It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 5:26 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 6:45 pm 
Offline
Forum Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:48 pm
Posts: 16892
Location: (M) Processing.
FIGURES DON'T LIE: DEMOCRATS DO
May 23, 2012


It's been breaking news all over MSNBC, liberal blogs, newspapers and even The Wall Street Journal: "Federal spending under Obama at historic lows ... It's clear that Obama has been the most fiscally moderate president we've had in 60 years." There's even a chart!

I'll pause here to give you a moment to mop up the coffee on your keyboard. Good? OK, moving on ...

This shocker led to around-the-clock smirk fests on MSNBC. As with all bogus social science from the left, liberals hide the numbers and proclaim: It's "science"! This is black and white, inarguable, and why do Republicans refuse to believe facts?

Ed Schultz claimed the chart exposed "the big myth" about Obama's spending: "This chart -- the truth -- very clearly shows the truth undoubtedly." And the truth was, the "growth in spending under President Obama is the slowest out of the last five presidents."

Note that Schultz also said that the "part of the chart representing President Obama's term includes a stimulus package, too." As we shall see, that is a big, fat lie.

Schultz's guest, Reuters columnist David Cay Johnston confirmed: "And clearly, Obama has been incredibly tight-fisted as a president."

Everybody's keyboard OK?

On her show, Rachel Maddow proclaimed: "Factually speaking, spending has leveled off under President Obama. Spending is not skyrocketing under President Obama. Spending is flattening out under President Obama."

In response, three writers from "The Daily Show" said, "We'll never top that line," and quit.

Inasmuch as this is obviously preposterous, I checked with John Lott, one of the nation's premier economists and author of the magnificent new book with Grover Norquist: Debacle: Obama's War on Jobs and Growth and What We Can Do Now to Regain Our Future.

(I'm reviewing it soon, but you should start without me.)

It turns out Rex Nutting, author of the phony Marketwatch chart, attributes all spending during Obama's entire first year, up to Oct. 1, to President Bush.

That's not a joke.

That means, for example, the $825 billion stimulus bill, proposed, lobbied for, signed and spent by Obama, goes in ... Bush's column. (And if we attribute all of Bush's spending for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and No Child Left Behind to William Howard Taft, Bush didn't spend much either.)

Nutting's "analysis" is so dishonest, even The New York Times has ignored it. He includes only the $140 billion of stimulus money spent after Oct. 1, 2009, as Obama's spending. And he's testy about that, grudgingly admitting that Obama "is responsible (along with the Congress) for about $140 billion in extra spending in the 2009 fiscal year from the stimulus bill."

Nutting acts as if it's the height of magnanimity to "attribute that $140 billion in stimulus to Obama and not to Bush ..."

On what possible theory would that be Bush's spending? Hey -- we just found out that Obamacare's going to cost triple the estimate. Let's blame it on Calvin Coolidge!

Nutting's "and not to Bush" line is just a sleight of hand. He's hoping you won't notice that he said "$140 billion" and not "$825 billion," and will be fooled into thinking that he's counting the entire stimulus bill as Obama's spending. (He fooled Ed Schultz!)

The theory is that a new president is stuck with the budget of his predecessor, so the entire 2009 fiscal year should be attributed to Bush.

But 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. Marketwatch's Nutting says that's Bush's spending.

Obama also spent the second half of the Troubled Asset Relief Fund (TARP). These were discretionary funds meant to prevent a market meltdown after Lehman Brothers collapsed. By the end of 2008, it was clear the panic had passed, and Bush announced that he wouldn't need to spend the second half of the TARP money.

But 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.

There are other spending bills that Obama signed in the first quarter of his presidency, bills that would be considered massive under any other president -- such as the $40 billion child health care bill, which extended coverage to immigrants as well as millions of additional Americans. These, too, are called Bush's spending

Frustrated that he can't shift all of Obama's spending to Bush, Nutting also lowballs the spending estimates during the later Obama years. For example, although he claims to be using the White House's numbers, the White House's estimate for 2012 spending is $3.795 trillion. Nutting helpfully knocks that down to $3.63 trillion.

But all those errors pale in comparison to Nutting's counting Obama's nine-month spending binge as Bush's spending.

If liberals will attribute Obama's trillion-dollar stimulus bill to Bush, what won't they do?

COPYRIGHT 2012 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 7:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Posts: 3788
Location: The West and the Muslim world will never share the same values
It used to be the Dhimmicrats would wait a suitable time (as in all the major participants were dead) before modifying/falsifying history. Good thing I had a firm grip on my iPhone when I read the column. I think Obama is a Bermuda Triangle version of Pinocchio. Each time he or his acolytes tells a lie his ears, not his nose, grow larger.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2012 10:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:49 am
Posts: 16676
Location: MI
LINK
Nice shootin' Tex!! :draw:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/
http://www.usdebtclock.org/2008.html (not all attributable to Obama, but to say he's slowing down spending is a distortion at best). It's like saying he's only asking to spend $1.3 trillion more than what the federal government takes in compared to $279.3 Billion in 2008. That doesn't look like a decrease in the rate of spending to me.

Maybe he projected that he was going to spend $1.5 Trillion more than the federal government takes in and then reduced it to $1.3 Trillion more and called that a reduction in the rate of increase in spending. That's like Democrats projecting in 2000 that the economy and federal revenues were going to skyrocket forever and declaring a surplus and racing to spend the money before they even had it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 5:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 8:45 am
Posts: 3781
Location: In Cincinnati, working the plan to undo everything Barack Obama's wrecking crew has done.
Ann, what could anyone add to this? It's perfect.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 6:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:03 pm
Posts: 1128
Location: Eastern Missouri
[Testing keyboard...now.]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 6:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:36 am
Posts: 1328
Let's see, there was a 5.8 trillion deficit when he came into office 3 years and four months ago and there's a 16 trillion dollar deficit now (18 trillion if you count SS). Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't he nearly tripled the deficit of the last sixty years? The really amazing thing about this is that I work with masters degrees and PHDs and they can't understand how I know that Obama has brought us to an economic calamity. Fact: with this deficit, no economic recovery is possible. It is no different than doing a household budget. If you keep spending more money than you have available to pay your debts then you will get into a trap where you can't pay anymore. Lies don't change the math whether democrats understand or want to understand the math.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 8:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 2:16 pm
Posts: 128
Location: Montana
What will history report about liberal-robots of our time?

How about a brave new world!

"Students...chapter 13 of your history text shows the that liberal journalists of the Obama era were a monolithic, rudderless group who understood that creating chaos and confusion has sometimes led to temporary control of a society."


Naaaa, your probably right. That will never happen...will it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QUQ1h-edo0


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 26, 2012 10:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 10:40 am
Posts: 2199
Thanks Ann for watching MSNBC for us, thereby exposing this drivel for the world to see. You're definately looking out for us.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2012 11:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 8:28 pm
Posts: 2
With one thing, I must agree with Obama's figure that his administration spending is the lowest since Eisenhower days. I agree with Obama only because the dollar is now worth less than any predecessor; making the spending of trillions of dollars less proportional per expense per figure than in the Eisenhower days. For example, during Eisenhower a senior was able to use social security to supplement their living expenses, in these days a senior cannot even pay their rent with social security. The same precedent goes to all federal wages of what an employee earns an hour being worth less per figure, with the lowest purchasing power ever. A person has to spend at least two hours of wages per day just to get to work. So Obama is right, his spending sheets are so low that even if the actual numbers exceed many presidents of the past 60 years combined, because the dollar he spends per figure is worth less by a wide margin to any previous president in the history of the United States.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2012 11:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 11:35 am
Posts: 10476
A math teacher once told the class I was in, "Figures don't lie but liars figure." It means that liars can create legitimate math formulas to get the desired results they want.

So Obama, who everyone knows lies about the statistics he puts out can just show the math as legitimate. . .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2012 3:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 8:28 pm
Posts: 2
Quote:
A math teacher once told the class I was in, "Figures don't lie but liars figure." It means that liars can create legitimate math formulas to get the desired results they want.

So Obama, who everyone knows lies about the statistics he puts out can just show the math as legitimate. . .


Democratic candidates are experts in telling the audience whatever they want to hear just to get the audiences vote. I say that even though I have been a democrat all my life because I have seen this time and time again that when it comes to election season the democrats mobilize, organize, tell you what you want to hear, as soon as election is over they forget your name and who you are.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2012 11:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:28 pm
Posts: 766
Quote:
Bush had been chopping brush in Texas for two months


:ha:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2012 1:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 6:27 pm
Posts: 4795
Location: Circling the monetary black hole
So, not passing a budget has worked to restrain spending.

Yea. That makes sense.

[/sarcasm]


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group