATE THAT THERE AREN'T MORE GOLDWATER'S TODAY!!

 

[AmericanGirl05]

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

Nonsense. CBO predicted Jan 8 2009 the deficit was $1.2+ trillion. WHO ever stepped in had that. You can give Obama $200 billion as they pointed out in the link I gave

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

AND 2009 F/Y DEFICIT WAS $1.4 TRILLION

Receipts in 2009 tumbled to $2,105 billion, a decrease of $419 billion, or 17 percent, from 2008. That year-over-year decline follows a small drop in revenues for fiscal year 2008 and is the largest annual percentage decline in revenues in more than seven decades.


Federal Budget Deficit Totals 1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009 Congressional Budget Office

Federal Budget Deficit Totals $1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009

CBO projects deficits based on pending appropriations legislation.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Oh right, in the right wing world of delusion, the next Prez WOULDN'T had spent ANY money and the CBO's prediction of $1.2+ trillion deficit on Jan 8, 2009 12 days prior to Obama was bogus.

EVERY other past Prez gets responsibility for their final F/Y budgets, but since Dubya didn't want he "credit" for the F/Y(that started 4 months prior to Obama) that was deteriorating, you chose not to sign a budget, that gets him off the hook? lol

You can't make this shit up.

No, actually, you are wrong.

I am a retired Federal employee with 38 years of service. For most of my career, I worked in budget, planning and policy positions, including 12 years heading a resource management division for one of my agencies' offices. I've written budget justifications, developed operating plans, wrote budget appeals, wrote responses to OMB and Congressional questions, executed the financial plan.

Let me explain how the process works:

Agencies develop 5 year plans on a regular basis. Around May, the internal parts of the agency develop their request to the Department level based on that plan. The Secretary (or independent agency head) makes the decision as to what the Department/Agency will submit to the Office of Management and Budget; that submission is normally due to OMB on Labor Day. OMB conducts their analysis, and in a normal year, submits their mark back to the agency around Thanksgiving. At this point the Secretary has the option to appeal to the President. The agencies have till mid-December to submit their final Congressional submission to OMB, who packages it as the President's Budget which is, by law, submitted to Congress February 1.

Please note that this submission is the last time the President influences the appropriations process till he signs or vetoes the bills Congress presents to him later in the year.

Congress then holds hearings and does their own analyses. Regular order is for Congress to pass an overall budget, all of which does is create targets for the individual appropriations committees. The appropriations committees act, each chamber votes, and the final appropriation is determined by conference action and the President signs the final bill (there are 12 appropriations bills).

What has happened, particularly in the Pelosi era, was that the overall Congressional budget process was ignored, and the individual appropriations bills subsumed into a larger Omnibus bill.

Because Congress never acts in time for the start of the fiscal year, they always pass Continuing Resolutions till they do. In election years, they pass CRs because they want the incoming President to be able to make his mark on the process.

CRs provide limited funding and are superceded by the annual appropriation.

Please do not EVER post any ignorant garbage to me about the Federal budget process. It was my professional life, and you just show your ignorance to me when you do.

Got it, you are one of the MORONS who "thinks" Gov't will just stop spending money IF Dubya doesn't sign bills and just pushes it off to the next guy AND LIKE EVERY OTHER US PREZ IN HISTORY, DUBYA SHOULDN'T BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS FINAL F/Y BUDGET. F*kkkking amazing!!!
'
How Much Did Obama Add?

But it’s also true that Obama signed a number of appropriations bills, plus other legislation and executive orders, that raised spending for the remainder of fiscal 2009 even above the path set by Bush. By our calculations, Obama can be fairly assigned responsibility for a maximum of $203 billion in additional spending for that year.


Here’s how we arrived at our $203 billion total: We combed through all the appropriations bills signed by Obama for 2009, plus other legislation that CBO said also resulted in increased spending. We also examined the budget effects of Obama’s decision to bail out General Motors and Chrysler using funds previously appropriated under TARP. And here’s what we found:

• $2 billion for children’s health insurance.
• $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
• $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.
• $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
• $31 billion in “supplemental” spending for the military and other purposes. ... 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.
• $20 billion for GM and Chrysler bailouts.

Other big domestic programs that don’t require yearly appropriations, including Social Security and Medicare, continued to operate as they had under Bush. One big fiscal 2009 spending increase resulted from an unusually large 5.8 percent cost of living increase that took effect just before Obama took office. That was an anomaly, as we explained in “Social Security COLA,” posted Sept. 23, 2009, and there would be no COLA at all for the next two years. The same 5.8 percent COLA also was given in 2009 to millions of federal retirees, military retirees and disabled veterans and their survivors.

So by our calculations, Obama can fairly be assigned responsibility for — at most — 5.8 percent of the $3.5 trillion that the federal government actually spent in fiscal 2009, which was 17.9 percent higher than fiscal 2008.

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not


DISHONEST RIGHT WINGERS, I HATE THAT THERE AREN'T MORE GOLDWATER'S TODAY!!

If Congress does not pass an appropriation, and if the President refuses to sign what they do pass, then discretionary spending stops. Entitlements and trust funds do not.

You are stupid and uneducable and I do not intend to waste any more time with you. I explained the budget process in detail.

And you continued to shout platitudes from leftie propaganda at me.

I'm an expert in the process. You are not.

 

[Dad2three]

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

Nonsense. CBO predicted Jan 8 2009 the deficit was $1.2+ trillion. WHO ever stepped in had that. You can give Obama $200 billion as they pointed out in the link I gave

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

AND 2009 F/Y DEFICIT WAS $1.4 TRILLION

Receipts in 2009 tumbled to $2,105 billion, a decrease of $419 billion, or 17 percent, from 2008. That year-over-year decline follows a small drop in revenues for fiscal year 2008 and is the largest annual percentage decline in revenues in more than seven decades.


Federal Budget Deficit Totals 1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009 Congressional Budget Office

Federal Budget Deficit Totals $1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009

CBO projects deficits based on pending appropriations legislation.

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Oh right, in the right wing world of delusion, the next Prez WOULDN'T had spent ANY money and the CBO's prediction of $1.2+ trillion deficit on Jan 8, 2009 12 days prior to Obama was bogus.

EVERY other past Prez gets responsibility for their final F/Y budgets, but since Dubya didn't want he "credit" for the F/Y(that started 4 months prior to Obama) that was deteriorating, you chose not to sign a budget, that gets him off the hook? lol

You can't make this shit up.

No, actually, you are wrong.

I am a retired Federal employee with 38 years of service. For most of my career, I worked in budget, planning and policy positions, including 12 years heading a resource management division for one of my agencies' offices. I've written budget justifications, developed operating plans, wrote budget appeals, wrote responses to OMB and Congressional questions, executed the financial plan.

Let me explain how the process works:

Agencies develop 5 year plans on a regular basis. Around May, the internal parts of the agency develop their request to the Department level based on that plan. The Secretary (or independent agency head) makes the decision as to what the Department/Agency will submit to the Office of Management and Budget; that submission is normally due to OMB on Labor Day. OMB conducts their analysis, and in a normal year, submits their mark back to the agency around Thanksgiving. At this point the Secretary has the option to appeal to the President. The agencies have till mid-December to submit their final Congressional submission to OMB, who packages it as the President's Budget which is, by law, submitted to Congress February 1.

Please note that this submission is the last time the President influences the appropriations process till he signs or vetoes the bills Congress presents to him later in the year.

Congress then holds hearings and does their own analyses. Regular order is for Congress to pass an overall budget, all of which does is create targets for the individual appropriations committees. The appropriations committees act, each chamber votes, and the final appropriation is determined by conference action and the President signs the final bill (there are 12 appropriations bills).

What has happened, particularly in the Pelosi era, was that the overall Congressional budget process was ignored, and the individual appropriations bills subsumed into a larger Omnibus bill.

Because Congress never acts in time for the start of the fiscal year, they always pass Continuing Resolutions till they do. In election years, they pass CRs because they want the incoming President to be able to make his mark on the process.

CRs provide limited funding and are superceded by the annual appropriation.

Please do not EVER post any ignorant garbage to me about the Federal budget process. It was my professional life, and you just show your ignorance to me when you do.

Got it, you are one of the MORONS who "thinks" Gov't will just stop spending money IF Dubya doesn't sign bills and just pushes it off to the next guy AND LIKE EVERY OTHER US PREZ IN HISTORY, DUBYA SHOULDN'T BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS FINAL F/Y BUDGET. F*kkkking amazing!!!
'
How Much Did Obama Add?

But it’s also true that Obama signed a number of appropriations bills, plus other legislation and executive orders, that raised spending for the remainder of fiscal 2009 even above the path set by Bush. By our calculations, Obama can be fairly assigned responsibility for a maximum of $203 billion in additional spending for that year.


Here’s how we arrived at our $203 billion total: We combed through all the appropriations bills signed by Obama for 2009, plus other legislation that CBO said also resulted in increased spending. We also examined the budget effects of Obama’s decision to bail out General Motors and Chrysler using funds previously appropriated under TARP. And here’s what we found:

• $2 billion for children’s health insurance.
• $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
• $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.
• $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
• $31 billion in “supplemental” spending for the military and other purposes. ... 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.
• $20 billion for GM and Chrysler bailouts.

Other big domestic programs that don’t require yearly appropriations, including Social Security and Medicare, continued to operate as they had under Bush. One big fiscal 2009 spending increase resulted from an unusually large 5.8 percent cost of living increase that took effect just before Obama took office. That was an anomaly, as we explained in “Social Security COLA,” posted Sept. 23, 2009, and there would be no COLA at all for the next two years. The same 5.8 percent COLA also was given in 2009 to millions of federal retirees, military retirees and disabled veterans and their survivors.

So by our calculations, Obama can fairly be assigned responsibility for — at most — 5.8 percent of the $3.5 trillion that the federal government actually spent in fiscal 2009, which was 17.9 percent higher than fiscal 2008.

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not


DISHONEST RIGHT WINGERS, I HATE THAT THERE AREN'T MORE GOLDWATER'S TODAY!!

If Congress does not pass an appropriation, and if the President refuses to sign what they do pass, then discretionary spending stops. Entitlements and trust funds do not.

You are stupid and uneducable and I do not intend to waste any more time with you. I explained the budget process in detail.

And you continued to shout platitudes from leftie propaganda at me.

I'm an expert in the process. You are not.

Your dodge of LOGIC and honesty of that spending is noted Bubba. Must hurt to be that stupid?

 

[Flash]

Obama has several distinctions.

Biggest liar

Most failed foreign policy

Worse economic recovery

Lowest percentage of workforce participation in decades

Most number on welfare

Greatest drop in family income

Most taxpayer's money given to special interest goups like the unions.

Highest federal budget in history

Most debt ever accrued by an American President or any leader of any country in the history of the world.

Most Constitutional rights stomped upon.

Longest Commander in Chief at war since the Revolution.

Of course let us not forget he is the biggest asshole ever to hold that office.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Yup, that's what he is. Obama has just really fucked this country up. Yup, he sure has.

It's a bad day at the Wall Street Journal when they have to go to press with news like this. They're going to have to revert their Op Ed section back to....Op Ed, instead of "Why We Hate Obama".

Jobless Claims Fall By 20,000 in March 28 Week
Initial claims for jobless benefits near the lowest level in 15 years
Jobless Claims Fall By 20 000 in March 28 Week - WSJ
WASHINGTON—The number of Americans seeking first-time unemployment benefits fell to near the lowest level in 15 years last week, a sign of continued improvement in the labor market.

Initial jobless claims decreased by 20,000 to a seasonally adjusted 268,000 in the week ended March 28, the Labor Department said Thursday. Economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal had expected 285,000 new claims.

Last week’s level was just about above the 267,000 new claims filed in the Jan. 24 week. Claims that week were the lowest since the spring of 2000."""

Right before the idiots elected Dubya!

Really nut job? How many times does the truth have to be explained to you before it gets through your incredibly thick skull.

God damned Progressives are the stupidest people on the planet.

You get 5 little gold stars on your forehead for most the best response to the O/P.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Obama has several distinctions.

Biggest liar

Most failed foreign policy

Worse economic recovery

Lowest percentage of workforce participation in decades

Most number on welfare

Greatest drop in family income

Most taxpayer's money given to special interest goups like the unions.

Highest federal budget in history

Most debt ever accrued by an American President or any leader of any country in the history of the world.

Most Constitutional rights stomped upon.

Longest Commander in Chief at war since the Revolution.

Of course let us not forget he is the biggest asshole ever to hold that office.

Ooooh, I just want to take your methane and sell it to every vegetable gardener in America. They are always searching for free manure.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

Nonsense. CBO predicted Jan 8 2009 the deficit was $1.2+ trillion. WHO ever stepped in had that. You can give Obama $200 billion as they pointed out in the link I gave

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

AND 2009 F/Y DEFICIT WAS $1.4 TRILLION

Receipts in 2009 tumbled to $2,105 billion, a decrease of $419 billion, or 17 percent, from 2008. That year-over-year decline follows a small drop in revenues for fiscal year 2008 and is the largest annual percentage decline in revenues in more than seven decades.


Federal Budget Deficit Totals 1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009 Congressional Budget Office

Federal Budget Deficit Totals $1.4 Trillion in Fiscal Year 2009

CBO projects deficits based on pending appropriations legislation.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Oh right, in the right wing world of delusion, the next Prez WOULDN'T had spent ANY money and the CBO's prediction of $1.2+ trillion deficit on Jan 8, 2009 12 days prior to Obama was bogus.

EVERY other past Prez gets responsibility for their final F/Y budgets, but since Dubya didn't want he "credit" for the F/Y(that started 4 months prior to Obama) that was deteriorating, you chose not to sign a budget, that gets him off the hook? lol

You can't make this shit up.

No, actually, you are wrong.

I am a retired Federal employee with 38 years of service. For most of my career, I worked in budget, planning and policy positions, including 12 years heading a resource management division for one of my agencies' offices. I've written budget justifications, developed operating plans, wrote budget appeals, wrote responses to OMB and Congressional questions, executed the financial plan.

Let me explain how the process works:

Agencies develop 5 year plans on a regular basis. Around May, the internal parts of the agency develop their request to the Department level based on that plan. The Secretary (or independent agency head) makes the decision as to what the Department/Agency will submit to the Office of Management and Budget; that submission is normally due to OMB on Labor Day. OMB conducts their analysis, and in a normal year, submits their mark back to the agency around Thanksgiving. At this point the Secretary has the option to appeal to the President. The agencies have till mid-December to submit their final Congressional submission to OMB, who packages it as the President's Budget which is, by law, submitted to Congress February 1.

Please note that this submission is the last time the President influences the appropriations process till he signs or vetoes the bills Congress presents to him later in the year.

Congress then holds hearings and does their own analyses. Regular order is for Congress to pass an overall budget, all of which does is create targets for the individual appropriations committees. The appropriations committees act, each chamber votes, and the final appropriation is determined by conference action and the President signs the final bill (there are 12 appropriations bills).

What has happened, particularly in the Pelosi era, was that the overall Congressional budget process was ignored, and the individual appropriations bills subsumed into a larger Omnibus bill.

Because Congress never acts in time for the start of the fiscal year, they always pass Continuing Resolutions till they do. In election years, they pass CRs because they want the incoming President to be able to make his mark on the process.

CRs provide limited funding and are superceded by the annual appropriation.

Please do not EVER post any ignorant garbage to me about the Federal budget process. It was my professional life, and you just show your ignorance to me when you do.

Got it, you are one of the MORONS who "thinks" Gov't will just stop spending money IF Dubya doesn't sign bills and just pushes it off to the next guy AND LIKE EVERY OTHER US PREZ IN HISTORY, DUBYA SHOULDN'T BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS FINAL F/Y BUDGET. F*kkkking amazing!!!
'
How Much Did Obama Add?

But it’s also true that Obama signed a number of appropriations bills, plus other legislation and executive orders, that raised spending for the remainder of fiscal 2009 even above the path set by Bush. By our calculations, Obama can be fairly assigned responsibility for a maximum of $203 billion in additional spending for that year.


Here’s how we arrived at our $203 billion total: We combed through all the appropriations bills signed by Obama for 2009, plus other legislation that CBO said also resulted in increased spending. We also examined the budget effects of Obama’s decision to bail out General Motors and Chrysler using funds previously appropriated under TARP. And here’s what we found:

• $2 billion for children’s health insurance.
• $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
• $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.
• $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
• $31 billion in “supplemental” spending for the military and other purposes. ... 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.
• $20 billion for GM and Chrysler bailouts.

Other big domestic programs that don’t require yearly appropriations, including Social Security and Medicare, continued to operate as they had under Bush. One big fiscal 2009 spending increase resulted from an unusually large 5.8 percent cost of living increase that took effect just before Obama took office. That was an anomaly, as we explained in “Social Security COLA,” posted Sept. 23, 2009, and there would be no COLA at all for the next two years. The same 5.8 percent COLA also was given in 2009 to millions of federal retirees, military retirees and disabled veterans and their survivors.

So by our calculations, Obama can fairly be assigned responsibility for — at most — 5.8 percent of the $3.5 trillion that the federal government actually spent in fiscal 2009, which was 17.9 percent higher than fiscal 2008.

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not


DISHONEST RIGHT WINGERS, I HATE THAT THERE AREN'T MORE GOLDWATER'S TODAY!!

If Congress does not pass an appropriation, and if the President refuses to sign what they do pass, then discretionary spending stops. Entitlements and trust funds do not.

You are stupid and uneducable and I do not intend to waste any more time with you. I explained the budget process in detail.

And you continued to shout platitudes from leftie propaganda at me.

I'm an expert in the process. You are not.

Your dodge of LOGIC and honesty of that spending is noted Bubba. Must hurt to be that stupid?

Ya' know, you take the Holy Grail for legitimate conservative news reporting and hand it to them on a platter, and they just want to whine, kick their pudgy little sticky feet and cry like a baby.

 

[Faun]

This is typical leftist logic you are trying to fight.

According to the left-ards, the economy was headed toward economic Armageddon. They literally think that every single job in the entire country was going to be wiped out.

So according to their irrational perspective, the moment Obamy signed the stealmulous bill, every single job that wasn't lost (because it was going to and they know it), was therefore saved by the stealmulous bill.

Basically, if even one job was not lost, then it obviously was saved, or created, because Darth Bush had ordered the Bank Star to destroy the planet. Thankfully Obamy Wan Nohopey, saved us all for the dark side.

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House
Back Then, Helping Boost Economic Growth Was Bipartisan

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House Center for American Progress Action Fund

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Bush signed a continuing resolution in September, 2008 for the first half of FY2009. He owns all spending for that period with the exception of spending bills Obama signed. On top of that, he also passed TARP during that same period. Bush owns that as well.

 

[Dad2three]

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House
Back Then, Helping Boost Economic Growth Was Bipartisan

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House Center for American Progress Action Fund

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Bush signed a continuing resolution in September, 2008 for the first half of FY2009. He owns the budget for that period. On top of that, he also passed TARP during that same period. Bush owns that as well.

Yeah, why wouldn't the prez accept responsibility for the entire fiscal year budget (minus the things CLEARLY outlined as being tied to Obama, $200 billion) like EVERY other Prez?

Buying into ANYTHING that Dubya didn't own over $1.2+ trillion deficits of the F/Y budget is just being dishonest of past policies and precedent!

 

[Faun]

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Bush signed a continuing resolution in September, 2008 for the first half of FY2009. He owns the budget for that period. On top of that, he also passed TARP during that same period. Bush owns that as well.

Yeah, why wouldn't the prez accept responsibility for the entire fiscal year budget (minus the things CLEARLY outlined as being tied to Obama, $200 billion) like EVERY other Prez?

Buying into ANYTHING that Dubya didn't own over $1.2+ trillion deficits of the F/Y budget is just being dishonest of past policies and precedent!

Spending is only one aspect of the deficit. Revenue is the other.

Bush owns the $400 billion drop in revenue since he dumped the Great Recession to Obama.

 

[Dad2three]

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Bush signed a continuing resolution in September, 2008 for the first half of FY2009. He owns the budget for that period. On top of that, he also passed TARP during that same period. Bush owns that as well.

Yeah, why wouldn't the prez accept responsibility for the entire fiscal year budget (minus the things CLEARLY outlined as being tied to Obama, $200 billion) like EVERY other Prez?

Buying into ANYTHING that Dubya didn't own over $1.2+ trillion deficits of the F/Y budget is just being dishonest of past policies and precedent!

Spending is only one aspect of the deficit. Revenue is the other.

Bush owns the $400 billion drop in revenue since he dumped the Great Recession to Obama.

True, but Obama DIDN'T blow up spending, and as the right wing moron earlier wants to posit, Gov't doesn't just shut it's doors because there wasn't a budget under Dubya. He gets credit (or blame) on his watch (and the last F/Y that started under him) like EVERY other past Prez.

And in honesty, MOST of the past6 years of debt can be traced back to Dubya's policies that crashed the US economy, or the 2 UNFUNDED wars, UNFUNDED Medicare expansion or 2 UNFUNDED tax cuts. (To you right wingers, NO the POLICY change done under ONE Prez DOESN'T end the day he leaves, no one has the balls to put US back to the tax levels the US had thanks to Clinton/Dems 1993 budget bill, DESPITE the 4 straight surpluses before GOP ideology took over!!!)

 

[Flash]

[



True, but Obama DIDN'T blow up spending, and as the right wing moron earlier wants to posit, Gov't doesn't just shut it's doors because there wasn't a budget under Dubya. He gets credit (or blame) on his watch (and the last F/Y that started under him) like EVERY other past Prez.

And in honesty, MOST of the past6 years of debt can be traced back to Dubya's policies that crashed the US economy, or the 2 UNFUNDED wars, UNFUNDED Medicare expansion or 2 UNFUNDED tax cuts. (To you right wingers, NO the POLICY change done under ONE Prez DOESN'T end the day he leaves, no one has the balls to put US back to the tax levels the US had thanks to Clinton/Dems 1993 budget bill, DESPITE the 4 straight surpluses before GOP ideology took over!!!)

One of the things that Moon Bats always conveniently forget to mention is the last two years of Bush's administration where we had the most debt, worse economic record and most government spending the Democrats were completely in charge of Congress and that shithead Obama voted for the budgets.

If Bush's budgets were so bad why did the Democrats and that shithead Obama pass them?

In other words thank the Democrats for the screwing up the economy and putting this country so much in debt.

The Democrats never take responsibility for the damage they do to this country. They always try to blame their failures on somebody else.

Bush's crime was going along with the filthy ass Democrats. The economy was doing OK until the filthy ass Democrats took over in after the disastrous 2006 mid term election.

It is always a dumb thing to elect Democrats. Bad things happen.

 

[Mertex]

Joblessness is a result of a system fostering increased ease and availability of government assistance. Why work when you don't have to? That seems to be the general aesthetic in many areas. Especially among cultures and areas where the people feel as though the government owes them something. So, I suppose Obama is directly responsible in portion for that. Now, regardless of whether you agree with the previous statement or not, it is important to point the proverbial finger at Congress as well. They are not much more than petulant children squabbling over an already-pissed-in-pot. Generally speaking, these men and women are a total disgrace. I'm proud to be American, but disgusted with what we have allowed our top tiers of government to become.

Idiot....unemployment has gone down from where it escalated to because of George W. Bush.

 

[AmericanGirl05]

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House
Back Then, Helping Boost Economic Growth Was Bipartisan

Republicans Loved Stimulus When Bush Was in the White House Center for American Progress Action Fund

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Bush signed a continuing resolution in September, 2008 for the first half of FY2009. He owns all spending for that period with the exception of spending bills Obama signed. On top of that, he also passed TARP during that same period. Bush owns that as well.

The full year appropriation supercedes the CR. The full year approp could have cut the funds available.

 

[Dad2three]

[



True, but Obama DIDN'T blow up spending, and as the right wing moron earlier wants to posit, Gov't doesn't just shut it's doors because there wasn't a budget under Dubya. He gets credit (or blame) on his watch (and the last F/Y that started under him) like EVERY other past Prez.

And in honesty, MOST of the past6 years of debt can be traced back to Dubya's policies that crashed the US economy, or the 2 UNFUNDED wars, UNFUNDED Medicare expansion or 2 UNFUNDED tax cuts. (To you right wingers, NO the POLICY change done under ONE Prez DOESN'T end the day he leaves, no one has the balls to put US back to the tax levels the US had thanks to Clinton/Dems 1993 budget bill, DESPITE the 4 straight surpluses before GOP ideology took over!!!)

One of the things that Moon Bats always conveniently forget to mention is the last two years of Bush's administration where we had the most debt, worse economic record and most government spending the Democrats were completely in charge of Congress and that shithead Obama voted for the budgets.

If Bush's budgets were so bad why did the Democrats and that shithead Obama pass them?

In other words thank the Democrats for the screwing up the economy and putting this country so much in debt.

The Democrats never take responsibility for the damage they do to this country. They always try to blame their failures on somebody else.

Bush's crime was going along with the filthy ass Democrats. The economy was doing OK until the filthy ass Democrats took over in after the disastrous 2006 mid term election.

It is always a dumb thing to elect Democrats. Bad things happen.

PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE TELL ME ONE POLICY THAT CHANGED UNDER THE DEMS HAVING CONGRESS? Pretty please? Oops



Yes, Dubya built a GREAT ponzi scheme, until it popped that is!

 

[Faun]

That graphic needs some correction ... first of all, Reagan did not inherit a recession. Though interest rates and inflation were ridiculously high, GDP was +7.6% in the 4th quarter of 1980 and +8.5% in the 1st quarter of 1981. There was a recession earlier in 1980 but it ended in July. The next recession didn't start until July of 1981. Also, we are past "half way though their 5th year." At this point in Reagan's term, the unemployment rate was 6.6%. Today it's 5.5%. As far as the deficit, it's unrealistic to say Obama cut it in half since that is starting from FY2010, but Obama signed an Omnibus budget bill and a continuing resolution bill in FY2009 because Bush never signed a budget bill for FY2009. He too signed a continuing resolution to carry the government through the first half of FY2009. But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama.

Agree with all BUT:

"But the second half of FY2009 is attributable to Obama."

Nonsense, WHOEVER was Prez would be inheriting the Bush economy

January 08, 2009
CBO Projects $1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009

12 days pre Obama

CBO Projects 1.2 Trillion Deficit for 2009 - Memphis Daily News

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.


How Much Did Obama Add?

• $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).

Obama s Spending Inferno or Not

Yes, Obama has actually cut the deficit by 2/3rds from Dubya's final F/Y budget (the one like EVERY other US Prez, he gets EVEN if he chose not to sign bills BECAUSE he wanted to later say it wasn't his!)

You can blame Bush for the decrease in revenue, which was directly attributable to the Great Recession he handed Obama, but you can't blame him for all of the increase in spending in FY2009. Again, Obama signed the budgets for the second half of FY2009. And the total deficit for FY2009 was $1,9t.

You absolutely CANNOT blame Bush for the FY 09 spending levels.

The final appropriations for FY 09 were not passed until after Obama took office. The government operated on continuing resolutions till that point.

What you may not understand about how appropriations work, is that they supercede any CRs. And government spending over the course of the year is not a steady line. Grants and contracts are not awarded on a steady basis, like salaries. And during CRs, agencies often postpone filling positions, thus lowering their salary costs.

I see this all the time -- it was really Bush in 09. But you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. The spending for that fiscal year is on the watch of the President who signs the final appropriations for that year.

In the case of FY 09, it was Barack Obama.

Bush signed a continuing resolution in September, 2008 for the first half of FY2009. He owns all spending for that period with the exception of spending bills Obama signed. On top of that, he also passed TARP during that same period. Bush owns that as well.

The full year appropriation supercedes the CR. The full year approp could have cut the funds available.

Money was spent before Obama signed it. Bush owns it.