Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Barack Obama. Thats who

[Tekkendo]

Your not forced to purchase insurance.

LMFAO....

[reelop19]

Only it isn't at all that way since our military is actually socialized unlike healthcare. Those who think our health care is socialized have no idea what they are talking about.

This is flat out idiotic. Military healthcare is so far from socialized medicine its ridiculous. Comparing the 2 is nonsense. Military gets free healthcare because its the least that can be done for people serving this country so that people like you can say stupid stuff. As soon as you're out no more free healthcare unless you develop some sort of disability while you are in and even then you might not get 100% of your care taken care of unless its severe. So serving your country and getting free healthcare is far different from being a leach on society or an illegal immigrant and reaping the rewards of a tax payer funded, bust of a healthcare system.

[reelop19]

Estimates to fund healthcare from the CBO are now at 2.7 trillion which is far more than the 900 billion Obama promised back when he was lying about it not being a tax. Every country who does socialized medicine is so deep in the red that I cannot believe idiots believe this will work.

[aberry33]

Bush spent money on two wars, prescription drugs, and TARP. Somehow Obama was able to still pile on a bit of an increase on top of that.

Derp.

I rarely get involved in these partisan threads, but was all of the money spent on that second war really necessary?

[ReclusiveSoldat]

I rarely get involved in these partisan threads, but was all of the money spent on that second war really necessary?

Not enough actually, if we wanted a job well done more boots on the ground was/is the view of Eric S.Shinseski, who quickly was shuttled out of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Sadly, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz prevailed, and the resulting Iraqi clusterf@ck is what we have today.

[porcupinetree]

What was the National Debt when Obama took office?
What is it now

What was unemployment at when Obama took office?
What is it now?

What did Obama promise?
That he would spend less and lower unemployment.
He also promised a booming economy.

He has not provided.
Know what happens to presidents who fail at economy? Ask Carter.

[goody1]

What was the National Debt when Obama took office?
What is it now

What was unemployment at when Obama took office?
What is it now?

What did Obama promise?
That he would spend less and lower unemployment.
He also promised a booming economy.

He has not provided.
Know what happens to presidents who fail at economy? Ask Carter.

All Bushs fault. Even the promises Obama made to fix all of those things were Bushs fault

[Tekkendo]

What was the National Debt when Obama took office?
What is it now

What was unemployment at when Obama took office?
What is it now?

What did Obama promise?
That he would spend less and lower unemployment.
He also promised a booming economy.

He has not provided.
Know what happens to presidents who fail at economy? Ask Carter.

[EctoCanuck]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-has-lowest-s/


For those of you too lazy to read the whole article here are the cliffs;




"So, using raw dollars, Obama did oversee the lowest annual increases in spending of any president in 60 years.

Here are the results using inflation-adjusted figures:

Average percentage increase per year
Johnson 1964 1969 6.3
George W. Bush 2001 2009 5.9
Kennedy 1961 1964 4.7
Carter 1977 1981 4.2
Nixon 1969 1975 3.0
Reagan 1981 1989 2.7
George H.W. Bush 1989 1993 1.8
Clinton 1993 2001 1.5
Obama 2009 2013 -0.1
Eisenhower 1953 1961 -0.5

So, using inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account."



So from now on you conservatards can stop saying Obama's spending is out of control because here is actual proof it isn't!!!

[leafs43]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-has-lowest-s/


For those of you too lazy to read the whole article here are the cliffs;




"So, using raw dollars, Obama did oversee the lowest annual increases in spending of any president in 60 years.

Here are the results using inflation-adjusted figures:

Average percentage increase per year
Johnson 1964 1969 6.3
George W. Bush 2001 2009 5.9
Kennedy 1961 1964 4.7
Carter 1977 1981 4.2
Nixon 1969 1975 3.0
Reagan 1981 1989 2.7
George H.W. Bush 1989 1993 1.8
Clinton 1993 2001 1.5
Obama 2009 2013 -0.1
Eisenhower 1953 1961 -0.5

So, using inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account."



So from now on you conservatards can stop saying Obama's spending is out of control because here is actual proof it isn't!!!

Quoting someone that is avoiding the facts.


Obama has outspent Bush by the barrel loads, yet thinking a rate decrease is the same as spending less.

[Stizzel]

I rarely get involved in these partisan threads, but was all of the money spent on that second war really necessary?

Theres no such thing as necessary government spending

[Stizzel]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-has-lowest-s/


For those of you too lazy to read the whole article here are the cliffs;




"So, using raw dollars, Obama did oversee the lowest annual increases in spending of any president in 60 years.

Here are the results using inflation-adjusted figures:

Average percentage increase per year
Johnson 1964 1969 6.3
George W. Bush 2001 2009 5.9
Kennedy 1961 1964 4.7
Carter 1977 1981 4.2
Nixon 1969 1975 3.0
Reagan 1981 1989 2.7
George H.W. Bush 1989 1993 1.8
Clinton 1993 2001 1.5
Obama 2009 2013 -0.1
Eisenhower 1953 1961 -0.5

So, using inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account."



So from now on you conservatards can stop saying Obama's spending is out of control because here is actual proof it isn't!!!

Was feeling embarassed for you, then noticed you're canadian. Carry on.

[EctoCanuck]

Obama has outspent Bush by the barrel loads..............

Please list the spending that is truly Obama's here and the amount or leave and never come back.

[wjs010]

Car A (Obama) is traveling at an acceleration of 2 m/s^2 at an initial velocity of infinity. Car b ( bush) is traveling at an acceleration of 6 m/s2 at an initial velocity of 100 m/s. if they travel for eight years, what is their final velocity ? V= (a)(t)+ Vo .

[leafs43]

Please list the spending that is truly Obama's here and the amount or leave and never come back.

lmao....







You're just embarrassing yourself.

[EctoCanuck]

lmao....







You're just embarrassing yourself.

1st)That chart does not list total spending just a percentage of GDP which can be affected by factors like inflation and recessions.Truly an example of the right grasping at straws.


2rd)I'm only gonna ask one more time retard.............list the actual programs initiated by Obama and their cost.


Here I'll show how.

Bush pushed PharmaCare through congress with no way to pay for it...................................hundreds of billions of dollars.

Bush gave rich tax cuts with no way to pay for it................................................ ................hundreds of billions of dollars.

Bush gave the rich another tax break............................................. ...................................hundreds of billions of dollars.

Bush ignored warnings that 9/11 was coming resulting in war in Afghanistan.........................hundreds of billions of dollars.

Bush claimed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq-WRONG................................ hundreds of billions of dollars.


Total cost the day Obama took office..................-$1.300,000,000,000 deficit and another $8,000,000,000,000 over the next ten years.

These numbers verified by 140 Republican Congressmen and Senators!

Now leafs43 where are your numbers to backup your claim??????

[Tekkendo]

I rarely get involved in these partisan threads, but was all of the money spent on that second war really necessary?

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998-Truth!
This was a quote from President Clinton during a presentation at the Pentagon defending a decision to conduct military strikes against Iraq.


"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear.
We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998-Truth!
Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on this occasion to be briefed by top military officials about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction.
His remarks followed that briefing.


"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998-Truth!
This is a quote from Albright during an appearance at Ohio State University by Albright, who was Secretary of State for Bill Clinton.


"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998-Truth!
This was at the same Ohio State University appearance as Madeline Albright.
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate,
air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998-Truth!
According to the U.S. Senate website, the text of this letter was signed by several Senators, both Democrat and Republican, including Senator John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.


"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998-Truth!
The text of this statement by Nancy Pelosi is posted on her congressional website.


"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999-Truth!
This was from an appearance Albright made in Chicago.
She was addressing the embargo of Iraq that was in effect at the time and criticism that it may have prevented needed medical supplies from getting into the country. Albright said, "There has never been an embargo against food and medicine. It's just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction, and palaces for his cronies."


"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001Truth!
The only letter with this quote from December 5, 2001 that we could find did not include the participation of Senator Bob Graham, but it was signed nine other senators including Democrat Joe Lieberman.
It urged President Bush to take quicker action against Iraq.


"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002-Truth!
These were remarks from Senator Levin to a Senate committee on that date.


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!
This and the quote below was part of prepared remarks for a speech in San Francisco to The Commonwealth Club.


"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002-Truth!


"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002-Truth!
Part of a speech he gave at Johns Hopkins.


"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002-Truth!
On the floor of the Senate during debate over the resolution that would authorize using force against Iraq.
He was urging caution about going to war and commented that even though there was confidence about the weapons in Iraq, there had not been the need to take military action for a number of years and he asked why there would be the need at that point.


"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002-Truth!
Senator Kerry's comments were made to the Senate as part of the same debate over the resolution to use force against Saddam Hussein.


"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Rockefeller's statements were a part of the debate over using force against Saddam Hussein.


"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Waxman's contribution to the Senate debate over going to war.


"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002-Truth!
Senator Clinton acknowledged the threat of Saddam Hussein but said she did not feel that using force at that time was a good option.


"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003-Truth!
In a speech to Georgetown University.

leaving Saddam there to restart his WMD programs must be a better idea huh?

[llcoolray3000]

1st)That chart does not list total spending just a percentage of GDP which can be affected by factors like inflation and recessions.Truly an example of the right grasping at straws.


2rd)I'm only gonna ask one more time retard.............list the actual programs initiated by Obama and their cost.


Here I'll show how.

Bush pushed PharmaCare through congress with no way to pay for it...................................hundreds of billions of dollars.

Bush gave rich tax cuts with no way to pay for it................................................ ................hundreds of billions of dollars.

Bush gave the rich another tax break............................................. ...................................hundreds of billions of dollars.

Bush ignored warnings that 9/11 was coming resulting in war in Afghanistan.........................hundreds of billions of dollars.

Bush claimed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq-WRONG................................ hundreds of billions of dollars.


Total cost the day Obama took office..................-$1.300,000,000,000 deficit and another $8,000,000,000,000 over the next ten years.

These numbers verified by 140 Republican Congressmen and Senators!

Now leafs43 were are your numbers to backup your claim??????

I'm confused. You're counting tax cuts as spending, but up thread some other guy said the tax cuts in the stimulus bill don't count as spending. Which is it?

[EctoCanuck]

I'm confused. You're counting tax cuts as spending, but up thread some other guy said the tax cuts in the stimulus bill don't count as spending. Which is it?

Are you holding me accountable for the words of someone else because I'm the one confused.



Surely leafs43 will come through with a total list of Obama's spending.

In the meantime I want you conservatards and born-again types to enjoy these memes.................

[llcoolray3000]

I'm not holding anyone accountable because this is the Internet and you all are nothing but experimental chat bots as far as I'm concerned. I'm just wondering if tax cuts are spending or not

[saloman]

Quoting someone that is avoiding the facts.


Obama has outspent Bush by the barrel loads, yet thinking a rate decrease is the same as spending less.

Can you name a president that spent less than his predecessor? What Obama has done is notable, which is lead the smallest increase in spending since Eisenhower. Relative to his peers, especially Republicans, Obama's spending record is very good and something that is completely ignored by the right-wing spin machine you spread around here.

Case in point:
Mitt Romney claims on his campaign website: �Since President Obama assumed office three years ago, federal spending has accelerated at a pace without precedent in recent history."

Flat out lie.

[badreligion]

The ad-hominems in this thread are laughable ....

[saloman]

I've managed to get negged by JUSA, ScubaStevo, and Meatie so far. Nice rebuttals ***gots.

btw JUSA, I went to neg you back but couldn't since I recently repped you since you said something reasonable. Too bad you are a partisan hack.

[ScubaStevo]

I've managed to get negged by JUSA and Meatie so far. Nice rebuttals ***gots.

btw JUSA, I went to neg you back but couldn't since I recently repped you since you said something reasonable. Too bad you are a partisan hack.

Let me add for false premise. Feel free to neg me back.

See, unlike a liberal, I am not going to piss and moan about people having more reps than me (just like they piss and moan about people having more money than they do).

[saloman]

Let me add for false premise. Feel free to neg me back.

See, unlike a liberal, I am not going to piss and moan about people having more reps than me (just like they piss and moan about people having more money than they do).

Let's face it. You neg because you lack intelligence to respond otherwise. That is why all three of you idiots did it. I negged you back in one of your threads where you were crying about how depressed you are btw.

[ScubaStevo]

Let's face it. You neg because you lack intelligence to respond otherwise. That is why all three of you idiots did it. I negged you back in one of your threads where you were crying about how depressed you are btw.

1. LMFAO at you spending the time to find a post I made just under three years ago during the peak of the economic meltdown (see, as a person who works for a living, the economy affects me). Strong life you must have.

2. You insult our intelligent when you can't even post a coherent, factual thread.

GTFO - we all know the only reason you are a liberal is because you want other peoples' money. Go earn it yourself for f*ck sakes. That is the bottom line.

[A-GAME]

1. LMFAO at you spending the time to find a post I made just under three years ago during the peak of the economic meltdown (see, as a person who works for a living, the economy affects me). Strong life you must have.

2. You insult our intelligent when you can't even post a coherent, factual thread.

GTFO - we all know the only reason you are a liberal is because you want other peoples' money. Go earn it yourself for f*ck sakes. That is the bottom line.

[nutsy54]

"So, using raw dollars, [b]Obama did oversee the lowest annual increases in spending of any president in 60 years.

Here's where the lie of your position is exposed: It starts counting Obama's increases after 2009, even though he presided over massive new spending the year he took office, almost all of which was under his signature. Not to mention the "bubble" of Stimulus spending, which of course fell off after its peak.

Here are the results using inflation-adjusted figures:

Average percentage increase per year
Obama 2009 2013 -0.1

So from now on you conservatards can stop saying Obama's spending is out of control because here is actual proof it isn't!!!

No, we'll just keep exposing your false claims, ignorance of history, and childish need to resort to name-calling when you don't get your way

[nutsy54]

Please list the spending that is truly Obama's here and the amount or leave and never come back.

If you don't understand that Barack Obama has signed every spending bill since 2009 (and voted For every one prior to that as a Senator), then why should the rest of us do your homework for you?

[saloman]

1. LMFAO at you spending the time to find a post I made just under three years ago during the peak of the economic meltdown (see, as a person who works for a living, the economy affects me). Strong life you must have.

Honestly I searched for your threads to neg you back, and you crying about depression was the first thing that came up on the list.

I won't disclose my identity but I am positive that you don't want to compare resumes with me, Stevie.

2. You insult our intelligent when you can't even post a coherent, factual thread.

You may not like the facts, but there they are.

GTFO - we all know the only reason you are a liberal is because you want other peoples' money. Go earn it yourself for f*ck sakes. That is the bottom line.

I'm rich. I own guns, and I'm pro life, and I voted for Bush and Obama. You don't know **** about me. You look like a jackass with your assumptions.

Dip****s like you take the indignant position that people who give a damn about the poor must be poor and looking for hand outs and makes you look like fools.