Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
ExpandMyMind

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since

43 posts in this topic

It’s enough to make even the most ardent Obama cynic scratch his head in confusion.

Amidst all the cries of Barack Obama being the most prolific big government spender the nation has ever suffered, Marketwatch is reporting that our president has actually been tighter with a buck than any United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Who knew?

Check out the chart –

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

post-83582-0-91901000-1342970360_thumb.j

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

big trick, with the laziest Congress in history anybody can do that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have added trillions to the debt since he's been in office. This guy has blew through more cash then all the presidents combined since Eisenhower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have added trillions to the debt since he's been in office. This guy has blew through more cash then all the presidents combined since Eisenhower

01-george-w-bush-thanks-for-blaming-it-on-the-black-guy-e1284821996594.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez, Q, don't bring in the race card. Isn't it enough to have Republicans and Democrats at each others throats? Do you have to promote race wars too?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez, Q, don't bring in the race card. Isn't it enough to have Republicans and Democrats at each others throats? Do you have to promote race wars too?

Not my poster... only my post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not my poster... only my post

I don't find it the least bit cute...or whatever you thought it was when you felt the need to interject it into the conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not this idiocy again?

So if all of the spending falls to Bush, is the recovery that Obama always takes credit for really the Bush Recovery?

You can't have it both way libs.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what liberals do. They blame Bush and promote racial division.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just don't get it yet! I hope this helps.

Obama will win a second term as President. I explained why in my post titled, "Congrats to Pres. Obama on his reelection".

Now let me give you some of the reasons why he will become the "greatest" president ever. His knowledge of constitutional law and current law allows him the power to act as head of state and unilaterally enact policies that are helpful to all americans and eliminate provisions in current law that reduce freedoms and discriminate against the poor and immigrant class. Congress is on autopilot and is not needed to do what Obama needs to do to put this country on a new and compassionate path.

It was the Bush budget passed during the financial crisis of October 2008 that contained budgetary fixes for the crisis. When Obama and Harry Reid saw this opportunity, they took it. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, congress simply passed a continuing resolution, which just renewed Bush's budget for a year each time. There has been no "new" budget since the fall of 2008. Reid will not allow it. This is Obama's great scheme to keep Bush's budget year after year (which still contains lots of extra crisis money) and apply most of it to redistribute wealth to the poor and needy.

Obama will not let the Republicans dictate any new budget that reduces spending by even a dime. We are on the path to real social justice and compassion.

Vote Obama or just stay at home.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Pyridium I read your thread and this post and I can't figure you out. You're over the top enthusiasm for taking advantage of help for disability and entitlements and the pride you take in being dependent on the government is laughable and if anything, not gonna persuade any votes. You sound like a caricature of the ultimate trailer trash welfare abusing liberal socialist sheep.

I sense all sarcasm but haven't seen you say otherwise. What's your deal man? You serious?

Edited by Is it for real
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have only stated what Pres. Obama has promised and what he has delivered. We have all seen what it took to pass his healthcare law. Were we just lucky to have 60 votes in the senate to pass it? No ObamaCare, No legacy.

Sarcasm? Everyone here is entitled to their own opinions about the facts. I have seen nobody discount anything that I have posted. I try to stay as factual as I can, but maybe my socialistic side tends to show itself too much.

I just wanted to be the first to post Obama's reelection success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarketWatch is a subsidiary of Dow Jones, a property of News Corporation. MarketWatch is part of Dow Jones' Consumer Media Group, along with The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, the WSJ.com and affiliated internet properties. Through the Rupert Murdoch-controlled News Corp. ownership, MarketWatch is also affiliated with, among many other global media properties, the New York Post, The Times of London, Fox News Channel and multiple other 20th Century Fox spinoffs, and HarperCollins publishers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MarketWatch

This isn't a 'lib' study. If anything, this documentation of the facts and figures could be said to come from the right wing. This is based on facts. Fact: Obama is the smallest government spender since Eisenhower. End of story.

I hate Obama, but I also hate the lies that are spewed regarding his presidency.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I didn't build that debt. Somebody else made that happen" --Obama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pyridium I read your thread and this post and I can't figure you out. You're over the top enthusiasm for taking advantage of help for disability and entitlements and the pride you take in being dependent on the government is laughable and if anything, not gonna persuade any votes. You sound like a caricature of the ultimate trailer trash welfare abusing liberal socialist sheep.

I sense all sarcasm but haven't seen you say otherwise. What's your deal man? You serious?

Must be hard for you not using any public roads, not having an education, not having access to ambulances, or security for when you retire. Well, at least you're not a freeloader!

Rafterman, the premise is simple. Bush created the situation Obama inherited. Obama is trying to fix it. Republicans are running interference to avoid his re-election. Should I explain again?

Anyway. the thread premise is true, although there are caveats. Republicans have blocked all new spending and tax increases are off the table. If Obama had full reigns, who knows what spending would have been like. It would be misleading to say Obama is solely responsible for it. By looking at the OP's chart, it looks like Republicans are only against spending when it's someone else doing the spending :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Must be hard for you not using any public roads, not having an education, not having access to ambulances, or security for when you retire. Well, at least you're not a freeloader!

Rafterman, the premise is simple. Bush created the situation Obama inherited. Obama is trying to fix it. Republicans are running interference to avoid his re-election. Should I explain again?

Anyway. the thread premise is true, although there are caveats. Republicans have blocked all new spending and tax increases are off the table. If Obama had full reigns, who knows what spending would have been like. It would be misleading to say Obama is solely responsible for it. By looking at the OP's chart, it looks like Republicans are only against spending when it's someone else doing the spending :P

I find it strange that you claim Obama is trying to fix things when you then go on to bring up the fact that the only reason he hasn't spent more is because congress has denied him.

Edited by ExpandMyMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

01-george-w-bush-thanks-for-blaming-it-on-the-black-guy-e1284821996594.jpg

01-george-w-bush-thanks-for-blaming-it-on-the-black-guy-e1284821996594.jpg

The stimulas, bail-outs, and unconstitutional wars 0bama fully supported. What money did Bush spend that 0bama didnt aprove of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you assign 2009 budget spending to Bush when Obama signed off on 9 of the appropriations (the vast majority of the spending) . As Jim Michaels would have said, “here’s a dime. It’s what the story is worth.”

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it strange that you claim Obama is trying to fix things when you then go on to bring up the fact that the only reason he hasn't spent more is because congress has denied him.

Where you have to say that it is quite difficult to top spending at this point, not even the reality removed Hill-Washingtonians would dare to try to pass a budget where more than 1/3 is financed by debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must be hard for you not using any public roads, not having an education, not having access to ambulances, or security for when you retire. Well, at least you're not a freeloader!

Rafterman, the premise is simple. Bush created the situation Obama inherited. Obama is trying to fix it. Republicans are running interference to avoid his re-election. Should I explain again?

Anyway. the thread premise is true, although there are caveats. Republicans have blocked all new spending and tax increases are off the table. If Obama had full reigns, who knows what spending would have been like. It would be misleading to say Obama is solely responsible for it. By looking at the OP's chart, it looks like Republicans are only against spending when it's someone else doing the spending :P

This whole roads thing is killing me. The federal government didn't build any roads. They took our money and hired people to build some of the roads we use. Most roads are build by State and/or local government.

Education is a state responsibility. We had, IMHO, a much better education system before the Feds got involoved.

Ambulances? I have never even seen a federal ambulance.

This is just silly. We, the people, paid for all the things you mentioned. We would still have them. To think otherwise is simply inane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarketWatch is a subsidiary of Dow Jones, a property of News Corporation. MarketWatch is part of Dow Jones' Consumer Media Group, along with The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, the WSJ.com and affiliated internet properties. Through the Rupert Murdoch-controlled News Corp. ownership, MarketWatch is also affiliated with, among many other global media properties, the New York Post, The Times of London, Fox News Channel and multiple other 20th Century Fox spinoffs, and HarperCollins publishers.

http://en.wikipedia....iki/MarketWatch

This isn't a 'lib' study. If anything, this documentation of the facts and figures could be said to come from the right wing. This is based on facts. Fact: Obama is the smallest government spender since Eisenhower. End of story.

I hate Obama, but I also hate the lies that are spewed regarding his presidency.

What matters is who wrote it, not the publication where it's printed. If Rush Limbaugh writes a piece for USA Today (as he's done in the past) does that make USA Today a "right-wing rag"?

Here is the author and his profile:

Rick Ungar

I write on politics with a 'specialty' in health care policy. My interest in the field began with an experience fifteen years ago in a hospital in Los Angeles that has led me to my current life where I consult a number of government officials and health care advocacy groups. In addition to my contributions to Forbes, I write a political column at The Washington Monthly. On Saturdays, you can find me on your TV arguing with my more conservative colleagues on "Forbes on Fox" on the Fox News Network and serving as a liberal talking head on other Fox News and Fox Business Network shows.

So just another lib spouting lib talking points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rafterman, the premise is simple. Bush created the situation Obama inherited. Obama is trying to fix it. Republicans are running interference to avoid his re-election. Should I explain again?

And he's done a **** job trying to do that. Which is exactly why he doesn't deserve another 4 years in office. He even said it himself.

Poor poor Obama - he's only the most powerful man in the world and he had a majority in Congress for only 2 years. He just couldn't get anything done because of those waskely Republicans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole roads thing is killing me. The federal government didn't build any roads. They took our money and hired people to build some of the roads we use. Most roads are build by State and/or local government.

Education is a state responsibility. We had, IMHO, a much better education system before the Feds got involoved.

Ambulances? I have never even seen a federal ambulance.

This is just silly. We, the people, paid for all the things you mentioned. We would still have them. To think otherwise is simply inane.

Well, to be fair, about 49% of us paid for them.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The transportation system is funded by fuel tax primarily. The education system here in Iowa is from property tax. We also have a city and state sales tax.

So I am going to have to dispute your 49% claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What matters is who wrote it, not the publication where it's printed. If Rush Limbaugh writes a piece for USA Today (as he's done in the past) does that make USA Today a "right-wing rag"?

Here is the author and his profile:

Rick Ungar

I write on politics with a 'specialty' in health care policy. My interest in the field began with an experience fifteen years ago in a hospital in Los Angeles that has led me to my current life where I consult a number of government officials and health care advocacy groups. In addition to my contributions to Forbes, I write a political column at The Washington Monthly. On Saturdays, you can find me on your TV arguing with my more conservative colleagues on "Forbes on Fox" on the Fox News Network and serving as a liberal talking head on other Fox News and Fox Business Network shows.

So just another lib spouting lib talking points.

Are you suggesting that the author fabricated the numbers, statistics and facts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.