Elephant Dung

[kcwolf]

Do we miss President Bush? Inspite of rethug love of the man on this forum, it might be time to go back to September, 2008 and shake the dust off the old memory bank.

Bush?s Legacy Of Squandering Taxpayer Money

President Bush announced his $700 billion plan to buy out troubled financial institutions. Demanding enormous faith in his administration?s stewardship, the plan ?would place no restrictions on the administration other than requiring semiannual reports to Congress, granting the Treasury secretary unprecedented power to buy and resell mortgage debt,? and to hire outside firms ?to help manage its purchases.? Further, the proposal provides no oversight mechanism:

Sec. 8. Review: Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Bush is demanding unprecedented control over billions of dollars ? with no oversight. His history of mismanaging taxpayer dollars should make Americans skeptical of his buyout plan:

IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION

-$142 million wasted on reconstruction projects that were either terminated or canceled. [Special Inspector General for Iraq, 7/28/08]

-?Significant? amount of U.S. funds for Iraq funneled to Sunni and Shiite militias. [GAO Comptroller, 3/11/08]

-$180 million payed to construction company Bechtel for projects it never finished. [Federal audit, 7/25/07]

-$5.1 billion in expenses for Iraq reconstruction charged without documentation. [Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction report, 3/19/07]

-$10 billion in spending on Iraq reconstruction was wasteful or poorly tracked. [GAO, 2/15/07]

-Halliburton overcharged the government $100 million for one day?s work in 2004. [Project on Government Oversight, 10/8/04]

KATRINA

-Millions wasted on four no-bid contracts, including paying $20 million for an unusable camp for evacuees. [Homeland Security Department Inspector General, 9/10/08]

-$2.4 billion in contracts doled out by FEMA that guaranteed profits for big companies. [Center for Public Integrity investigation, 6/25/07]

-An estimated $2 billion in fraud and waste ? nearly 11 percent of the $19 billion spent by FEMA on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita as of mid-June. [New York Times tally, 6/27/06]

-?Widespread? waste and mismanagement on millions for Katrina recovery, including at least $3 million for 4,000 beds that were never used. [GAO, 3/16/06]

DEFENSE CONTRACTS

-A $50 million Air Force contract awarded to a company with close ties to senior Air Force officers, in a process ?fraught with improper influence, irregular procedures, glaring conflicts of interest.? [Project on Government Oversight, 4/18/08]

-$1.7 billion in excessive fees and waste paid by the Pentagon to the Interior Department to manage federal lands. [Defense Department and Interior Department Inspectors General audit, 12/25/06]

-$1 trillion unaccounted for by the Pentagon, including 56 airplanes, 32 tanks, and 36 Javelin missile command launch-units. [GAO, 5/18/03]

Given Bush?s history of gross fiscal mismanagement ? including an unprecedented number of no-bid contracts and Bush?s resistance to closing fraud loopholes or increasing oversight of contracts ? why should Americans trust another $700 billion to his care?

Some around here are tired of the "blame game. The fact remains, there were mountains of elephant dung to clean up from the Bush, Cheney and his cronies.

Jonathan Alter, Newsweek, writes:

The BP oil spill is the perfect metaphor for Barack Obama's presidency so far. His first 500 days in office have been?with the significant exception of health-care reform?consumed in cleaning up the messes left by his predecessors in the financial sector, the auto business, Afghanistan, and now the oil and gas industry, where "regulators" in the Denver office of the Minerals Management Service under President Bush were literally sleeping with the industry reps they were supposed to be licensing. Obama's fate is to head up what Donald Regan (Ronald Reagan's chief of staff) called "the shovel brigade"?the crew cleaning up the dung when the elephants leave the circus.

 

[Lumi]

So by Alter's own account,

can 9/11 be blamed on Clinton ?

How many times did BC's Admin circle that turd
without grasping the shovel and picking it up?

Interesting side note, last night I watched "Hannibal" 9 February 2001, for the 1st time in :shrug:
Either agent Starling on Pazzi was on the FBI's
10 Most Wanted List online, and Osama Bin Laden was on the list :shrug:


Hmmm, things that make you go hmmmmm

 

[kcwolf]

Yes, I'd say Clinton shares some of the blame also.

Speaking of Osama, remeber him saying this in 2004?

And, as Bin Laden noted, it is equally simple to get us into that trap. As he said, it is "easy for us to provoke and bait this administration. All that we have to do is to send two mujahidin to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al-Qaida, in order to make the generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses without their achieving for it anything of note other than some benefits for their private companies."

And now Obama continues to lead us down the mistake.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

--one more time--

Projected Deficit

In the first independent analysis, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that President Obama's budget would rack up massive deficits even after the economy recovers, forcing the nation to borrow nearly $9.3 trillion over the next decade.

SOURCE: CBO, White House Office of Management and Budget | The Washington Post - March 21, 2009

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD width=453></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

<HR>Obama to high school grads: 'Don't make excuses'

:SIB

Grapevine a little late--but what the hell--

Blame Game
President Obama spoke to graduates of Kalamazoo, Michigan Central High School Monday night telling them not to make excuses, "Take responsibility not just for your successes, but for your failures as well. When you screw up, it's the easiest thing in the world to start looking around for someone to blame. We see it every day out in Washington, with folks calling each other names and making all sorts of accusations on TV."

That drew ridicule from Republicans and other critics, who say the president often puts blame on the previous administration. A Los Angeles Times headline read, Barack 'Eight Years of Failed Bush Policies' Obama Tells High School Grads 'Don't Make Excuses'.

And Senate Republicans quickly sent out a "best-of" list of instances in which they say the president has used his predecessor as a scapegoat for everything from the deficit to America's image

 

[rusty]

<HR> Obama to high school grads: 'Don't make excuses'

:SIB

I have no complaints with the financial aid system.
My daughter just graduated and will be attending a on campus living st college.

My concerns would be for her paying the loan installments after 6months of graduating.
Me and my wife will pay about 40% of the cost for the school year.
I'm sure other people are getting a better deal but still its not bad.

Nice article DTB.

 

[Trench]

SOURCE: CBO, White House Office of Management and Budget | The Washington Post - March 21, 2009

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD width=453></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

DTB's favorite chart. This chart IS actually revealing in that shows the following:

- Budget years 2000 and 2001 show a budget surplus. These budgets were submitted by the Clinton administration.

- Budget years 2002 thru 2008, submitted by the Bush administration show budget deficits fluctuating between $200 and $500 Billion. These budget deficits were kept artificially low as the Bush administration relied heavily on the Bank of China to finance their tax cuts and exhorbitant military spending and by keeping the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars off the books.

- Then we have Budget year 2009, again submitted by the Bush administration. The $1.85 Trillion budget deficit clearly shows how the Bush administration drove the economy into the abyss of an economic recession only surpassed by the Great Depression of the 1930's.

- Finally, this chart shows Budget deficit "projections" for 2010 thru 2019, revealing the long-term effects of the economic collapse brought on by the deregulation of the financial industry and the true cost of war once those costs are factored into the budget (as they were not during the Bush administration).

Yes, it is an interesting chart.

Trench

 

[THE KOD]

DTB's favorite chart. This chart IS actually revealing in that shows the following:

- Budget years 2000 and 2001 show a budget surplus. These budgets were submitted by the Clinton administration.

- Budget years 2002 thru 2008, submitted by the Bush administration show budget deficits fluctuating between $200 and $500 Billion. These budget deficits were kept artificially low as the Bush administration relied heavily on the Bank of China to finance their tax cuts and exhorbitant military spending and by keeping the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars off the books.

- Then we have Budget year 2009, again submitted by the Bush administration. The $1.85 Trillion budget deficit clearly shows how the Bush administration drove the economy into the abyss of an economic recession only surpassed by the Great Depression of the 1930's.

- Finally, this chart shows Budget deficit "projections" for 2010 thru 2019, revealing the long-term effects of the economic collapse brought on by the deregulation of the financial industry and the true cost of war once those costs are factored into the budget (as they were not during the Bush administration).

Yes, it is an interesting chart.

Trench

.............................................................

Trench you make DTBlackgumby look like a member of the three stooges. And he would be the stupidest one.

Great job !:mj06:

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

DTB's favorite chart. This chart IS actually revealing in that shows the following:

- Budget years 2000 and 2001 show a budget surplus. These budgets were submitted by the Clinton administration.

- Budget years 2002 thru 2008, submitted by the Bush administration show budget deficits fluctuating between $200 and $500 Billion. These budget deficits were kept artificially low as the Bush administration relied heavily on the Bank of China to finance their tax cuts and exhorbitant military spending and by keeping the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars off the books.

- Then we have Budget year 2009, again submitted by the Bush administration. The $1.85 Trillion budget deficit clearly shows how the Bush administration drove the economy into the abyss of an economic recession only surpassed by the Great Depression of the 1930's.

- Finally, this chart shows Budget deficit "projections" for 2010 thru 2019, revealing the long-term effects of the economic collapse brought on by the deregulation of the financial industry and the true cost of war once those costs are factored into the budget (as they were not during the Bush administration).

Yes, it is an interesting chart.

Trench

I don't know why he keeps posting this damn chart. He has been called on it a million fucking times.

 

[rusty]

Budget 2011: Past Deficits vs. Obama?s Deficits in Pictures

Posted February 5th, 2010 at 12:24pm in Energy and Environment with 24 commentsPrint This Post Print This Post

UPDATE: Chart revised 5/14/2010

Releasing his budget this Monday, President Barack Obama told the American people:

We won?t be able to bring down this deficit overnight, given that the recovery is still taking hold and families across the country still need help. ? Just as it would be a terrible mistake to borrow against our children?s future to pay our way today, it would be equally wrong to neglect their future by failing to invest in areas that will determine our economic success in this new century.

But not only does President Obama?s budget fail to reduce deficits ?overnight?, his budget actually moves them in the opposite direction. President Obama?s budget would:

* Permanently expand the federal government by nearly 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) over 2007 pre-recession levels;
* Borrow 42 cents for each dollar spent in 2010;
* Leave permanent deficits that top $1 trillion in as late as 2020;

The chart above compares the President?s budget deficit projections to the Congressional Budget Office?s budget deficit projections under current law. In other words, the policy changes embodied in President Obama?s 2011 Budget puts our country $2.5 trillion deeper in debt by 2020 than it other wise would be if current law were left unchanged.

Now the President is apparently arguing that his trillions of dollars in additional deficit spending are needed to ?invest in areas that will determine our economic success in this new century.?

This is statement goes to the core of the fundamental difference between leftists and conservatives in this country: liberals belief economic growth comes from wise investments by government experts; conservatives believe that economic growth stems from millions of Americans having the freedom to make their own economic decisions everyday.

President Obama?s bailouts, massive stimulus spending, and other dangerous interventionist policies (some of which began in 2008) have made Americans less economically free. The 2010 Index of Economic Freedom analyzes just how economically ?free? a country is, and this year America saw a steep and significant decline, enough to make it drop altogether from the ?free? category, the first time this has happened in the 16 years we?ve been publishing these indexes. The United States dropped to ?mostly free.? As the Index shows, lack of freedom has a direct, negative effect on job growth. It should be no surprise that President Obama?s policies have taken us down the path to fewer jobs and record deficits.

i

 

[Trench]

.............................................................

Trench you make DTBlackgumby look like a member of the three stooges. And he would be the stupidest one.

Great job !:mj06:

that's DTBlackgumby and them are his ass eyes... :142smilie

Trench

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

As usual--liberals don't like WH and CBO statistics--on liberal rhetoric--like "opinion from your liberal author.

I might ask Alter the obvious --FACTS vs his opinion.

Fact 1- Dems have controled congress going on 5 years--wheres the beef about them

--and how they get in power-
-same ole Liberal rhetoric--4.6 unemployment 14,000 Dow and they got in on worst economy since great depression grift--
Glad to see them firing on all cylinders since.

Then they get exectutive branch (pres) too who promised he had all the answers--but find out -
-the only answer Gumby/Dem congress and Liberal writers have is -- IT was Booosh

on added note--appears from responses to Alters the only ones biting again are in this thread--most of population wised up after a 5 year window-

Appears to me its unanimous -14 responses all negative--
http://comments.realclearpolitics.com/read.php?42323,665681,665737,quote=1

--and we continue to have the same 3 here doing the ole--

--to every liberal opinion.

P.S. Mr Alter I believe FACTS show GW came in during dot.com recession--enron/worldcom going under--then 911--Katrina-
-He went about correcting situation--not whining like some little bitch with the blame game.

Bottom line you have those that lead and the "Its not my fault" base.
++++++++++++++++++++++++

Make that 15 responses to article now :0008

 

[Chadman]

While I do find the budget outlooks to be very concerning, and I will be watching how Obama deals (or not) with them in the coming years, I think Trench has some good, specific points in addressing your chart and numbers, Wayne. I notice you didn't address any of his points, just pasted the Jim Carey hoedown and moved on.

There's no doubt that the debt under Bush is undervalued and undersold - the military expenditures alone for wars were never counted, unlike now. Fuzzy math, right?

You mention Bush being handed an economy headed down, and use that as some kind of excuse. Obama was handed a much worse economic downturn as most would agree, and had much tougher decisions to make in a short time period - according to analysts on both side of the aisle. But, Obama gets full blame for you, and Bush gets no blame. Typical conservative avoidance I would call it, since you say the liberals have incorrect opinions. The facts are there, it just depends on what you chose to believe and how you choose to talk about it.

I remember how Bush, his advisors, Fox News, and you sang the praises of the Bush economy, funded primarily by easy credit, bad loans, people buying everything on credit, not being responsible, and then all Hell breaking loose under his watch, and nobody placing responsibility for any of it on him. And I remember people here and elsewhere blaming Obama for the bad economy after the first month of his Presidency. It's lunacy, and irresponsible, but so what, right? And all this, coupled with enacting two (at least) elective wars, with none of that money going on the deficit books, and billions of taxpayer money outside of those appropriations coming up missing - and I haven't heard one conservative that I remember say anything negative about that taxpayer money just being "lost". Lost in the accounts of defense contractors who were found guilty of defrauding the American taxpayer, and being punished by receiving future no bid contracts afterwards.

Like I said, I think the deficit is very much out of control, and has to be dealt with. If Obama doesn't, then I'll be critical of him. He's on the clock as far as I'm concerned, as I think last year was a pretty tough year to start balancing the books (from the previous administration). I also blame much of this on the Democratic majority, for allowing a lot of this to happen, although I don't think regulation and oversight efforts were allowed to happen in many cases, prior to the full majority outlook.

Again, I find it interesting that you completely buy in to these CBO numbers, expect us to take them as being undeniable and gospel, and were one of the ones ridiculing their numbers on Healthcare reform, saying the were inaccurate and arguable. Again, I guess it just matters what the subject matter and political angle is, right? :0074

 

[THE KOD]

P.S. Mr Alter I believe FACTS show GW came in during dot.com recession--enron/worldcom going under--then 911--Katrina-
-He went about correcting situation--not whining like some little bitch with the blame game.

..................................................................

Bush went about correcting situation

you cant be serious.

Bush never corrected a fawking thing. Except to enter wars that cost us trillions and are still costing us.

wtf

where is you're head

 

[Trench]

While I do find the budget outlooks to be very concerning, and I will be watching how Obama deals (or not) with them in the coming years, I think Trench has some good, specific points in addressing your chart and numbers, Wayne. I notice you didn't address any of his points, just pasted the Jim Carey hoedown and moved on.

There's no doubt that the debt under Bush is undervalued and undersold - the military expenditures alone for wars were never counted, unlike now. Fuzzy math, right?

You mention Bush being handed an economy headed down, and use that as some kind of excuse. Obama was handed a much worse economic downturn as most would agree, and had much tougher decisions to make in a short time period - according to analysts on both side of the aisle. But, Obama gets full blame for you, and Bush gets no blame. Typical conservative avoidance I would call it, since you say the liberals have incorrect opinions. The facts are there, it just depends on what you chose to believe and how you choose to talk about it.

I remember how Bush, his advisors, Fox News, and you sang the praises of the Bush economy, funded primarily by easy credit, bad loans, people buying everything on credit, not being responsible, and then all Hell breaking loose under his watch, and nobody placing responsibility for any of it on him. And I remember people here and elsewhere blaming Obama for the bad economy after the first month of his Presidency. It's lunacy, and irresponsible, but so what, right? And all this, coupled with enacting two (at least) elective wars, with none of that money going on the deficit books, and billions of taxpayer money outside of those appropriations coming up missing - and I haven't heard one conservative that I remember say anything negative about that taxpayer money just being "lost". Lost in the accounts of defense contractors who were found guilty of defrauding the American taxpayer, and being punished by receiving future no bid contracts afterwards.

Like I said, I think the deficit is very much out of control, and has to be dealt with. If Obama doesn't, then I'll be critical of him. He's on the clock as far as I'm concerned, as I think last year was a pretty tough year to start balancing the books (from the previous administration). I also blame much of this on the Democratic majority, for allowing a lot of this to happen, although I don't think regulation and oversight efforts were allowed to happen in many cases, prior to the full majority outlook.

Again, I find it interesting that you completely buy in to these CBO numbers, expect us to take them as being undeniable and gospel, and were one of the ones ridiculing their numbers on Healthcare reform, saying the were inaccurate and arguable. Again, I guess it just matters what the subject matter and political angle is, right? :0074

All good points Chad. I agree with you that the clock is ticking for Obama. Although most on the left may still have a favorable opinion of Obama, at some point he has to break ranks with the forces in play who so far, have convinced him to continue so many of the Bush policies, particularly in the foreign policy arena. If he fails to do that, I suspect he'll disenfranchise many voters and he'll be vulnerable in 2012. On the domestic side, so many of our economic problems are systemic and contrary to what DTB would have us believe, there is no quick fix. I think the CBO budget projections bear this out. Once again though, I think Obama has to distinguish himself from policies of the past and fight much harder for alternative energies and modernizing our aging infrastructure. These things of course, could translate to jobs and help get our economy back on track.

Trench

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

While I do find the budget outlooks to be very concerning, and I will be watching how Obama deals (or not) with them in the coming years, I think Trench has some good, specific points in addressing your chart and numbers, Wayne. I notice you didn't address any of his points, just pasted the Jim Carey hoedown and moved on.

There's no doubt that the debt under Bush is undervalued and undersold - the military expenditures alone for wars were never counted, unlike now. Fuzzy math, right?

You mention Bush being handed an economy headed down, and use that as some kind of excuse. Obama was handed a much worse economic downturn as most would agree, and had much tougher decisions to make in a short time period - according to analysts on both side of the aisle. But, Obama gets full blame for you, and Bush gets no blame. Typical conservative avoidance I would call it, since you say the liberals have incorrect opinions. The facts are there, it just depends on what you chose to believe and how you choose to talk about it.

I remember how Bush, his advisors, Fox News, and you sang the praises of the Bush economy, funded primarily by easy credit, bad loans, people buying everything on credit, not being responsible, and then all Hell breaking loose under his watch, and nobody placing responsibility for any of it on him. And I remember people here and elsewhere blaming Obama for the bad economy after the first month of his Presidency. It's lunacy, and irresponsible, but so what, right? And all this, coupled with enacting two (at least) elective wars, with none of that money going on the deficit books, and billions of taxpayer money outside of those appropriations coming up missing - and I haven't heard one conservative that I remember say anything negative about that taxpayer money just being "lost". Lost in the accounts of defense contractors who were found guilty of defrauding the American taxpayer, and being punished by receiving future no bid contracts afterwards.

Like I said, I think the deficit is very much out of control, and has to be dealt with. If Obama doesn't, then I'll be critical of him. He's on the clock as far as I'm concerned, as I think last year was a pretty tough year to start balancing the books (from the previous administration). I also blame much of this on the Democratic majority, for allowing a lot of this to happen, although I don't think regulation and oversight efforts were allowed to happen in many cases, prior to the full majority outlook.

Again, I find it interesting that you completely buy in to these CBO numbers, expect us to take them as being undeniable and gospel, and were one of the ones ridiculing their numbers on Healthcare reform, saying the were inaccurate and arguable. Again, I guess it just matters what the subject matter and political angle is, right? :0074

No Chad not fuzzy math--just more propaganda put out by the left--
UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has now been added.

:0corn




UPDATE: This graph is now over one year old. For up to date information see this post: Budget 2011: Past Deficits vs. Obama?s Deficits in Pictures

President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious. The Washington Post has a great graphic which helps put President Obama?s budget deficits in context of President Bush?s.
What?s driving Obama?s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending. Riedl details:

• President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.
• President Bush began a string of expensive finan­cial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.
• President Bush created a Medicare drug entitle­ment that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new govern­ment health care fund.
• President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. Presi­dent Obama would double it.
• President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama has already in­creased this spending by 20 percent.
• President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.
• President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama?s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.

UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has now been added.

CLARIFICATION: Of course, this Washington Post graphic does not perfectly delineate budget surpluses and deficits by administration. President Bush took office in January 2001, and therefore played a lead role in crafting the FY 2002-2008 budgets. Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for the FY 2009 budget deficit that overlaps their administrations, before President Obama assumes full budgetary responsibility beginning in FY 2010. Overall, President Obama?s budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

another FACT :

http://www.miseryindex.us/indexbypresident.asp

Since I was born GW was one of 5 presidents to reduce misery index from time he took over till time he left office


<TABLE border=0 width=560><TBODY><TR><TD class=text_18px_t_black width=150>President </TD><TD class=text_18px_t_black width=130 align=middle>Time Period </TD><TD class=text_18px_t_black width=70 align=right>Start </TD><TD class=text_18px_t_black width=70 align=right>End </TD><TD class=text_18px_t_black width=70 align=right>Change </TD><TD class=text_18px_t_black width=70 align=right>Avg. </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=560 colSpan=6></TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>Richard M. Nixon </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1969-01 - 1974-07 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.80 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>17.01 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_black width=70 align=right>9.21 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>10.57 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>James E. Carter, Jr. </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1977-01 - 1980-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>12.72 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>19.72 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.00 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>16.26 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>Dwight D. Eisenhower </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1953-01 - 1960-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>3.28 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.96 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_black width=70 align=right>4.68 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>6.26 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>Barack H. Obama </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>2009-01 - 2010-04 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.73 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>12.14 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_black width=70 align=right>4.41 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>9.72 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>Lyndon B. Johnson </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1963-11 - 1968-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.02 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>8.12 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_black width=70 align=right>1.10 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>6.77 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>George H.W. Bush </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1989-01 - 1992-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>10.07 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>10.30 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_black width=70 align=right>0.23 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>10.68 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>George W. Bush </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>2001-01 - 2008-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.93 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.49 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_red width=70 align=right>-0.44 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>8.11 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>John F. Kennedy </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1961-01 - 1963-10 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>8.31 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>6.82 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_red width=70 align=right>-1.49 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.14 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>William J. Clinton </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1993-01 - 2000-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>10.56 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.29 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_red width=70 align=right>-3.27 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.80 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>Gerald R. Ford </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1974-08 - 1976-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>16.36 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>12.66 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_red width=70 align=right>-3.70 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>16.00 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>Ronald W. Reagan </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1981-01 - 1988-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>19.33 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>9.72 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_red width=70 align=right>-9.61 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>12.19 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=150>Harry S. Truman </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=130 align=middle>1948-01 - 1952-12 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>13.63 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>3.45 </TD><TD class=text_12px_t_red width=70 align=right>-10.18 </TD><TD class=text_16px_t_black width=70 align=right>7.88 </TD></TR><TR><TD class=text_14px_t_black width=560 colSpan=6 align=middle>
The misery index was initiated by economist Arthur Okun, an adviser to President Lyndon Johnson in the 1960's. It is simply the unemployment rate added to the inflation rate. It is assumed that both a higher rate of unemployment and a worsening of inflation both create economic and social costs for a country. A combination of rising inflation and more people out of work implies a deterioration in economic performance and a rise in the misery index.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[Chadman]

I'm confused. Now we learn this chart was developed by The Heritage Foundation, and published in The Washington Post, using numbers from wherever they got them from and the CBO? And you post a comment (update) saying that that the wars were funded by something different than usual under Bush, but all the military expenditures on the war were counted in the deficit? Update from where, the Heritage Foundation? The Post? From Wayne's archives?

I've learned long ago to question authority. Let alone non-authorities. Apparently this chart had many helpers in it's creation, mainly helpers wearing ultra conservative hats and publishers that wear the same hats. Probably worth doing more research on sources, numbers, etc. But it is good to see you accepting CBO numbers now, though. I guess you also agree that the Healthcare Legislation, as shown by CBO numbers, will reduce our national debt in future years. That was pretty plainly shown when we were discussing these numbers previously.

 

[THE KOD]

I guess you also agree that the Healthcare Legislation, as shown by CBO numbers, will reduce our national debt in future years. That was pretty plainly shown when we were discussing these numbers previously.

.............................................................

DTBlackgumby will agree to that when hell freezes over.

His numbers and charts are a useless bunch of
crappola.

A total waste of time.

 

[gardenweasel]

Do we miss President Bush? Inspite of rethug love of the man on this forum, it might be time to go back to September, 2008 and shake the dust off the old memory bank.

Bush?s Legacy Of Squandering Taxpayer Money

President Bush announced his $700 billion plan to buy out troubled financial institutions. Demanding enormous faith in his administration?s stewardship, the plan ?would place no restrictions on the administration other than requiring semiannual reports to Congress, granting the Treasury secretary unprecedented power to buy and resell mortgage debt,? and to hire outside firms ?to help manage its purchases.? Further, the proposal provides no oversight mechanism:

Sec. 8. Review: Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Bush is demanding unprecedented control over billions of dollars ? with no oversight. His history of mismanaging taxpayer dollars should make Americans skeptical of his buyout plan:

IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION

-$142 million wasted on reconstruction projects that were either terminated or canceled. [Special Inspector General for Iraq, 7/28/08]

-?Significant? amount of U.S. funds for Iraq funneled to Sunni and Shiite militias. [GAO Comptroller, 3/11/08]

-$180 million payed to construction company Bechtel for projects it never finished. [Federal audit, 7/25/07]

-$5.1 billion in expenses for Iraq reconstruction charged without documentation. [Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction report, 3/19/07]

-$10 billion in spending on Iraq reconstruction was wasteful or poorly tracked. [GAO, 2/15/07]

-Halliburton overcharged the government $100 million for one day?s work in 2004. [Project on Government Oversight, 10/8/04]

KATRINA

-Millions wasted on four no-bid contracts, including paying $20 million for an unusable camp for evacuees. [Homeland Security Department Inspector General, 9/10/08]

-$2.4 billion in contracts doled out by FEMA that guaranteed profits for big companies. [Center for Public Integrity investigation, 6/25/07]

-An estimated $2 billion in fraud and waste ? nearly 11 percent of the $19 billion spent by FEMA on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita as of mid-June. [New York Times tally, 6/27/06]

-?Widespread? waste and mismanagement on millions for Katrina recovery, including at least $3 million for 4,000 beds that were never used. [GAO, 3/16/06]

DEFENSE CONTRACTS

-A $50 million Air Force contract awarded to a company with close ties to senior Air Force officers, in a process ?fraught with improper influence, irregular procedures, glaring conflicts of interest.? [Project on Government Oversight, 4/18/08]

-$1.7 billion in excessive fees and waste paid by the Pentagon to the Interior Department to manage federal lands. [Defense Department and Interior Department Inspectors General audit, 12/25/06]

-$1 trillion unaccounted for by the Pentagon, including 56 airplanes, 32 tanks, and 36 Javelin missile command launch-units. [GAO, 5/18/03]

Given Bush?s history of gross fiscal mismanagement ? including an unprecedented number of no-bid contracts and Bush?s resistance to closing fraud loopholes or increasing oversight of contracts ? why should Americans trust another $700 billion to his care?

Some around here are tired of the "blame game. The fact remains, there were mountains of elephant dung to clean up from the Bush, Cheney and his cronies.

Jonathan Alter, Newsweek, writes:

The BP oil spill is the perfect metaphor for Barack Obama's presidency so far. His first 500 days in office have been?with the significant exception of health-care reform?consumed in cleaning up the messes left by his predecessors in the financial sector, the auto business, Afghanistan, and now the oil and gas industry, where "regulators" in the Denver office of the Minerals Management Service under President Bush were literally sleeping with the industry reps they were supposed to be licensing. Obama's fate is to head up what Donald Regan (Ronald Reagan's chief of staff) called "the shovel brigade"?the crew cleaning up the dung when the elephants leave the circus.

this president`s approval rating is in the tank...he`s f`ed up everything he`s touched...so the only thing his gadfly`s can do is "blame bush"?...

it`s sort of pathetic..you don`t see past presidents being so rude and disrespectful...it`s who the guy is...it`s what he has to do...he`s a one-legged man in an ass kicking contest...

he refuses to let louisiana clean up the oil spill...can`t sell the people on the healthcare debacle(and rightly so)....has completely thrown most of our allies under the bus in favor of despots....and is in the process of dismantling our military....



and if you`re comparing the debt when bush left with the debt now...and after healthcare takes effect...or when obama`s done in 4 years,you are a bigger buffoon/lackey than alter...and obviousluy don`t have the wherewithal to use google...

just look at the election trends since obama took office...couldn`t even hold teddy kennedy`s seat....:mj07:

every politician this poser campaigns for loses....just look at how much his big labor lackeys just threw down a rathole trying to oust blanche lincoln.....

epic fail...on every level...and why should that surprise?...it failed in europe....no wonder he`s blaming everyone else....

"president pass-the-buck"

it`s a clusterfuck...:142smilie ...but thankfully,it will be short lived....

c`mon november...:toast: