So, it appears that all the liberal commentators and lefty cable/radio
talkers have been scooped by, of all publications, the Wall Street Journal, which has posted the best news of the year for the Obama presidency.
talkers have been scooped by, of all publications, the Wall Street Journal, which has posted the best news of the year for the Obama presidency.
Rex Nutting, who writes for the WSJ’s stocks page, “MarketWatch,”
calculates in his newest column that, of all the falsehoods told about President Obama,
“the biggest whopper is the one about his reckless spending spree.”
calculates in his newest column that, of all the falsehoods told about President Obama,
“the biggest whopper is the one about his reckless spending spree.”
Nutting notes the irony that most people – even many
Democrats – accept as fact that Obama has spent recklessly throughout his
presidency. But the spending binge never happened. In fact, Nutting points out
in stunning fashion that federal spending under Obama is rising at its slowest
annual pace in nearly 60 years.
Democrats – accept as fact that Obama has spent recklessly throughout his
presidency. But the spending binge never happened. In fact, Nutting points out
in stunning fashion that federal spending under Obama is rising at its slowest
annual pace in nearly 60 years.
What’s more, when the numbers are adjusted for inflation,
spending is actually declining under the current president. The historical data
comes from the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget
Office.
spending is actually declining under the current president. The historical data
comes from the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget
Office.
I know some liberals have been passing around a chart online
that calculates the proportional “blame for the deficit.” But the WSJ piece is not some left-wing “blame Bush” rant.
that calculates the proportional “blame for the deficit.” But the WSJ piece is not some left-wing “blame Bush” rant.
Nutting’s
spending chart, published in a reputable conservative publication, relying upon official
government statistics, will certainly send shivers up the spines of
conservatives. Especially those who glorify Ronald Reagan.
spending chart, published in a reputable conservative publication, relying upon official
government statistics, will certainly send shivers up the spines of
conservatives. Especially those who glorify Ronald Reagan.
One of the main reasons why the anti-Obama claims in the Republican
talking points are so far off the mark is that they falsely attribute the
fiscal year 2009 budget to Obama. I’ve long ago given up trying to correct
people who think the deficit on day one of the Obama presidency was Obama’s
fault.
talking points are so far off the mark is that they falsely attribute the
fiscal year 2009 budget to Obama. I’ve long ago given up trying to correct
people who think the deficit on day one of the Obama presidency was Obama’s
fault.
Nutting reminds his readers that the FY 2009 budget took
effect on Oct. 1, 2008. It was crafted by Republican President George W. Bush
and the Democratic-controlled Congress. It contained a projected $1.2 trillion
deficit, a figure that was adjusted upward soon after Obama took office. The WSJ
columnist concludes that Obama does not deserve blame for the deficit, but
Democrats should not look at the chart and conclude that the president is a
tight-fisted budget hawk.
effect on Oct. 1, 2008. It was crafted by Republican President George W. Bush
and the Democratic-controlled Congress. It contained a projected $1.2 trillion
deficit, a figure that was adjusted upward soon after Obama took office. The WSJ
columnist concludes that Obama does not deserve blame for the deficit, but
Democrats should not look at the chart and conclude that the president is a
tight-fisted budget hawk.
Here’s a slice of Nutting’s piece:
“Like a relief pitcher who comes into the game with the
bases loaded, Obama came in with a budget in place that called for spending to
increase by hundreds of billions of dollars in response to the worst economic
and financial calamity in generations.
bases loaded, Obama came in with a budget in place that called for spending to
increase by hundreds of billions of dollars in response to the worst economic
and financial calamity in generations.
“By no means did Obama try to reverse that spending. Indeed,
his budget proposals called for even more spending in subsequent years. But the
Congress (mostly Republicans, but many Democrats too) stopped him. If Obama had
been a king who could impose his will, perhaps what the Republicans are saying
about an Obama spending binge would be accurate.
his budget proposals called for even more spending in subsequent years. But the
Congress (mostly Republicans, but many Democrats too) stopped him. If Obama had
been a king who could impose his will, perhaps what the Republicans are saying
about an Obama spending binge would be accurate.
“Yet the actual record doesn’t show a reckless increase in
spending. Far from it.”
spending. Far from it.”
You can read the entire column here.
Wow. You actually believe that tripe. You have just proven the old adage that there are three type of lies: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics. The four years in which Obama has submitted budgets had the following deficits: 2010 – $1.293 trillion; 2011 – $1.3 trillion; 2012 – $1.327 trillion; 2013 – $901 billion (estimated). According to government actuaries the real deficit last year (2011) was $5 trillion if you take into account the unfunded liabilities for Social Security, Medicare and other retirement programs.
Don't give me that lying song and dance that Obama is some sort of penny pinching fiscal conservative. He's not. Obama is as big a spender as we have ever seen in the Oval Office and the American people are not stupid enough to believe the bull coming out of the White House.