Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

National debt has increased $4 trillion under Obama
cbsnews ^ | 8/22/11 | Mark Knoller

Posted on 09/04/2011 3:17:04 PM PDT by Typical_Whitey

The latest posting by the Treasury Department shows the national debt has now increased $4 trillion on President Obama's watch.

The debt was $10.626 trillion on the day Mr. Obama took office. The latest calculation from Treasury shows the debt has now hit $14.639 trillion.

It's the most rapid increase in the debt under any U.S. president.

The national debt increased $4.9 trillion during the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush. The debt now is rising at a pace to surpass that amount during Mr. Obama's four-year term.

Mr. Obama blames policies inherited from his predecessor's administration for the soaring debt. He singles out:

"two wars we didn't pay for" "a prescription drug program for seniors...we didn't pay for." "tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 that were not paid for."

(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: obamadebt
OK let me see if I understand this correctly: Obama blames three of G.W. Bush policies/actions for the national debt increases on Obama's watch:

1. (2) unpaid wars - Notwithstanding that the Afghan war was a direct reaction to 911 and that a majority of democrat senators voted for the IWR, wasn't Obama elected to end the wars and bring the troops home. To date he has escalted the war in Afghanistan with an increase of 30k troops, he hasn't removed the troops from Iraq and he went and started a third unpaid for war in Libya, is thinking about another war in Syria, uses drone attacks in Yemen and Kenya all which have increased the national debt and is allowing the nutty left to dismantle the Pentagon with called for Billions in cuts to the DOD. 2. unpaid Prescription Drug plan - As a Senator Obama voted Yes for this plan. If it's so bad why hasn't he ended it or tried to fix it and in fact he has added his own unpaid for multi-trillion healthcare fiasco called Obamacare. 3. unpaid tax cuts - So why did Obama extend these unpaid tax cuts in DEC 2010? Obama himself added unpaid for making work pay tax credits and other unpaid for tax credits as well as adding an unpaid for trillion dollar stimulus program that failed to create jobs and trillions in bail out dollars to his union buddies that never got paid back.

Obama said "the debt is a manageable problem"

Not according to their our own national security experts. In 2010 CJCS Admiral Mullen said "The national debt is the greatest threat to our national security." Obama acts like he can continue this orgy of spending, at his speech next week he will ask for more spending but that is the height of irresponsibility since it is the debt that is the greatest threat to our national security.

People should really start asking themselves does this guy know what he is doing? or maybe he is intentionally trying to destroy the U.S. economy. When will the media actually do its job and ask him.

Maybe the Republicans can ask him in their response to his upcoming failed jobs plan speech next Thursday night.

1 posted on 09/04/2011 3:17:08 PM PDT by Typical_Whitey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


2 posted on 09/04/2011 3:22:26 PM PDT by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Typical_Whitey

Did CBS report this?


3 posted on 09/04/2011 3:42:38 PM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!

This article is from CBS News.


4 posted on 09/04/2011 3:45:11 PM PDT by Typical_Whitey (Ask a liberal to explain how tax increases create jobs in America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Typical_Whitey
When this article appeared earlier as a CNS News item, I wondered if the MSM would run the info at all. Now I see that CBS has entered the fray but let a capable middle weight, Mark Knoller, take the byline so he will be low hanging fruit when the time comes. His article is still not as good as CNS News since it is filtered through the media template filter that gives you a semblance of the truth but not all the truth while at the same time providing the broiler plate language designed to help the Big O. The real test is what talk radio does with the story if anything. Still some revelation that the Big O has as much deficit in 3 years as W did in 8 is some comfort. Too bad the extrapolation of what it will be after 4 years each was never printed. The Big O in four years vs. The W in four years (either term) would be quite a contrast. And then the W deficits in the first two years with a Republican Congress vs. the last 2 with the DemocRat’s in power would be another great comparison.
5 posted on 09/04/2011 3:50:49 PM PDT by cashless (Unlike Obama and his supporters, I'd rather be a TEA BAGGER than a TEA BAGGEE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Typical_Whitey

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents -- number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back -- $30,000 for every man, woman and child,” — Senator Barrack Obama, July 3, 2008 at a campaign event in Fargo, North Dakota.
My comment over on the SeeBS.com site.
6 posted on 09/04/2011 3:53:40 PM PDT by cc2k ( If having an "R" makes you conservative, does walking into a barn make you a horse's (_*_)?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Typical_Whitey

Mouse nuts compared to Obamacare.


7 posted on 09/04/2011 3:53:53 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Typical_Whitey

The national debt has increased more than $4 trillion under this AnointedIdiot and when his tenure is up, it will be close to $6+...... =.=


8 posted on 09/04/2011 4:12:43 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Typical_Whitey

The Obama admin will spend whatever it takes to keep GDP from going negative.


9 posted on 09/04/2011 4:18:22 PM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Obama’s Deficit Avalanche isn’t Bush’s Fault / scottuystarnes.com / 2/9/2010
SOURCE http://scottystarnes.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/obama-deficit.jpg?w=400&h=308

Washington Times reports: Even more staggering than the mountains of snow in the capital are the deficits the Obama administration plans for the next decade. Huge spending increases will add about $12 trillion to the national debt for budget years 2009 to 2020.

The scariest part is that these deficits are based on unrealistic budgeting assumptions; the real fiscal outlook is much bleaker. In the proposed 2011 budget, the White House defensively attacks the “irresponsibility of past” deficits.

For example, the 2009 budget deficit of $1.4 trillion is blamed on the George W. Bush administration as if President Obama’s $862 billion stimulus package and more than $400 billion supplemental spending bill had nothing to do with it. Mr. Obama’s planned 2010 budget deficit rises to an even higher record level of $1.6 trillion.

By comparison, all of Mr. Bush’s deficits from 2002 to 2008 – the seven years during which his team had the most control over the budget – produced a combined deficit of $2.1 trillion.

Obama has spent more in 2 years than Bush did in 7 years. Obama’s BIOB (Blame it on Bush) defense just won’t work anymore.


10 posted on 09/04/2011 4:45:03 PM PDT by Liz (The rule of law must prevail. We can’t govern ourselves by our personal point of view.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Typical_Whitey
Need to rename Pennsylvania ave MLK blvd and add some Liquor stores and Pawn shops to the Whitehouse front lawn as we have reached that point right now,with the Kenyan/Somali scumbag.
11 posted on 09/04/2011 4:46:04 PM PDT by Cheetahcat (Carnival commie side show, started November 4 2008 ,A date that will live in Infamy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
THE WAR PROFITEERING MACHINE "Officially" it costs the US $120 billion a year to finance our military presence in Afghanistan and all the other related functions to keep "our friend" Hamid Karzai in power. Probably the figure is higher, much higher ...lots of CIA and other covert funds don’t get reported........$150 billion is probably far too low. Think trillions.

Karzai was pulled out of obscurity some years ago, thought to be an Afghan hack who could be manipulated. Prodded by the duplicitous neocons with hidden agendas, the US government orchestrated Karzai into a world-recognized power. And ever since US taxpayers, and our military, have been paying the price.

Heck, the US taxpayer got to subsidize one of the three most corrupt governments on the face of the Earth. The Karzai Klan is stealing billions---and were actually seen shamelessly loading billions on trucks to transport out of their godforsaken country...so that they could enjoy life far, far away from that hellhole.

US taxpayers have enriched Hamid, his corrupt brother (now dead), the rest of the crooked Karzai Klan and countless members of their extended family..........a nauseating assortment of cut throats, drug traffickers, embezzlers, money launderers, extortionists, thieves.....

One of the biggest scams is located at the Bank of Kabul where the definition of a “loan” for the well-connected is "all the money you can take with no intention of ever paying it back." So far, the known bank “losses” are something like a billion dollars PLUS......."withdrawn" from US money deposited there by the military, the CIA, the State Dept. and all the other US agencies that were duped into financing this colossal foreign policy failure.

Of course....the war-profiteering neocons got their cut. Neocon Richard Perle is starting an oil business in the Mideast. And if he ever dares sells even one barrel of oil, he should be charged with treason.

12 posted on 09/04/2011 4:48:51 PM PDT by Liz (The rule of law must prevail. We can’t govern ourselves by our personal point of view.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Liz

But still the fact remains that a great debt scandal surrounds the Bush administration. He increased the debt by more than Obama has but at a slower pace. As a percentage four tril under Bush was greater than four tril under Obama as the total debt was lower.


13 posted on 09/04/2011 4:52:08 PM PDT by Monterrosa-24 (...even more American that a French bikini and a Russian AK-47.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Monterrosa-24

Plenty of blame to go around for sure.


14 posted on 09/04/2011 4:54:23 PM PDT by Liz (The rule of law must prevail. We can’t govern ourselves by our personal point of view.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Typical_Whitey
For the sake of visual comparison, here's what a million dollars in stacked $100 dollar bills looks like:

Here's one billion dollars in stacked C-notes:

One trillion dollars (in double stacked pallets of $100 bills) looks something like this:

If you look directly above the arrow, you'll see the same little guy standing right next to the double stacked pallets of money.

15 posted on 09/04/2011 5:50:33 PM PDT by garjog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Monterrosa-24

“But still the fact remains that a great debt scandal surrounds the Bush administration. He increased the debt by more than Obama has but at a slower pace. As a percentage four tril under Bush was greater than four tril under Obama as the total debt was lower.”

I’m sorry, but what possible relevance does the percentage of the total debt have ? I understand the percentage of the GDP but this seems like a stretch.

If you look at the graph of Bush’s term you’ll see the debt peaked at around 400B during the recovery from the Stock bubble and 9/11. Due to his tax policies the deficit dropped steadily after this despite the wars and Medicare part D.

Most of the total debt under Bush happened after the Dems took over both houses of congress and more importantly with the sub-prime crisis.

Anyone who has done the slightest bit of research into this crisis understands that it was the democrats that invented it, grew it, and defended it from being reigned in by republicans.

Can we blame the republicans for their reaction to the crisis ? Of course. However, when TARP was voted on the goal was supposed to be to buy up the bad debt. I was against it but it was the government that caused the problem in the first place. It was Obama that decided to use the funds to take control of American industry.

Bush spent too much, the republican congress spent too much but comparing this to the insane policies of the Obama administration is TOO MUCH.


16 posted on 09/05/2011 8:10:32 AM PDT by Bigjimslade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson