WSJ - "Obama spending binge never happened"

[johnny2x2x]

I'll keep this short...

Obama authorized $1.1 Trillion dollars of extra spending during fiscal 2009. Nancy Pelosi was the 1st to put all the 2009 spending on Bush( I suspect this clown just dusted off her charts). The Fact is Bush didnt even sign the 2009 budget. Bush, upon Obama's request, turned over around $250 of discretionary spending under TARP to Obama so he could spend on anything he wanted. Obama also authorized $40 B on S chip, $140 B on Stimulus II, $800 B on Stimulus I all during fiscal 2009.

All this spending by Obama increased the base line for his future budgets....the fact is 2009 should have been a one time spending blitz......why 2010, 2011 budgets have to be so high since Tarp was already spent(some paid back) and stimulus has been exhausted??

Obama the most fiscal president since Eisenhower?? LOL...sure a fiscal president who racks up almost $6 Trillion in debt in his first 4 years......

Seriously dude, do you ever research a single thing before you post? 2010 and 2011 were the years that all but about $100 Billion of the stimulus was spent. Bush did pass a budget that ended up authorizing $3.1 Trillion, Obama had to sign a $400 Billion continuation of Bush's budget to simply keep the government running in March 2009. You do realize that Obama has only had his own budget in place for 2-1/2 years right? His 4 years of spending wont be finished until the Fall of 2013 when that fiscal year ends.

Bush owns the 2009 budget, all of it was money he spent except for about $100 Billion in Obama stimulus. And budgets aren't independent of each other. Obama was left a budget of $3.52 Trillion he could no cut the budget in 2012 from that without huge and sweeping cuts. So that's what is always left in this argument, the Righties are left trying to defend huge budget cuts in the middle of a recession which is indefensible.

 

[tsmith7559]

Seriously dude, do you ever research a single thing before you post? 2010 and 2011 were the years that all but about $100 Billion of the stimulus was spent. Bush did pass a budget that ended up authorizing $3.1 Trillion, Obama had to sign a $400 Billion continuation of Bush's budget to simply keep the government running in March 2009. You do realize that Obama has only had his own budget in place for 2-1/2 years right? His 4 years of spending wont be finished until the Fall of 2013 when that fiscal year ends.

Bush owns the 2009 budget, all of it was money he spent except for about $100 Billion in Obama stimulus. And budgets aren't independent of each other. Obama was left a budget of $3.52 Trillion he could no cut the budget in 2012 from that without huge and sweeping cuts. So that's what is always left in this argument, the Righties are left trying to defend huge budget cuts in the middle of a recession which is indefensible.

BUSH OWNS A BUDGET THAT GOES THROUGH 9/30/2009 AND IS OUT OF OFFICE IN 1/2009??

The country was out of money within 6 months of a $3.1 Trillion budget?? you serious??
c'mon dude get real.

Obama didn't come in and live with the budget Bush had approved. He immediately signed off on enormous spending programs that had been specifically rejected by Bush. This included a $410 billion spending bill that Bush had refused to sign before he left office. Obama signed it on March 10, 2009. Bush had been chopping brush in Texas for two months at that point. On Jan. 12, 2009, Obama asked Bush to release the remaining TARP funds for Obama to spend as soon as he took office. By Oct. 1, Obama had spent another $200 billion in TARP money. That, too, gets credited to Bush, according to the creative accounting of Rex Nutting

The $140 B is stimulus II was duly charged against Obama, not any money has been noted for stimulus I.

Yes, His budgets for 2010 and 2011 shouldn't have any Stimulus or Tarp, yet why so high?

 

[Thumb]

What about Bush's huge leaps in discretionary spending on things like defense and the wars?

Those are still part of Obama's budgets, but nobody on the right complains about how Bush spent like mad on those things, but cry their eyes out when Obama spends on domestic issues like healthcare and stimulus.

Bush took office with a 1.9 trillion budget, Obama took office with a 3.1 trillion budget, which he's only raised so far to 3.8, but yeah, Obama has the spending problem.

 

[Michchamp]

that's another good point: not all spending is created equal.

ideally, spending creates jobs, and is taxed (along with wages) and expands GDP. some defense spending (e.g. hiring 1,000 workers to build submarines or toilets for the Navy) can accomplish that. much cannot. especially when it's spent abroad and not taxed here like a lot of the costs of the Bush wars.

all those "allies" he made in the Middle East cost money...

 

[tsmith7559]

What about Bush's huge leaps in discretionary spending on things like defense and the wars?

Those are still part of Obama's budgets, but nobody on the right complains about how Bush spent like mad on those things, but cry their eyes out when Obama spends on domestic issues like healthcare and stimulus.

Bush took office with a 1.9 trillion budget, Obama took office with a 3.1 trillion budget, which he's only raised so far to 3.8, but yeah, Obama has the spending problem.

$1.2 trillion in 8 yrs....or $700 B in 3yrs...you do the math....$6 T in deficits in 4 yrs.....ya fiscal Prez all the way
its no coincidence that the last 2yrs of Bush's administration the budgets increased more than the first 6 yrs.....dems controlled the purse strings...hence spending is up!!

 

[Thumb]

$1.2 trillion in 8 yrs....or $700 B in 3yrs...you do the math....$6 T in deficits in 4 yrs.....ya fiscal Prez all the way

I didn't call him a fiscal president. I'm merely pointing out the pots calling the kettles black.

But part of the reason spending is up is from war and defense costs initiated by your good friend GWB, it's not like Obama can just dump those costs.

Obama has spent money, nobody is denying that.....but the GOP makes it out like he's running down the street tossing Ben Franklins out of his pockets as he goes.

 

[Thumb]

$1.2 trillion in 8 yrs....or $700 B in 3yrs...you do the math....$6 T in deficits in 4 yrs.....ya fiscal Prez all the way
its no coincidence that the last 2yrs of Bush's administration the budgets increased more than the first 6 yrs.....dems controlled the purse strings...hence spending is up!!

Bush signed his name to those budgets.

 

[tsmith7559]

I didn't call him a fiscal president. I'm merely pointing out the pots calling the kettles black.

But part of the reason spending is up is from war and defense costs initiated by your good friend GWB, it's not like Obama can just dump those costs.

Obama has spent money, nobody is denying that.....but the GOP makes it out like he's running down the street tossing Ben Franklins out of his pockets as he goes.

I'm not defending Bush's spending, it was too much and the party paid the price in 2006.
But for a "journalist" to suggest the spending from Jan to Oct 1 is Bush's is laughable considering all the spending bill/programs Obama created during that time

 

[tsmith7559]

Bush signed his name to those budgets.

for the record...he didnt sign the 2009 budget...Obama did vote for approval, it passed with a couple republican supporters

 

[tinselwolverine]

What is a "fiscal" President as opposed to a "non-fiscal" President?

What's a "Commander in Chief" President as opposed to a "non-Commander in Chief" President?

Under provisions of The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, every President submits a budget to the Congress between early January and early February.

 

[tinselwolverine]

for the record...he didnt sign the 2009 budget...Obama did vote for approval, it passed with a couple republican supporters

As I recall from from the transitional period between the 2008 election and President-Elect Obama's Innauguration, the outgoing President Bush's attitude was to "get out of the way" and facilitate within as much as possible the President-Elect's capabilities to get his own Administration up and running the way the incoming President wanted.

Probably included in this was not to submit any budget to Congress in 2009, but simply allow the new President to submit his own, which the new President had until the first Monday in February, under the law.

I haven't paid much attention to the budgetary processes during previous periods of presidential transition; that said, I wouldn't be surprised at all if it has, let's say, "traditionally" been an "executive courtesy" for the outgoing president to not submit a budget but simply allow the incoming president to do it after the incoming President as assumed the office.