Best
102 Comments
Post
  • #8
    !
    How does she rationalize the FACT, that Obama did in three and a half years what took Bush two wars and eight years? Or that there have been more casualties in Afghanistan under Obama's watch than were under Bush's? When Bush was president we got a play by play everytime there was a casualty. When was the last time you heard the deathtoll on the news? I don't remember hearing of a rolling tally since Obama took office. If I remember right Rachel Madow's show got about 8 and a half million viewers during the month of June. Less than Bill O'reilly gets in one night. She's a liberal hack. I don't think anyone who does not profess a belief in liberalism even considers taking her seriously.
  • #13
    !
    This is true if you simply ignore the FACT that we're still paying for the programs that cost us $5 trillion under Bush and the FACT that the Bush recession has cost us $2 trillion in revenue loss.
  • #16
    !
    @AceLuby trust me I'm aware of that. but a posterboard with cutouts glued to it does not validate Obama's idiot logic in dealing with the recession.
  • #20
    !
    @Calfkiller Your post had nothing to do with posterboard or cutouts, it had to do with policy and where money is being spent. You acknowledge that $2 trillion of the added debt is due to loss of revenue and you acknowledge that we're still paying for Bushes programs that cost us another $2.5 trillion over the last 3 1/2 years, so I'm failing to see the 'idiot logic' of Obama's that even needs validation. You and the rest of your party need to remove the partisan blinders for once.
  • #44
    !
    @AceLuby Everything was going just fine until democraps took control of the House and Senate in January of 2007......that's where the spending originates
  • #48
    !
    @AceLuby I'm sorry. You're right. It would appear that Rachel Madow is right after all. It really is all Bush's fault. I can't wait till the debate so this mess can finally get straightened out.
  • R Load more replies

  • #64
    !
    So Obama has changed the deficit by -$324 B. Ok lets have a see - First, lets start with Clinton so we can establish Maddow's baseline. Under the Clinton presidency, there was an annual surplus of $300 B +/- (Maddow is showing $491 B - googled and couldn't find where that's from). George Bush's $587 B actually comes close to his actual annual budget deficit after 2001. Now for Obama's annual budget surplus of $324 billion, that's about $1.3 trilllion away from the truth. I can do triple integrals and differential equations, but I can't make sense of these numbers. Even if we ignore 2009, Obama continues to run a $1 trillion annual deficit.
  • #67
    !
    OK, so Maddow is looking at the change to the change of our deficit. This is sort of like the acceleration rate of our fiscal insanity ($/yr^2-read "dollars per year per year"). The annual deficit is the speed in $/yr. Attributing 2009 to Bush ($-1.4+ trillion/yr) and carrying out to projected 2012 annual deficit of $-1.1 trillion/yr gives Obama a positive (nonlinear) acceleration of $100 B/yr2 or approximately $300 B over three years. This sounds like we're going in the right direction, but no, we're still headed towards the cliff. We're just slowing up a bit. Lets look at Bush's average deficit speed. Over his 8 years, including 2009, Bush averaged an annual deficit of $450 billion (the worst of previous presidents). Over Obama's 3 years (excluding 2009) the average annual deficit is $1,200 billion, or close to three times Bush's average annual deficit. Or, in other words, close to three times worse than the worst of past presidents since FDR. What are we spending all that money on?

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/up...
  • R Load more replies

  • #18
    !
    Over the last 40 years Republicans have never once shrunk the deficit. She's absolutely right that they are the farthest things from a fiscally responsible party, they just pay lip service for votes and then when they drive up the deficit those same voters sit idly by only to re-elect to do it again.
  • #22
    !
    That not only ignores the fact that the amount of deficit has gotten lower which was her point. This has only happened under Clinton and Obama. Does that mean anything? I don't really think so.
    Do you realize who set the budget for 2009?
  • #77
    !
    @Cheenoguy Spending over a trillion dollars beyond the budget every year is not reducing the debt, its just a fraction of a reduction in deficit spending. Clinton had some high deficits some years, and some slightly less in other years, but in the end he added 1.8 trillion to the national debt - you don't get credit if you can not even balance the budget, which Clinton never did in practice. Neither Obama nor Romney are going to balance the budget, and Obama will never get credit for trying from me until his yearly deficit is lower than the average Bush deficit (702 billion). obama's average is 1.3 trillion not counting this year. and there was no actual set budget in 2009 because the democrats would not pass one - so spending accountability falls to the chief executive who can say no. I am not advocating Romney, it will be the same under him
  • #9
    !
    I can't believe they even keep her on their staff, she wouldn't know the truth if it hit her in the gullet. Creates her own Obama stats! By the way, the female vote has changed, seems like women might like to have choices BUT THEY WANT YOU TO PAY FOR IT YOURSELF!
  • #7
    !
    Another lying lib. We have had annual deficits over 1 trillion dollars for the last 4 year including this year, but since she said it some will blindly believe it.
  • #24
    !
    @AceLuby Well I guess since Bush did that makes everything ok. That makes the ride to financial hell so much sweater.
  • #25
    !
    @David944 Why would you need a sweater in hell? Regardless, where was all that fiscal conservatism as Republicans grew a trillion dollar budget deficit from nothing? Oh, that's right, they were too busy screaming about patriotism and supporting the President to remember the 8 years of hell that led up to the recession. Biden was right, you guys just want to pretend those 8 years didn't happen and that all our troubles fell from the sky.
  • R Load more replies

  • #70
    !
    I can not believe what angry liars there are on MSNBC. Any word from their mouths can not be taken seriously. They are very scary hateful people.
  • #30
    !
    LOL...I just drew my own graph and mine makes more sense, and then my dog
    made one and his was better than hers. Who made the graph a kindergartner?!
  • #52
    !
    @mimi57 I will present you some wisdom from Abraham Lincoln. "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
  • R Load more replies

  • #29
    !
    this is what i have been saying all along.the facts are graphed out right in front of people now.clinton was the best and i wish he could come back but law says only 2 terms.we actually had no deficit at all when clinton left office
  • #21
    !
    that grass is so wrong. Clinton grew the national debt 44% in his 8 years with 4 debt ceiling increases. and we all know the travesty of the Bush and Obama years since then. Maddow is irresponsible with the misleading numbers. those reductions she talks about are theoretical and never have and never will be a real deduction
  • #19
    !
    If you go back through history, you will find that's true. Deficits grow under Republicans & shrink under Democrats.

    Yes, Obama did grow the deficit with his stimulus package for ALL of us, whereby Bush grew it with his "stimulus" (LOL) package for big banks, but, given the chance, President Obama will reduce it over the next four years (since we're STILL trying to dig out of our 2 unnecessary wars & thousands of countless American lives lost for NOTHING.) Romney-Ryan, on the other hand, will F us up even more.
  • #14
    !
    sorry I got off topic. The graph makes me think she just might be a Madcow. It doesn't even look like it was done on a computer. I looks like a posterboard with cutouts glued to it.
  • #5
    !
    I found the graph and article quite interesting. I knew Clinton did a great job and Bush did a horrible job. But I truly though Obama would look much worse because of the economy that he was given.
  • #2
    !
    How does Maddow account for the $850 billion in stimulus money? That is almost a trillion more in spending under Obama so, how do you run the numbers and come up with him as a deficit reducer?
  • #26
    !
    I don't think so. BO has spent more then any other president in history. If Maddow claims that deficit spending is down, it's misleading because the debt ceiling has been raised three times in the last 3.5 years.

    If I make $8,000 a month but spend $10,000 I am not reducing the debt if the bank increases my credit line to $12,000. But Maddow and BO are claiming he has cut the deficit because the government raised their credit limit. Very misleading. Shame on them.

    Under Obama we are now spending $50,000 more a month on an $8k salary, but 'no worries' because country's credit card limit has been bumped to $80,000 so the deficit has been reduced! Oi!
  • #73
    !
    @bizaroWorld Same fishy math with Clinton as well. The debt limit raised 4 times to allow for a 44% increase in the national debt from 1993-2000. spending less deficit money is not cutting spending or lowering the debt.
  • R Load more comments...
Post