is unbeliveable, he feeds us sh.t and we are supposed to eat it? Will he never learn that we THE PEOPLE are not stupid and see right through his empty suit?

MORE HUMAN THAN HUMAN !!!

As they say in the Navy, "stand by for heavy rolls" come November 2nd. 

Yes! Have some.

Obama and the rest of the leftists believe that if they say something often enough, it's the truth. Blame Bush, I, I, I, Blame Bush, I, I, I, Blame Bush, I, I, I.  What a load of horse manure this man is pushing around......  One thing that made me really sad was when he said, "I don't quit."  Please Mr. Obama, feel free.......

After the 2006 elections, the Dems controlled Congress and we had an unpopular lame duck Republican president.  The Dems effectively controlled the country at that point.  A fair media would assign sufficient blame to them for what has gone on in this country since 2007.  All we hear is "the last eight years";.  What a crock.  Most of Bush's term showed strong growth and low unemployment with a blossoming stock market.  Let's not forget the Dow reached 14,000 under Bush, and he was reelected in 2004.  Neither of those things would have happened if there was not confidence in the direction of the country at that time.  The "last eight years" is just a talking point concocted in some Democrats strategy session.  The media knows this, but they let the lies stand.

Annoy a liberal:  Work hard and be happy.

In Tuesday's release from the House Democrat's Committee on the Budget, titled CBO Forecasts Economic Recovery, Fiscal Challenges, it is so eloquently stated right from the top:

A year ago, the Bush Administration handed the Obama administration an economy in free fall and a federal budget with record deficits in place of the record surpluses that it had inherited.

In 2001, Republicans inherited a strong economy..

In 2001, the Bush administration inherited an economy in free fall. The dot.com economic bubble had crashed almost a year earlier, March, 2000, with the peak of the broad market being back in the turn, in 1997-98. Every single leading economic indicator had abruptly turned south long before the 2000 election. The country was heading into recession, thousands of companies were going out of business, and we were reeling from the exploding news of how much corruption and fraud had been a part of that bubble. Soon enough, we had to deal with the 9/11 catastrophe.

Once again, there was nothing Bush, or a Gore, could have done in 2001-2003 to keep the federal budget from going deep back into deficits, as most all of that shift from surplus to deficit was the fallout from the dot.com crash, resulting recession and the costs of, and to the economy from 9/11.  Bush's failure to control spending certainly added to the more permanent deficits - but one can only assume that Al Gore would have spent much more.

I say all of that, because President Obama, and many other D's are on record early on in this economic crash, in acknowledging that the root of the cause of the housing bubble which led to the crash were policies that were pushed by the progressive caucus - HUD's massive push to lower lending standards for sub-prime loans and marching orders to Fannie to provide $trillions in guaranteed loans to lower income Americans (targeting minorities). We are also often reminded that most of the regulatory issues which the D's whine about being the cause of this more recent economic crisis either were either the result of Clinton supported policy, the lack of action by the Clinton administration, or by the successful power to block wanted reforms by those in power during the Clinton years. See the Fontline production of "The Warning," which was shown recently on PBS, and ignored by the entire national MSM.

I just say all of this because I just don't recall President Bush, nor his team coming out day after day and finger pointing and blaming someone else for what they inherited. Politics is politics but this is getting out of hand.

I found the hypocrisy of President Obama last night to be of historical nature (Yea - put him on Mt. Rushmore - but label it "Blamer n' Chief"). He is by far the most partisan president I recall in my 57 years, yet he, in a STOTU address blames others for being too political. He suggests that the other side of the isle needs to work with him to reach compromise - even goes so far as to suggest that he might finally reach across the isle - but then, instructs the Democrats, in reminding them that they weld the power and control of the Congress, to just go ahead and run over the opposition party. He publically attacks the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Must I go on?

For a clear understanding of where this man's vision lies, look no further than his proposal to waive the repayment of college loans -- only for those who go to work for the government - not for those who want to go to work to produce something that produces the revenue to pay for that government!

Government. It is everything.

(;~/ gary

I wish everyone would stop using the term inherit. Like all others Obama "asked" for
the presidency well knowing the challenges of which he now fails.

really so george bush put on black face and snuck back into the white
house, snuggled up to nancy pelosi, chummed up to harry reid and and
signed away all that money. it really wasn’t obama that spent all that
money, it was all inherited from george bush. that’s the new liberal
progressive socialist definition for inherit.

lunaticcringeradio

why doesn't NPR have some tool make up a funny cartoon of "how speak obama" and have the person try to talk and then stammer and blurt out "B-B-B-B-BUSH'S FAULT! BUSH'S FAULT!!!!!!"

I hate the New York Times more than it hates the US Military

are people here NOT aware that bush ran huge deficits coupled with unfunded tax cuts that have long term effects? 

I don't agree with any spending items of obama, but to pretend that bush had no hand 09 jump in budget deficits shows ignorant partisanship.  

09 fiscal year started in october of 08 thus most of the budget projections are already set in place by late january of 09.

Just two policies dating from the Bush Administration — tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — accounted for over $500 billion of the deficit in 2009 and $7.1 trillion in 2009 through 2019, including the associated debt-service costs. These impacts easily dwarf the stimulus and financial rescues. Furthermore, unlike those temporary costs, these inherited policies (especially the tax cuts) do not fade away as the economy recovers.

One of the biggest mistakes people here make is that the tax cuts increased revenue and were "good" for the economy. this would be true if bush did not run budget deficits while cutting taxes, as well having to borrow RECORD amounts of money form China because we simply couldn't afford to pay for anything.   

Now obama is not going to make things any better obviously, probably worse. but let's not play this partisan game and pretend that bush ran the economy much better and has nothing to do with our current debt or the budget deficit of 2009 which jumped over a trillion dollars. remember he initiated TARP. 

 and back in 07 i argued on this site how deficits and debt were not good for the country. and Noel himself argued me with a bunch of figures and reasons why they aren't so bad...NOW all of sudden they are? could it be because it's a dem running a deficit now?  PURELY partisan.