The End of Barack Obama

Again, biased toward what? They all have government bias, with a Liberal/Conservative seasoning on top. It's all bias, esp stuff defending Obama! (Which is probably all RJ allows himself to see.)

 

Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1956 & 1957.

1956:
Receipts (in current dollars) $74.6B
Outlays (in current dollars) $70.6B

1957:
Receipts (in current dollars) $80.0B
Outlays (in current dollars) $76.6B

Federal debt 1955 - $274,374,222,802.62
Federal debt 1956 - $272,750,813,649.32
Federal debt 1957 - $270,527,171,896.43

 

Federal debt (source - treasurydirect.gov)
1994 - $4,692,749,910,013.32
1995 - $4,973,982,900,709.39
1996 - $5,224,810,939,135.73
1997 - $5,413,146,011,397.34
1998 - $5,526,193,008,897.62
1999 - $5,656,270,901,615.43
2000 - $5,674,178,209,886.86
2001 - $5,807,463,412,200.06

 

Link? And what you see is the interest added onto the debt for Clinton's last four years. Interest now is about a half trillion per year.

Average change in annual deficit


President political party change in deficit years in office avg. change in deficitB.H.Obama Democrat -$275,024,511,413 4.5 -$68,756,127,853G.W.Bush Republican $803,424,990,821 8 $100,428,123,853G.W.Bush
first 7 years Republican $397,130,927,169 7 $56,732,989,596W.J.Clinton Democrat -$164,787,361,848 8 -$20,598,420,231G.H.W.Bush Republican $34,326,854,936 4 $8,581,713,734R.Reagan Republican $106,541,043,476 8 $13,317,630,435J.Carter Democrat -$4,328,272,827 4 -$1,082,068,207

Average annual deficit



President political party total accumulated debt years in office average annual deficitB.H.Obama Democrat $2,463,134,663,538 4 $615,783,665,884G.W.Bush Republican $3,011,831,280,329 8 $376,478,910,041G.W.Bush
first 7 years
(see comment above) Republican $2,133,146,435,012 7 $304,735,205,002W.J.Clinton Democrat $884,619,423,570 8 $110,577,427,946G.H.W.Bush Republican $1,129,428,976,886 4 $282,357,244,222R.Reagan Republican $1,706,702,601,850 8 $213,337,825,231J.Carter Democrat $384,933,505,542 4 $96,233,376,385

Here's the link...
http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

Carter only added less than $400 billion
Reagan and Bush41 added almost $3 trillion
Clinton added lass than a trillion
Shrub Jr. added over $5 trillion and destroyed the economy
Which left Obama with no choice but to add $2.5 trillion to recover from the disaster Shrub left him with.
So cons have added $8 trillion, liberals have added $3.7 trillion, mostly cleaning up after the cons. But that comes to $11.7 trillion, plus the $600 billion we owed before Carter makes $12.3 trillion. And the national debt is now $17 trillion, which shows how much interest we've accumulated.

 

rjh,

A truly balanced budget would include debt interest. So I submit that Dwight Eisenhower remains the last President to have actually had a balanced budget. I will admit that thanks to the Republicans in Congress forcing Clinton to accept some changes Federal spending was reduced, and thanks to excess Social Security and Medicare revenue the government had enough real money to pay its bills, although those IOU's are awaiting repayment.

 

The debt is bad.

But were were taking about the deficit under Clinton, which is the first step to getting on track to paying down the long term accumulated debt.

Medicare part D, and the wars under Bush got us off that financial track

 

You can take it as: 'The budget wasn't balanced' or 'Clinton didn't balance the budget'

The first few lines of the article say: 'Let us establish one point definitively: Bill Clinton didn’t balance the budget. Yes, he was there when it happened. But the record shows that was about the extent of his contribution.'

So, the article is seemingly saying the budget was balanced - it's just Clinton (I was going to change his name to Klingon - but I find changing peoples names quite annoying) didn't do it alone. Which I think would be true.
I doubt he personally sat in the Oval office alone and went through the entire budgetary needs and came to his own independent conclusions.

Was the article wrong about: 'Clinton tax hike' 'We have a balanced budget today that is mostly a result of 1) an exceptionally strong economy that is creating gobs of new tax revenues and 2) a shrinking military budget.'
It was Bill Clinton who, during the big budget fight in 1995, had to submit not one, not two, but five budgets until he begrudgingly matched the GOP’s balanced-budget plan. In fact, during the height of the budget wars in the summer of 1995, the Clinton administration admitted that “balancing the budget is not one of our top priorities.”

So, really, it's a combination of events and influences and not necessarily the person 'in charge'

 

And here I thought only cons were this thick. If it was the "GOP's plan" why did they go along with Shrub to destroy it six months after he took office? When Shrub became POTUS in 2001, he had a "REPUBLICAN CONGRESS" and a "REPUBLICAN SENATE". Within six months they added $3 trillion to the national debt with tax cuts(welfare) for millionaires. Then they added another $3 trillion with the Iraq war. And they wrecked not only the U.S. economy, but also the global economy with bank and real estate deregulations. They destroyed the middle class in this process, giving 95% of wealth to the top one percent, and losing a million jobs per month. If you're not one of the richest 1%, you're being conned if you vote republican. Oh, that's right, you're not even in this country. Thank god you can't vote.

 

rjhangover

Who's to know if the Dem's were in power they wouldn't have added upto 3 trillion with the Iraq war. Who's to know what the budget would have been like under the Rep's if 9/11 didn't occur, or they were in office during the mid/late 90's.

Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system

1 November 1999
An agreement between the Clinton administration and congressional Republicans, reached during all-night negotiations which concluded in the early hours of October 22, sets the stage for passage of the most sweeping banking deregulation bill in American history, lifting virtually all restraints on the operation of the giant monopolies which dominate the financial system.
The proposed Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 would do away with restrictions on the integration of banking, insurance and stock trading imposed by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, one of the central pillars of Roosevelt's New Deal. Under the old law, banks, brokerages and insurance companies were effectively barred from entering each others' industries, and investment banking and commercial banking were separated.

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/11/bank-n01.html

So who was that then 'Clinton'/'Dems' or 'The Rep's'?

 

I doubt you know about the Silverado Savings & Loan mess. That was another one of Shrub Jr.'s brothers. But you might have heard of ENRON in Texas. They're con Jobs. Read up on it sometime.

Bubba Clinton had eight years to invade Iraq, but didn't. So your "who knows" is just more con fantasy. If you remember, Shrub daddy started the Iraq shit before Bubba was POTUS, with DESERT STORM. Actually, Raygun started it by selling chemical weapons to Saddam Husein during the Iran/Iraq war.

 

rjhangover

The deregulation of S&Ls in 1980, by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act signed by President Carter (Dem) on March 31, 1980

Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system

So who was that then 'Clinton'/'Dems' or 'The Rep's'?

'If you remember, Shrub daddy started the Iraq shit before Bubba was POTUS'

I'm talking about after 9/11 - when Clinton wouldn't have been in office, anyway.

On June 26, 1993, Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack on the Iraqi Intelligence Service's (IIS) principal command and control complex in Baghdad, publicly announced as retaliation for the assassination attempt by the IIS on former President George H. W. Bush while he was visiting Kuwait in April of that year to commemorate a coalition victory over Iraq in the Persian Gulf War. Fourteen cruise missiles were launched from the USS Peterson and nine were launched from the USS Chancellorsville. Sixteen of the missiles hit the target; three struck a residential area, killing nine civilians and wounding 12. Four of the missiles were unaccounted for. This strike was in violation of international law, although that point is contentious.

The UN sanctions against Iraq that the United Nations Security Council imposed after the Gulf War remained in place during the Clinton administration. These sanctions are alleged to have contributed to increased child mortality there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy_of_the_Bill_Clinton_administration#Iraq

Only a matter of time...

 

Nice two step...dance around that you do.

The missile attack by Bubba wasn't an invasion. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. The Iraq invasion was Shrub jr.'s revenge on Saddam, for his attempt on his daddy's life. Both Shrub and Cheney knew Saddam didn't have nukes, they just used the false CIA info for the excuse to invade.
Yeah, the dems are dumb, but not dumb enough to invade and kill a million innocent civilians. It's not their style. You know it, and I know it.

Oh, and deregulation has always been a con thing. Carter was the only honest POTUS, he was just naive. Silverado was done by a Bush brother. And Enron was another Texas con job.

I don't know why you continue to double down on your lame con defense. It only diminishes your credibility. Maybe you're trying to get brownie points with the likes of Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin.

 

Who said it was?
If Clinton was in gov' after 9/11 - do you know he wouldn't have 'invaded'?

Did I say it did?

I thought you might say that. Wasn't the missile attack 'revenge', too?
If not why did Clinton start a missile attack that killed innocent people?

Did either say he did?

Just maintain sanctions and continue wars, I suppose.

'Silverado was done by a Bush brother' - wow, really.
All wrapped up that easily was it. Ok, if you say so.

Brownie points? Yeah, sure, if you say so.

You mentioned deregulation - so I pointed out who deregulated S and L.
Are you just putting that down to naivete and had no influence at all?
What about: Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system
So who was that then 'Clinton'/'Dems' or 'The Rep's'?
Ever going to answer that?

Politics is too complicated to put the entire blame for one thing or another on one political party - which I'm not trying to do, but you are...

 

It is far easier to do what he is doing than to actually engage in critical thinking.