Published: Monday, April 14 2014 4:20 p.m. MDT
@Concinnity"for Obama's obvious financial blunderings"I'm honestly not sure what those "obvious" blunderings are.
The deficit is half as much as it was a few years ago, Obamacare pays for itself
(that's why the repeal is scored by CBO as increasing the deficit),
we've gained jobs every month since the census workers were let go due to
their tax being complete (and gained private sector jobs every month since
"Paying for Bush's mistakes…." is one reason Mr. Obama cannot
solve them. Until he realizes that he is the problem and not straw men, Bush or
Reagan, he will never successfully address them. Partisan extremists don't
help a sick economy by making it sicker.
Does a president who loves America, and trying to fix things,--spend hundreds of
millions for lavish vacations, and gifts for his wife, on the tax payers dime?
Only Obama could double the deficit, then have the hubris to brag when he cuts
it in half. Only his blind lemming followers would swallow it and expect
rational people to congratulate him for it.
For all those who are pointing fingers at various Presidents and political
parties, need I remind you who it was that elected them?True, the
corruptions of people like William “Boss” Tweed of New York, George
Ryan, Jesse Jackson Jr. and Rod Blagojevich of Illinos, James Traficant from
Ohio, Tennessee's Ray Blanton, Ray Nagin, Huey Long and Edwin Edwards of
the infamously corrupt New Orleans/Louisiana, the whole city administration of
Bell, CA, even, apparently, our own John Swallow and a few of his fellow
"law men", and on, and on, and on, are not always apparent to voters.
But, there are more than a few of the people on the aforementioned list and
many, many others not mentioned whose crimes and generally low character are not
only well known to voters, they are sometimes part of what some consider the
"human" element that helps them relate to their constituency. And
therein lies the real problem.The **real** problem is the people.
It is we, ultimately, who are represented by those we elect. Ultimately, it is
only WE who can clean up the messes they make on our behalf. It is, therefore,
WE who must do better.
Hey Objectified - Sorry, but your “points” have NO basis in
fact.The skyrocketing price of world oil caused economic problems
during the Carter administration. But the high price of World Oil was not
Carter’s fault.And Reagan deserves NO credit for the fact that
the price of word oil plummeted during his administration to less than a third
of what it had been during the Carter administration.It was cheap energy
that got the economy rolling again . . . Not Reagan’s policies.But in spite of the fact that Reagan had everything going for him, he still
could not capitalize on it. If he had not lowered taxes for high earners,
revenue from that rip-roaring cheap-energy-fueled boom could have balanced the
budget. Instead Reagan TRIPLED the national debt.And Moderan
“Conservatives” love him because of his irresponsibility.Republican Leadership has been TERRIBLE ever since Reagan took office in
1980.That’s because Republicans have deluded themselves into
thinking Reagan’s Voodoo economics really works, when 30 years of it
clearly shows it does NOT.
Hey Hawkeye - You really shouldn't blame the Democrats for ANY
of the many, many mistakes of the GW Bush administration, certainly not
GW's Great Recession. It was GW himself who demanded that
Fannie and Freddie give highly-risky, subprime, low-interest, no-down-payment
loans to five and a half MILLION dirt poor minority families.“I set an ambitious goal. It's one that I believe we can achieve.
It's a clear goal, that by the end of this decade we'll increase the
number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million families . . . Achieving
the goal is going to require some good policies out of Washington. And it's
going to require a strong commitment from those of you involved in the housing
industry . . . Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac . . . have committed to provide more
money for lenders. They've committed to help meet the shortage of capital
available for minority home buyers.” - GW Bush 2003And the
rest is history.Face it Hawkeye, Republican leadership is nothing
but bad news for America.
Some simple logic, for the likes of Gary Obama up there. If one triples a debt
and the debt is 100 dollars. That means the debt is now 300 dollars. Very
managable. If one increases the debt by almost 40% when talking trillions of
dollars, as Obama has done, that is a very unmanagable debt. The debt has gone
from 10 trillion to 17 trillion during the 5+ years of Obama. I'll take
Reagan doing it with billions over Obama doing it with trillions anyday.
To "GaryO" actually, Democrats are the ones that spend the most.Since 1981, when Congress was controlled by Republicans the debt
increased by $3 Trillion, or $300 billion/yr on average. However, when
controlled by Democrats the debt has risen by $8.79 Trillion or $732 billion/yr.
That is according to the US Historical Tables.
No use trying to convince GaryO the sun doesn't rise and set on the liberal
illuminati. Lost cause. Facts don't matter and where they don't fit,
they're just fabricated out of whole cloth. Harry Reid is a prime example
of that stratagem. The article posits "People want government to do
more and more..." We cannot include the ever-burgeoning Tea Party whose very
existence is based on the premise the government must do less especially in
areas where they have no expertise, such as the albatross Obamacare, GM and
banking bailouts, market manipulation, etc. Both parties have their culprits.The solution- term limits for all. I would recommend in addition the
disqualification of family members for one generation for that office. But that
may be too much to hope for. Let's at least start with term limits.
"Facts don't matter and where they don't fit, they're just
fabricated out of whole cloth."Right, that's exactly what
Republicans and conservatives do. It is amazing how they will just twist facts
around to fit their agenda. For instance look at red shirts claim. He'll
blame the debt on President Obama, until someone points out that the debt has
risen for more under Republican presidents in the last 40 years, then he will
turn around and try to claim that the debt has risen faster under democratic
congresses. Well, President Bush and the Republicans has total control of the
house, senate, and presidency for what six or seven years of Bush's
presidency? And they sure did a find job pushing the debt and deficit through
the roof. Even considering they were handed a surplus. (Yeah, redshirt will
argue the surplus thing. But he's wrong.)Obama had a democrat
house and senate for two years. Then Republicans were back in control of the
house. But, whatever, the point remains conservatives love making up
their own "facts".
To "mark" but it is a lie to claim that debt is the fault of a
Republican President.The fact is that Congress sets the budget and
sets the spending for the US government. When you look at it that way, you find
that when Democrats are in control that Democrats out spend Republicans by a
ratio of 3 to 1.During the time that Republicans controlled the
Presidency and Congress they averaged $400 billion deficits. During the time
that Democrats controlled the Presidency and Congress they averaged $1.2
Trillion deficits.Explain how $1.2 Trillion is less than $400
billion as you claim.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments