Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Obama Shatters Spending Record for First-Year Presidents

The numbers do not lie..
Liberals will have tons of excuses
But the fact is the more liberal you are the more you spend.
Too bad the American people forget that so easily
Thank you king obama for helping us remember

8 comments:

Scorpion said...

Entertainers such as O the entertainer have to spend money in order to continue to satisfy and be
entertaining..no imagination in that...

Jim said...

Of that $2.8 trillion, .7 would be the bailout under Bush. That leaves $2.1T compared to Bush's $1.8T, a difference of $300B. Then, Bush wasn't paying for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2001 and also wasn't facing a great depression in 2001, either.

So apples to apples, I'd say Obama did much better his first year than Bush in his.

Ron said...

No matter how much money is spent we know who is going to get the vast majority of it...and there in lies the problem. Both side are a part of the overall scheme. That should be obvious by now. Hope that finds your consciousness some day.

The Game said...

BUSH DID IT, BUSH DID IT!!!!!
Bailout and "stimulus" not needed, have created NO jobs, unless you believe the lies in the report

Yes Ron, both sides do suck..Dem's have always sucked more..sorry, its the truth.

I wish Republicans were actual conservatives, then we could blame 100% on dem's..

All this wasted failure of a stimulus plan is 100% dems..and they will have to pay it back in 2010...

Ron said...

You got part of the point but missed the other.

Both sides work for the corpratocracy. Think about it. Most government money is collected by large corporations. Some legit much not. These companies have no allegiance to the country or a party or even desire to see us succeed except on their terms. Those terms is we learn to live on 2 or 3 dollars an hour like the rest of the world..Concentrated wealth IS the new world order. It's already here! A few that control the economy of he world. Break up the too big to fail into tiny little pieces. That is a big part of the answer.

Marshall Art said...

Ron's becoming a conspiracy theorist. He thinks that because corps lobby for favors that it means they control everything. Not so. The politicians don't have to give in. They don't have to take any contributions or, taking them, they don't have to do any paybacks. Corps aren't evil because they look for ways to keep profits up. Anyone who looks to the tax code to reduce their taxes is doing the exact same thing. What write offs do YOU have Ron? (Or are you foolishly short-forming it?)

The problem always comes down to the character of the politician. Campaign finance reform is a joke because money doesn't do anything. The lust for money does. Find people of character to support in the elections and corps won't get any control to which they are not entitled.

For Jim,

Bush used half of his bailout money while in office. After the election, he went to the prez-elect and gave HIM the choice of what to do with the other half: spend or not spend. Guess what Barry Obumble said then?

Bush has enough for which he must answer. What happened since is on Barry Obraindead.

Anonymous said...

And how many jobs did Bush's 2001 "stimulus" of $1.3 trillion create? I'm glad you're finally waking up to the fact Bush and Obama are cut from the same cloth.

What was it you were bitching about again...?

American said...

Game,
once again, with your obama-obsession, you didn't mention Bush even once. Only after Jim and Ron's comments, you were forced to address the issue.
let me guess - you voted for Bush, not once, twoce, correct? Doe it make you a liberal? Just curious.