[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

No I meant "shaping up" to mean "forming". Obama walked into the Presidency fully aware of the challenge before him. He hasn't been up to the task.

By what criteria?
'Things still suck therefore it's Obama's fault' is intellectually lazy.

Would a McCain Presidency have kept unemployment under 8% while reducing the deficit? Would a Clinton Presidency have spent the stimulus money better? How would we know if he was up to the task? What criteria are you using?

edit - open question to everyone in this thread that think Obama is failing

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I said earlier that Obama was responsible for unemployment going above 8%. He borrowed nearly a trillion dollars which future tax payers will be responsible for with the promise that this cash would keep unemployment under 8%. He was wrong and looking back it appears that much of it was ill spent with no chance of correcting the course of the economy.

He was wrong about staying under 8%. Also, economists have revised their analysis of the recession to reflect that it was far worse than they had anticipated.
(my link in post 350 supports this claim)

But your last sentence is a non-sequitur.
Obama being wrong about the unemployment number is not evidence that he wasted the money (ignoring the presumption that it was he who decided where to spend it all) nor that the economy has no chance of correcting. One is not evidence of the other.

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Bush provided a budget to be voted on for every year he was in office. Sure he asked for money above the budget for the war and other expenses. That is far better than Obama operating without any budget at all. Some of Bush's faviourite social programs included: Aids drugs for Africa, Katrina relief and the formation Homeland Security.

Bush didn't include Iraq or Afganistan in his budget, nor did he include his prescription drug program. Bush's budget was baloney.

And using the lack of a budget as a criticism of Obama is the kind of "screw 'em all" attitude that congressional intransigence is hoping for. The budget is under the pervue of Congress.

Here is Obama's 2012 budget if you're interested. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

How come does your chart show continuous if not slightly increasing war expenditures into 2019 when the largest of the 2 conflicts was winding down when Obama came into office? How do they know that so much future revenue will be lost without knowing the shape of the economy? Also, if the future economy is so rosy wouldn't the increased revenues from the current tax rates eat up a lot of the deficit? For that matter why show non taxed income as part of the deficit? It isn't unless you believe the government has some sort of right to it.

I assume the debt + interest, I'm not really sure.
Projections have limited usefulness, but if we cut the graph off at the point where data is (somewhat) finalized then the underlying point remains:

Bush's policies, including the financial crisis, are the most obvious reason for the current state of the economy.

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

...the Bush tax cuts are about to expire.

I'll believe it when I see it.

Is any of this supposed to support your claim that Obama is responsible for media bias? Or the Tea Party? (344)