Which of the two was bigger?

Obama in effect voted for both halves, didn’t he? Bush only ‘voted’ for one.

What I did say, and completely stand by, is that Obama “is continuing the wasteful and profligate policies of his big-spending predecessor.”

Not just continuing, he has doubled down on the Bush spending, and in less productive areas of the economy. For Obama to be talking now about his worries about the deficit and the economy is ludicrous. If he really wants to inject confidence into the economy, he should simply disavow all of his planned new future spending.

He carries most of the blame for the 2009 deficit because his proposals have scared the bejeezus out of anybody thinking about expanding or investing in his business, thus delaying the recovery, which in turn has caused a precipitous drop in tax receipts. He has put a damper on economic activity, and without economic activity there are no tax receipts.

Fixating on deficits can be helpful, to be sure, but it also can unwittingly aid the other side since it enables them to offer a “solution” in the form of higher taxes.

That’s a good point. We should all be screaming to the heavens that the way Obama’s health insurance plan ‘pays’ for itself is by raising taxes. Even making the assumption that those taxes will eventuate and be collected, without the massive spending of the health bill they could pay down the debt or actually reduce the deficit. The idea that this health bill will save money in the long run is a pipe dream, and we shouldn’t be shy about saying so.

Profligate domestic spending most certainly was NOT the purchase price to Democrats.

No Child Left Behind, Medicare Prescription Drugs… those two budget busters were Bush signature programs and were passed at a time when the Republicans had control of the House.

When you look at the deficit numbers, you have to understand for what the reported “deficit” is. This number includes only “budgeted” overspending, not all governmental spending. Essentially, consider your spending, but with all spur of the moment purchases hidden (from everyone but your bank).

Throughout the Bush years the administration spent massive amounts of money off-budget (a practice which Obama has largely eschewed thus far, hence the much larger reported deficits). Initially this was due to truly unforseeable needs resulting from 9/11 and the aftermath, but the practice lasted far longer than it should have.

As a truer measure of the real deficit, consider the debt accrued, which includes “off-budget” spending. By this measure the true deficit was already 1 trillion dollars in 2008, and was over half a trillion for almost every year of the Bush presidency.

As a fiscal conservative, I have to tell you that the Bush years made it very hard for me to justify voting Republican. What is the point when they break the budget as badly as Democrats do?

don’t feed the trools. We have had a few here lately that have had a platform to spew their garbage, only because people respond to them. You cannot argue, debate or try to change the minds of the Liberals. As the one the other day, he/she thanked the righties for providing him/her with entertainment while he was doing his laundry. Free speech is great however, giving these leftists a forum to spew their liberal agendas does not further the site’s goal of being a republican/conservative site.

don’t feed the trools. We have had a few here lately that have had a platform to spew their garbage, only because people respond to them. You cannot argue, debate or try to change the minds of the Liberals. As the one the other day, he/she thanked the righties for providing him/her with entertainment while he was doing his laundry. Free speech is great however, giving these leftists a forum to spew their liberal agendas does not further the site’s goal of being a republican/conservative site.

I will admit that Obama hasen’t adressed any budget concerns so far, and I don’t see any long-term cuts that he has made (aside from a few defense programs), which raises the concern over whether or not he is willing to make the cuts that our nation will need in the future. And you can argue that the Stimulus and Omnibus bill (which, I don’t fully understand the purpose of the Omnibus, it wasn’t part of the stimulus, but I digest) were wasteful (as I am sure that you will), but THIS YEAR’s (FY2009) spending can hardly be blamed on Obama.
Pardon me for quoting a liberal article, but you can check out the links he provides for yourself to see whether they are factual:
http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/1200/why-economy-needs-spending-not-tax-cuts

“According to the Congressional Budget Office’s January 2009 estimate for fiscal year 2009, outlays were projected to be $3,543 billion and revenues were projected to be $2,357 billion, leaving a deficit of $1,186 billion. Keep in mind that these estimates were made before Obama took office, based on existing law and policy, and did not take into account any actions that Obama might implement.
…
Now let’s fast forward to the end of fiscal year 2009, which ended on September 30. According to CBO, it ended with spending at $3,515 billion and revenues of $2,106 billion for a deficit of $1,409 billion.

To recap, the deficit came in $223 billion higher than projected, but spending was $28 billion and revenues were $251 billion less than expected. Thus we can conclude that more than 100 percent of the increase in the deficit since January is accounted for by lower revenues. Not one penny is due to higher spending.”

To clarify: I am not justifying wasteful spending, but I think additional stimulus spending is appropriate (especially if it helps in the short-run, which I feel the stimulus was unsuccessful at doing). But, the deficit we see this year is not even close to being Obama’s fault. Of course, the next few years are a different story altogether.

I live in California. Not a bastion of conservatism as I’m woefully aware, but theres a movement afoot that I agree with here: The state’s legalized medicinal marijuana, and is moving to fully legalize and tax it. Make the damn hippies living off welfare and SSI pay into government coffers so you’re not dipping into my paycheck for income tax. It’s a sales tax, you only get taxed if you choose to buy the product, not government deciding it’s entitled to my pay check. It also nicely dovetails into personal freedom and getting the government out of people’s lives, things I’m in favor of. And yet instead of seeing this as a state issue which the constitution delegates to the states, Bush went gung-ho with the FBI and DEA raiding clinics. Something Obama has continued as well. Bush had a lot more in common with these libtards then you seem to think.

Both of them kill innovation which may one day keep the government away from my pocketbook.

I wasn’t aware. Won’t happen again.

I really am sorry about that. This is really my first step into a collaborative web environment, im used to just reading and then talking with people around me. It’s a little bit exciting and empowering to have a community of people like me to interact with, I guess I get all… anxious, about it. Way too excited for my own good Forgive the language, I’ll keep it in check.

most were elected last few cycles co-opting Conservative tones (CINO and more CINO, even PLINO) and they keep trying to couch the ObaMAOcare BS as (falsely invoking Conservative terms) “competition,” “Deficit nuetral” one of my favorite laughables, etc…. (McCackle (D-MO))

They could have used their Majorities to over-turn any Spending at any point/time – all they have done is exponentially increase it everywhere!

anytime we try to just “concede” some point for the sake of an argument to move onto what others feel are “better points” always bites us as the MSM will play up the supposed “conceded” points.

Bush is to blame for the TARP creation but Obama is equally (more-so) responsible for putting it on steroids and blowing it out of proportion – as Liberals always do. The Budget is solely Democrats fault and even large degree during the Bush last two years – since folks know so litle as to recall that Spending originates in the House (but, yes, a President can, could, should, do more to VETO/challenge Spending). Etc…..

Obama and LIBERALS/DEMOCRATS Spending must be challenged at every turn on all fronts – nothing conceded.

can’t just let the two originals go at it and hope to calm them down, but gotta have all involved until people get tossed lol

Don’t let the Trolls or someone elses temper degrade us to this…. THESE things are for the RINK where they belong lol.