BO: Hypocrite-in-Chief!!!!

In 2008, BO called Bush "unpatriotic" for running up $4 trillion in debt (over his 8 yrs in office) & borrowing from the Chinese. Well, BO has managed to eclipse that in less than 3 yrs.
In 2009, BO publically stated raising taxes during a recession was a dumb idea & would slow or even halt recovery. Well, what does he do? Yep, offer up the biggest tax increase in our history as a way to cure the economy he has ruined.
In 2011, BO announces his job recovery act (piece-mill over the course of a few months & at his convenience, between vacations). The only job he cares about obviously is his own & this new aptly named "act" is his last ditch effort to save his tail.

Is there anyone in the country who really thinks this guy is capable of doing anything right?

 

Ooooooh! I just love the Right-wing myopic view of the world. It's as if everything they know is absolute and carved in stone so there is no need to take in any real facts because the narrative that has served them so well for so long, and the rest of us unfortunately, needs no stinkin' basis in reality. It would be cute if it didn't hurt so many people on such a large and greed ridden scale. But alas, all we can do is present the facts that they will inevitably ignore as if facts we the vilest of evils that they cannot hear, see, or dare to speak. Yeah, like those three monkeys.
But I digress, for your consideration I present something other than the opinions of a Right-winger.
View attachment 253
What’s also important, but not evident, on this chart is that Obama’s major expenses were temporary — the stimulus is over now — while Bush’s were, effectively, recurring. The Bush tax cuts didn’t just lower revenue for 10 years. It’s clear now that they lowered it indefinitely, which means this chart is understating their true cost. Similarly, the Medicare drug benefit is costing money on perpetuity, not just for two or three years. And Boehner, Ryan and others voted for these laws and, in some cases, helped to craft and pass them.

To relate this specifically to the debt-ceiling debate, we’re not raising the debt ceiling because of the new policies passed in the past two years. We’re raising the debt ceiling because of the accumulated effect of policies passed in recent decades, many of them under Republicans. It’s convenient for whichever side isn’t in power, or wasn’t recently in power, to blame the debt ceiling on the other party. But it isn’t true.

 

Kind of puts your pretty lame argument in perspective doesn't it?

 

Let's see, was it nine times the Bush Regime went to Congress and asked for the debt ceiling to be raised and it got raised every time? Where was the Republican outrage? As Moen has pointed out the Bushies presided over a massive increase in the deficit during the time GB was in office. Where was the Republican outrage? Wasn't it Cheney who according Paul O'Neil said in a 2002 budget meeting that Ronald Reagan had proved that deficits didn't matter? Why wasn't he drummed out of the Party? Tarp was passed under whose watch and was signed by whom? Seems to me that the Republicans got the budget cutting religion at about the same time Obama moved into the White House.

 

All of this is well & good but how does that change or justify what BO said?
He said Bush was unpatriotic for doing the exact same thing he has done. The exact same thing.
He said raising taxes while the economy was weak would hinder recovery, yet he has done exactly that.
What does this hypocrisy have to do with the criticisms you level against Bush & Cheney...or are you just trying to change the subject & divert attention away from what BO has been caught saying?

 

Pot, meet Kettle.

 

As I said, I can only present the facts which clearly point out that you are completely wrong in your assertion that Obama has increased the debt in a mere three years what you claim took Bush 8 years to do. It is simply untrue, incorrect, wrong, a misrepresentation of the facts, and an outright lie. You have presented no counter evidence at all that would refute the data I posted. In spite of being unable to counter my post with any actual facts, you continue to believe that Obama did the exact same thing he criticized Bush for when in reality, he did no such thing. I understand what Obama said but I don't understand why you believe that the numbers you threw out for Bush and Obama which you claim are equal in size but which Obama arrived at in only 3 years, are even remotely supported by any actual facts. Do you have any actual facts?

 

I assume that's a rhetorical question.

 

Partisan narratives and actual facts go together like fish and bicycles. Right-wingers do not discuss and debate, but mutually reinforce their prejudices. Anyone who steps out of line is either shouted down or ignored. They do not recognize a rational argument and thus are easily bamboozled by the strings of fallacies spouted by right-wing politicians.

 

Just for starters, teh post you made showing the percent increases to the respective presidents. But since our search still is not working, I cannot find it. Try this one;

• http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/

 

It looks like on one hand we are talking about the deficit. And on the other we are talking about the budget. Not necessarily the same things are they? I don't think that they are anyway. And keeping in mind that our ongoing imperial adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan were not part of Bush's budget. He kind of ran those under the table when it came to financing. They are part of Obama's though.

 

You can't win the debate by simply denying the facts.

 

You can't debate period until you point out which facts are being denied.

 

In spite of what I am assuming is the always reputable (cough, cough BS!!) Heritage Foundation's figures and their broken link, the fact is we are discussing the Debt not the deficit. Try reading the OP before you post next time. Nice try though.

The Heritage Foundation run by none other than the former Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey, Mr. toe sucker himself.

 

You lost this "debate" after post number 2. You still can't counter my first post with a single fact. That would be the definition of losing any debate.

 

.....and the dims haven't passed a budget in years! No wonder spending, the debt & deficit have exploded under BO's watchful eyes, huh?

 

Still no facts, no counter argument, no clue. So sad.

 

...and now, if BO gets his re-election proposal passed we'll have to suffer billions more of debt being piled on....

 

The link works fine. Maybe your computer just cannot take the facts!

 

See post #17