$3.7 Trillion!!!

[Gipper]

Obama: WE’VE Piled Up a Whole Bunch of Debt
Posted by Jim Hoft on Tuesday, February 15, 2011, 5:04 PM
Obama Just Increased the US National Debt By $4 Trillion or 28% in 2 Years

After adding $4 trillion to the national debt in only two years Obama told reporters today that, “We’ve racked up a whole bunch of debt.”

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “We’ve Piled Up — We’ve Racked Up A Whole Bunch Of Debt.”
(President Obama, Press Conference, 2/15/11)

10,627 Billion Dollars – Debt Level On Day One Of Obama Administration

14,083 Billion Dollars – Debt Level Today

26,346 Billion Dollars – Debt Level Set By New White House Budget

Yes, YOU sure did.http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/02/obama-weve-piled-up-a-whole-bunch-of-debt/

Is this NOT insanity?

I wonder...do liberals see a problem here? Obama has blown up the budget, ignored his own debt commission, and then says we must get control of spending.

$4 Trillion in just two years!

Why is he constantly contradicting himself?

If only we had a high speed rail system....

Obama is taking us on a fast train to ruin. Is he doing it on purpose?

 

[Apathy]

Yup, it is insane how the GOPers are now born again fiscal conservatives ever since it was politically expedient for them to be so.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Yup, it is insane how the GOPers are now born again fiscal conservatives ever since it was politically expedient for them to be so.

what you mean they where not when they passed the prescription drug program? or fought 2 wars on the tab? Or wait...was it not a Republican in the white house who pushed for Tarp? Or was it the ..Huge tax cuts that where not payed for with cuts? But I mean those don't count..Bush was in charge...and as per all Republicans..you vote them into office...they spend more..and when asked about it..republicans just call them a rino and that now it will be different....same thing since 1980..Republicans in office for less goverment ...less taxes...and leave with more debt.

and of course one of the biggest reasons debt has gone up....the Huge Recession...started when the banks and financial system collapsed...under...the Republican white house of course...

 

[dogtowner]

what you mean they where not when they passed the prescription drug program? or fought 2 wars on the tab? Or wait...was it not a Republican in the white house who pushed for Tarp? Or was it the ..Huge tax cuts that where not payed for with cuts? But I mean those don't count..Bush was in charge...and as per all Republicans..you vote them into office...they spend more..and when asked about it..republicans just call them a rino and that now it will be different....same thing since 1980..Republicans in office for less goverment ...less taxes...and leave with more debt.

and of course one of the biggest reasons debt has gone up....the Huge Recession...started when the banks and financial system collapsed...under...the Republican white house of course...

a big reason we should never wish for bi-partisanship, its french for spend money while patting one another on teh back.

 

[Gipper]

a big reason we should never wish for bi-partisanship, its french for spend money while patting one another on teh back.

Its funny and revealing how the two posts above yours complain about the Rs spending, but not the Ds. Yet, BO has increased our debt by 300% in just two awful years in office. Some people are so slanted they are incapable of seeing the truth.

It is sad that some Americans want other Americans to support them. They are so weak and lazy, they won't do it themselves.

 

[Gipper]

Some Americans see this and others do not.

I wonder if we were to perform an IQ test on these two groups of people, what we would find.

http://washington*************/blogs/nate-beelers-toons/2011/02/obamas-deficit-solution

 

[Dr.Who]

Yup, it is insane how the GOPers are now born again fiscal conservatives ever since it was politically expedient for them to be so.

Both President Bush and President Obama increased the debt dramatically compared to all the other Presidents before them.

I don''t really care if the pubs are complaining now because they dislike dem spending or if it is because they finally woke up - the important thing is that finally someone is complaining.

OK, I take that back I do care what their motives are but that is a separate issue. All of Washington feels free to spend your money like it is going out of style and the pubs are bad. So vote in new freshmen congressmen who might fix this - like we did last election. I hope he pubs are as afraid as the dems are.

What I see going on here in this administration is that President Obama knows he is raising the debt monstrously and he just does not care about the consequences of that as long as he accomplishes his goals. His goals are to increase the size and scope of government, to redistribute wealth, to prop up unions, to expand entitlement programs, to redefine rights as getting a "free" job and health care and a house.

This can only lead to a statist government of one sort or another (whether that be socialist or tyranical or whatever) and it will be driven by a debt that can only be solved by tax rates so high that the only government capable of collecting them will need to be more powerful than it rightfully should be. Of course it may backfire terribly. The republicans may be in power when that day comes and they will seize control through that more powerful centralized statist government. Then again some third party might hold the office on that day.

The question that remains is does President Obama want such a statist government or not?

 

[BigRob]

Yup, it is insane how the GOPers are now born again fiscal conservatives ever since it was politically expedient for them to be so.

Similar to how the President is talking about the budget issues after spending almost almost $4 trillion more than we had in just two years?

The budget is going to need to be addressed.. it doesn't ultimately matter which party does it, but someone has to do it.

 

[PLC1]

Similar to how the President is talking about the budget issues after spending almost almost $4 trillion more than we had in just two years?

The budget is going to need to be addressed.. it doesn't ultimately matter which party does it, but someone has to do it.

Absolutely, and talking about cutting a few million here or there simply isn't going to do it. The whole budget needs to be scrutinized, including the untouchable parts: military spending and social programs.

And that still isn't going to bring us to fiscal sanity until we face up to the tax issue:
Tax bills in 2009 at lowest level since 1950

Amid complaints about high taxes and calls for a smaller government, Americans paid their lowest level of taxes last year since Harry Truman's presidency, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data found.

Taxed Enough Already indeed. There is no free lunch, not for liberals wanting to "tax the rich", nor for conservatives wanting to increase the economy through tax cuts.

 

[Gipper]

Absolutely, and talking about cutting a few million here or there simply isn't going to do it. The whole budget needs to be scrutinized, including the untouchable parts: military spending and social programs.

And that still isn't going to bring us to fiscal sanity until we face up to the tax issue:
Tax bills in 2009 at lowest level since 1950



Taxed Enough Already indeed. There is no free lunch, not for liberals wanting to "tax the rich", nor for conservatives wanting to increase the economy through tax cuts.

Wrong again my pot smoking friend.

I know you want to raise taxes on productive Americans so that their property can be redistributed to the unproductive. But, that is NOT the answer.

The answer is cutting government spending dramatically. No need to raise taxes.

Sorry my liberal Obama loving friend, but you are wrong again.

 

[Dr.Who]

The answer is cutting government spending dramatically. No need to raise taxes.

I don't know about the other things you said but this part looks right.

 

[Gipper]

I don't know about the other things you said but this part looks right.

Once you get to know my "friend" better, you will understand.

 

[PLC1]

Wrong again my pot smoking friend.

I know you want to raise taxes on productive Americans so that their property can be redistributed to the unproductive. But, that is NOT the answer.

The answer is cutting government spending dramatically. No need to raise taxes.

Sorry my liberal Obama loving friend, but you are wrong again.

How tedious it is to continue to read a Pavlovian response to uncomfortable facts and see my position caricaturized as some tax and spend liberal. It would be nice if you would actually read what I've posted instead of coming up with some juvenile rant that sounds like a regurgitation of right wing radio.

 

[Apathy]

Both President Bush and President Obama increased the debt dramatically compared to all the other Presidents before them.

I don''t really care if the pubs are complaining now because they dislike dem spending or if it is because they finally woke up - the important thing is that finally someone is complaining.

OK, I take that back I do care what their motives are but that is a separate issue. All of Washington feels free to spend your money like it is going out of style and the pubs are bad. So vote in new freshmen congressmen who might fix this - like we did last election. I hope he pubs are as afraid as the dems are.

What I see going on here in this administration is that President Obama knows he is raising the debt monstrously and he just does not care about the consequences of that as long as he accomplishes his goals. His goals are to increase the size and scope of government, to redistribute wealth, to prop up unions, to expand entitlement programs, to redefine rights as getting a "free" job and health care and a house.

This can only lead to a statist government of one sort or another (whether that be socialist or tyranical or whatever) and it will be driven by a debt that can only be solved by tax rates so high that the only government capable of collecting them will need to be more powerful than it rightfully should be. Of course it may backfire terribly. The republicans may be in power when that day comes and they will seize control through that more powerful centralized statist government. Then again some third party might hold the office on that day.

The question that remains is does President Obama want such a statist government or not?

The motives are the only thing that matters they have no intention of fixing the fiscal mess. They just want their projects to be the ones being spent on. Therefore replacing on suit for another is a worthless gesture when they both want the same thing.

 

[Apathy]

How tedious it is to continue to read a Pavlovian response to uncomfortable facts and see my position caricaturized as some tax and spend liberal. It would be nice if you would actually read what I've posted instead of coming up with some juvenile rant that sounds like a regurgitation of right wing radio.