Posted on 06/03/2016 11:24:22 AM PDT by Innovative
We have generally learned that there's not much utility in fact-checking every tweet that springs to life from the imagination of Donald Trump or which receives his blessing via retweet. Tweets containing factual errors are not as plentiful as those containing exclamation points or disparagement, but they aren't exactly rare.
But on Thursday evening, Trump retweeted this one, and we -- well, I -- couldn't let it stand.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
It’s a Wappo article. Yawn.
Is anyone seriously questioning the federal debt going up under Obama, one of his first acts being the bone-headed “stimulus” of throwing almost $1 trillion of OUR money down a rat hole “to help the economy.”
So everything sucked before Barry was Immaculated to FIX it, but instead it got Worse, and shows NO IMPROVEMENT ANYWHERE. But, because the type is too small and it doesn’t cover the period preceding the Immaculation, somehow it is Irrelevant?? Did I get That Right??
Actually, it didn't. This is a classic lie: stimulus spending enacted immediately after Obama took office in 2009 was attributed to Bush, because it was in the last fiscal year that BEGAN under Bush.
Bush did initiate TARP, but that was mostly paid back in full with interest, reducing the deficit in later years. However, about $10B stolen from TARP and given to GM was never paid back.
The WaPo writer didn’t note that after 7.5 years, Obama has not reversed any trends.
The U.S. economy only added 38,000 jobs in May, according to the Labor Department. It was the worst monthly job gain since 2010. The false picture of low unemployment at 4.7%, does not describe the unemployed who stopped looking for a job and are not tracked by statistics. As Trump would say, Obama’s economy is a disaster.
I don’t believe anything coming from Philip Bump.
Indeed Barack Obama is a fraud, s hustler and liar yet defending/excusing Bush on spending is a fool’s errand.
Bush is the core reason we have Obama as he was the catalyst for the Tea Party. Anyone who doesn’t grasp that cold reality is delusional. Bush’s record along w/a complicit R Congress; on spending and government growth was beyond reckless.
the editorial quality of the WashPost has sunk to the lowest levels ever!
they even show their BIAS in their article’s very first sentence... indeed they REVEL in their bias (you’d think the editor would at least be careful to NOT show the bias, and especially not right at the very top of their articles)
Dear WashPost, your bias belongs in any editorial you may wish to print, NOT in the rest of the paper.
what a worthless, stinking propaganda rag!
If you look at the stats and filter out the crap this guy throws in, except for the money supply measure (M1), everything Trumpt said is absolutely true. You can quibble about start and end points and the rates of change, but they are non-the-less true.
“Bush did initiate TARP, but that was mostly paid back in full with interest, reducing the deficit in later years.”
I could be mistaken, but I’m pretty sure the left used TARP + the regular deficit to claim that Bush left Obama a trillion dollar deficit. If TARP were not instituted, the deficit would have been around $400B. Certainly not good, but not anywhere near $1T.
Now, as many have pointed out, TARP was a loan, not an entitlement program. However, it was applied to Bush’s final budget. Now, around that time, the Senate led by Dingy “Treadmill Eye” Harry and the House led by Pelosi seemed to have problems passing a budget.
As a result, Bush’s final budget was used in the years thereafter (which resulted in an additional $1T worth of deficit spending on top of the already sickening deficit spending ... Porkulus was another disaster that, I think, was used against Bush). This gave the Dems cover for all of the money they were blowing as they attributed the spending to Bush.
I can’t look up everything right now, but I believe that is what the Dems were doing to keep their pockets lined during the early days of his majesty’s reign of pain. Any decrease in the annual budget has been due to TARP paybacks, the spending cuts demanded by Republicans, and anemic economic growth (which Obama fought tooth and nail, but, of course, takes credit for any deficit reductions).
As for GM, it wasn’t a “GM” bailout ... it was a bailout for the UAW. The bailout did nothing to fix GM. It only kept the UAW in control of GM. No underlying problems have been fixed. They should have let GM collapse. Their assets would have fallen into more capable hands.
There certainly would have been short term pain as job loss would have been high, but many, if not all of those employees would have been hired by the new companies that would have formed from the ashes of GM.
Instead, Obama did everything he could to retard progress so that his buddies at the UAW could maintain their lavish lifestyles ripping off the GM employees and company at large.
Seems his go to excuse is, It started under Bush..... as though 8 years of Obama has no liability for things...
Its garbage excuses like always.
Bush has a lot more in common with Hillary than Trump.
“Is anyone seriously questioning the federal debt going up under Obama...”
Well, yes. I keep running into idiots - online and in person - who honestly believe the federal debt is SMALLER than it was under Bush. I think they believe this because they mistakenly that Obama’s oft repeated claim that he has slowed the growth of the debt is the same as having reduced the debt. Kind of like how liberals were dumb enough to believe a cut in PROJECTED INCREASE for a government program was the same thing as an ACTUAL CUT in the program.
You have to take into consideration that Pelosi took over in 2006.
Surprised?
The author says the provenance of the charts is unclear yet he lists the source under every graph. Mostly the Federal Reserve. Does he not know what ‘provenance’ means?
Thanks to the acceptance of leftist fake and snarky news programs, like the Daily Show, and the rise of Buzzfeed, Vox, and HuffPo....which are just the same, these old rot publications think it is now safe to write like those outlets.
Actually the economy follows a 2 year lag of who controls Congress. The Uni party though, may be changing the history on that to steady decline.
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.