2
Feb

Obama’s Deficit Dishonesty!

Posted by: Mike's America @ 9:13 pm in Uncategorized  | 867 views

Dems try to claim it was Bush’s deficit yet they want to use recovered TARP funds for another Obama slush fund!

Plus: Don’t miss the video of Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) Read the Riot Act to Obama Budget Director!

If you’ve heard it once, you’ve heard it a hundred times. Despite the fact that Obama signed the most massive spending bills EVER shortly after becoming President in 2009 he tries to blame the deficit on President Bush.

Dick Morris takes the lie apart piece by piece:

BEHIND OBAMA’S PHONY DEFICIT NUMBERS
By Dick Morris
Dick Morris.com…
02.1.2010

President Obama is being disingenuous when he says that the budget deficit he faced “when I walked in the door” of the White House was $1.3 trillion. He went on to say that he only increased it to $1.4 trillion in 2009 and was raising it to $1.6 trillion in 2010.

Congressman Joe Wilson might have said “you lie,” but we’ll settle for “you distort.”

(As Mark Twain once said, there are three kinds of lies: “lies, damn lies, and statistics.”)

Here are the facts:

In 2008, Bush ran a deficit of $485 billion. By the time the fiscal year started on October 1, 2008, it had gone up by another $100 billion due to increased recession-related spending and depressed revenues. So it was about $600 billion at the start of the fiscal crisis. That was the real Bush deficit.

But when the fiscal crisis hit, Bush had to pass TARP in the final months of his presidency which cost $700 billion. Under the federal budget rules, a loan and a grant are treated the same. So the $700 billion pushed the deficit — officially — up to $1.3 trillion. But not really. The $700 billion was a short term loan. $500 billion of it has already been repaid.

So what was the real deficit Obama inherited? The $600 billion deficit Bush was running plus the $200 billion of TARP money that probably won’t be repaid (mainly AIG and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). That totals $800 billion. That was the real deficit Obama inherited.

And now, Obama wants to take some of the repaid TARP money and use it for another of his slush funds to reward campaign contributors. He is trying to spend the money that was supposed to be used to pay down the debt at the same time he blames that debt on Bush. What a liar!

Obama’s Director of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag went to the Senate Budget Committee Tuesday and tried to push this latest scam. It didn’t fly with New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg (R). This video is a must see!

Gregg: “No, no no! You can’t make that type of statement with any legitimacy. You cannot make that statement. This is the law [holds up a copy]. Let me tell you what the law says, let me read it to you again because you don’t appear to understand the law. The law is very clear: “The monies recouped from the TARP shall be paid into the general fund of the Treasury for the reduction of the public debt.”

If not for Judd Gregg the Dems might have simply ignored the law and just taken these billions that we borrowed in a time of emergency and spent them.

At the hearing, Sen. Gregg turned the Obama “inherited deficit” lie on it’s head when he said “What this administration inherited is not as important as what our children will inherit.” These really are the Obama deficits and no slick speeches by the President can change that!

  • Share/Bookmark
Print This Post Print This Post
This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010 at 9:13 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks

4 comments so far

yippie21
 1Reply to this comment  

Wow…. Go Get ‘em Senator Gregg! This shuffle of monies must be stopped! Shine the light of day on what this administration and the dem Congress are trying to do! Stall till November and hopefully the GOP will retake control of BOTH houses! If only we can. wow.

February 2nd, 2010 at 10:43 pm
Davey
 2Reply to this comment  

See, he’s making progress. Just look at how much more money he’s spent than that old stingy Bush. I’ll bet his advisor’s are having trouble just keeping him from running naked down the middle of Broadway throwing handfulls of cash wildly into the air.

February 3rd, 2010 at 3:08 am
eaglewingz08
 3Reply to this comment  

Obama voted for every one of these expensive democrap budgets, the TARP, the Bailouts, the Takeovers, the Porkulus, and the Democrap Budget Bills this year. OBAMA OWNS the entire 2008-2010 Budgets, and thus they are BARACK’s BUDGET BUSTERS (TM) not Bush’s. MAN UP Obama! You didn’t INHERIT it, you VOTED for them!

February 3rd, 2010 at 3:36 pm
Old Trooper
 4Reply to this comment  

Vulnerable Dems seek distance from Obama

http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/michael-jackson/sc-dc-obama-dems04-20100203,0,987524.story

“As Congress begins picking through President Obama’s vast election year budget, many Democratic incumbents and candidates seem to be finding something they love — to campaign against.

A Democratic Senate candidate in Missouri denounced the budget’s sky-high deficit. A Florida Democrat whose district includes the Kennedy Space Center hit the roof over NASA budget cuts. And an endangered Senate Democrat denounced proposed cuts in farm subsidies.

A headline on the 2010 campaign website of Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), blares her opposition to Obama’s farm budget: “Blanche stands up for Arkansas farm families,” it says.

Heading into an election season in which Republicans are trying to tie Democrats to Obama’s unpopular policies, Obama’s budget gives his fellow Democrats an unlikely campaign tool — a catalogue of ways to establish their distance from controversial aspects of his administration.

It is a time-tested campaign tactic for politicians to declare their independence of party leaders. But the tactic is particularly important for Democrats this year, because their party dominates Washington, and being an insider is a political liability in an anti-incumbent climate.

Underscoring that dynamic, Obama held a question-and-answer session with Senate Democrats on Wednesday, drawing polite challenges from a procession of incumbents up for reelection.

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), a recent party-switcher, questioned trade policies battering the steel industry. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) asked about health care for first responders involved in the Sept. 11attack. The message from Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Ca.): “California is hurting.”

All that underscores a potential gap between Obama’s governing agenda and congressional Democrats’ political interest in the election. While Democrats on the ballot encounter stiff headwinds, Obama is asking them look at the big picture on the budget, take on tough issues, and let the politics take care of themselves.

“If anybody’s searching for a lesson from Massachusetts, I promise you, the answer is not to do nothing,” Obama told the Senate Democrats. “We’ve got to finish the job on health care. We’ve got to finish the job on financial regulatory reform. We’ve got to finish the job, even though it’s hard.”

Since his State of the Union address last week, Obama has offered a spirited defense of his agenda, his feisty demeanor an implicit promise of support for those Democrats who work with him. At a time when some might be thinking about parting ways with his agenda, Obama is pressing his case that now is not the time to abandon the ideals that swept him into office.

While Democrats agree with Obama’s broad goals, they do not agree with all it takes to achieve them – especially in his budget, which makes little short-term progress in deficit reduction yet calls for spending cuts in many programs.

Lincoln is a dedicated proponent of fiscal responsibility. But she sharply denounced the cuts in farm subsidies that are so important to her state. That is not only good constituent service, but good 2010 politics in a state that voted heavily against Obama in the 2008 election.

Wednesday’s meeting with Obama gave Lincoln a televised opportunity to challenge Obama on a broader question. As one of eight Democrats hand-picked by party leaders to question the president, all but one up for re-election this year, Lincoln urged Obama to “to push back against people in our own party that want extremes.”

Then, in short order, her campaign website featured a news report: “Lincoln challenges Obama on liberal `extremes.’”

Elsewhere around the country, Rep. Suzanne Kosmas — a freshman Democrat from a Republican leaning part of Florida — minced no words in complaining about Obama’s proposed cuts to the NASA budget. The space industry is one of the largest employers in her district.

“The president’s proposal lacks a bold vision for space exploration and begs for the type of leadership that he has described as critical for inspiring innovation for the 21st century,” said Kosmas.

In the swing state of Missouri, Democratic Senate candidate Robin Carnahan wasted no time this week denouncing Obama’s budget as profligate.

“I’m disappointed in the president’s budget recommendation,” she said. “Missouri families have to balance their checkbooks and our government is no different.”

Democrats trumpet that split between their candidate and Obama as Carnahan tries to run as an outsider. But Republicans have tagged her “Rubberstamp Robin” for supporting Obama’s health care bill and other congressional initiatives.

Probably no vulnerable Democrat has more of a burden in defending Obama’s budget than Rep. John Spratt (D-S.C.), the House Budget Committee Chairman who is facing a strong opponent in his Republican-leaning district.

The National Republican Congressional Committee has already run an ad attacking him for his record in handling deficit-laden budgets. But Spratt has not shied from his association with the volatile issue. When Obama’s budget was delivered to Capitol Hill Monday, Spratt joined in a “photo op” for its reception.

The photo was run on a conservative blog under the headline: “Budget now in Spratt’s liberal hands.”

Janet.Hook@latimes.com

CParsons@latimes.com
**************************************************************
Apparently some Democrats are taking heat for the spending. Some Republicans should as well.
The overspending orgy must be stopped. Some of these clowns need to understand that they can and will be replaced. The size and cost of huge .gov is unsustainable. The Dems need to understand that Party Membership is not a Death Pact. The coming Elections in November are very real and the Working Class cannot abide with being saddled with higher taxes and supporting an Entitlement Class that contributes nothing but consumes tax dollars like popcorn.

February 3rd, 2010 at 6:04 pm

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment

If your comments get caught in spam a lot please log into your registered account before trying to comment again. You can email me if your comment is caught in spam

 

Identity Verification: If you wish to verify your commenter identity, so no one can steal it, click the below button: