And over the last four years, the deficit has gone up, but ninety percent of that is as a consequence of two wars that weren’t paid for, as a consequence of tax cuts that weren’t paid for, a prescription drug plan that was not paid for, and then the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Two wars not paid for? That’s why Obama started a third war in Libya, to replace Gaddafi with thugs who kill our ambassador?

You don’t “pay for” tax cuts. Tax cuts bring less money into the Government, and you have to CUT SPENDING to match your revenues. That’s the whole point of tax cuts–leave more money to people and businesses, so they can create jobs and get people off the dole.

A (Medicare) prescription drug plan not paid for? So you add on ObamaCare which costs many times more, and rob Medicare of $716 billion to “pay for” ObamaCare, and push Grandma over the cliff?

The worst economic crisis since the Great Depression? Hardly. The banks have paid back most of their TARP money, but people can’t find jobs because ObamaCare and all the new regulations and the “war on energy” are PREVENTING the recovery.

Kroft did not even call Obama on talking “deficit” when the question was about “debt”.

Yep, that was another point I meant to mention.

Now, can you imagine if Kroft or anyone dared to call teh Owe on something like mixing up debt and deficit?

Owe is busy. There’s redistribution, building businesses, buying auto manufacturers, selling Volts for half price, buying votes with executive orders, Letterman, the View, defaming Romney, raising campaign money, pandering to his base, Pimp with a limp, and other bumps in the road.

He has to be deliberately confusing the two. But it’s also astoonishing that the reporter doesn’t call him on such an obvious obsfuscation. Oh WAIT!!!!!….this is CBS!

Someone will explain what he meant on the Sunday talking heads.

Oh really? So where is GWB’s will? Where are the probate proceedings? Nothing? That’s right, you chose to run for president, you chose to accept the DNC nomination, you chose to accept the results of the general election, you chose to take the oath of office (twice). You didn’t inherit anything, you sad-sack loser.

Nutstuyu on September 25, 2012 at 10:32 AM

THIS.

You ASKED for the job, you GOT the job. THIS IS THE JOB.

Now STFU and DO IT!!!

If it’s bad – It’s someone elses fault.

The six-year-old in chief.

From R-R-R FY 2007 deficit of < $161 Billion
To D-D-2/3D FY 2009 deficit of > $1,412 Billion

In just two years. And Dems want to blame that all on Bush.

Tax cuts that weren’t paid for? What does that even mean?

LASue on September 25, 2012 at 8:16 AM

You know, like in Obummer’s old Chicago neighborhood, where you get your 40 and just walk out without throwing down the benjamins, and the those racist cop pigs harass you just ‘cuz yo black.

I inherited the biggest deficit in our history

Oh really? So where is GWB’s will? Where are the probate proceedings? Nothing? That’s right, you chose to run for president, you chose to accept the DNC nomination, you chose to accept the results of the general election, you chose to take the oath of office (twice). You didn’t inherit anything, you sad-sack loser.

The worst deficit from when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency was FY 2004, when:
(Receipts 1.88 Trillion) – (Outlays 2.29 Trillion) = Deficit 0.41 Trillion

And the worst deficit from when Democrats controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency(*) was FY 2009, when:
(Receipts 2.10 Trillion) – (Outlays 3.51 Trillion) = Deficit 1.41 Trillion

The problem wasn’t the 2003 Bush Tax Cuts.
The problem was the FY 2009 spending, passed by the Nancy Pelosi House, Harry Reid Senate, and a majority of the spending signed by Obama in 2009 (with only a minority of the spending signed by Bush in the last three months of 2008). Things like the 2nd half of TARP were requested by Bush AT OBAMA’s SPECIFIC REQUEST. And the “stimulus” and “Cash for Clunkers” were 100% Democrat initiatives in FY 2009.

They fully intended to run up spending as high as they possibly could in FY 2009, and then BLAME THAT ALL ON BUSH and set that level of spending as their new “baseline”!

OBAMA: When I came into office, I inherited the biggest deficit in our history. And over the last four years, the deficit has gone up, but ninety percent of that is as a consequence of two wars that weren’t paid for, as a consequence of tax cuts that weren’t paid for, a prescription drug plan that was not paid for, and then the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Obama came into office in Washington, D.C. as a U.S. Senator on January 3, 2005.

Obama became part of the majority party in Washington, D.C. when the Democrats took control of the House and Senate on January 3, 2007.

Obama and his fellow Democrats inherited a GOOD economy from the Republicans on January 3, 2007. And while revenues had gone down in FY 2001, down again in FY 2002, and down again in FY 2003, as a result of the Dot Com bust, 9/11/2001 Islamic Jihadist terrorist attacks, and two wars, the 2003 Bush Tax Cuts turned both employment and revenues around, such that by FY 2007, revenues were up an amazing 44% over FY 2003 revenues!

For employment numbers, use the Employment-population ratio: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000
For Revenue numbers, use: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z1.xls

Let’s look at the Employment-population ratio in the last month of each Fiscal Year (September) from 2000 onward:

Year Employment-population ratio in September
2000 64.2
2001 63.5
2002 63.0
2003 62.0
2004 62.3
2005 62.8
2006 63.1
2007 62.9
2008 61.9
2009 58.7
2010 58.5
2011 58.4
2012 58.3 (August 2012)

And let’s look at Receipts (Revenues) from 2000 onward:

Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (–): 1789–2017

Year Total Receipts (in millions of dollars)
2000 2,025,191
2001 1,991,082
2002 1,853,136
2003 1,782,314
2004 1,880,114
2005 2,153,611
2006 2,406,869
2007 2,567,985
2008 2,523,991
2009 2,104,989
2010 2,162,724
2011 2,303,466
2012 2,468,599 (estimate)

Starting with Fiscal Year 2000, note how both employment and revenues went DOWN in FY 2001, DOWN again in FY 2002, and DOWN again in FY 2003. That’s the effect of the Dot Com bust and the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

But the Bush Tax Cuts turned the economy around. Note how both employment and revenues went UP in FY 2004, UP again in FY 2005, UP again in FY 2006, and while employment dropped slightly in 2007, revenues were UP again that year.

The Bush Tax Cuts improved employment and improved revenues… Revenues in FY 2007 were 44% larger than FY 2003 revenues!

It wasn’t until the Democrats took majority control of the House and Senate, in January 2007, that the economy really started to tank. The Democrats have been in majority control (holding 2+ out of 3 of the House, Senate and Presidency) for 5.5 years, and they spent the first half of that driving the economy in the ditch and the second half of that leaving the economy in the ditch.

If the Bush Tax Cuts are allowed to expire, and tax rates go up, both jobs and revenue will be lost. We will have lower employment (higher unemployment) and lower revenues.

To allow the Bush Tax Cuts to expire would be irresponsible.

And Obama cannot honestly claim that annual deficits went up “as a consequence of tax cuts that weren’t paid for”, when the truth is that revenues went UP significantly (44% in just 4 years) after the passage of the 2003 Bush Tax Cuts.

=============================================

Again according to http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist01z1.xls,

The worst deficit of the R-R-R House-Senate-Presidency was FY 2004, when
Total Receipts were 1.88 Trillion,
Total Outlays were 2.29 Trillion,
and Total Deficit was 0.41 Trillion
——————————————————

The second part of the Bush Tax Cuts were signed in 2003, and Revenues went UP, not down, but spending under the D-D-D House-Senate-Presidency skyrocketed and by FY 2009,
Total Receipts were 2.10 Trillion,
Total Outlays were 3.51 Trillion,
and Total Deficit was 1.41 Trillion
——————————————————

In FY 2009, the Democrat majority produced the worst deficit in the history of this nation … more than 3 times the size (nearly 3.5 times the size) of the worst deficit of the Republican-majority years, FY 2004.

And while the Democrats want to blame deficits on the Bush Tax Cuts, the Bush Tax Cuts INCREASED revenue, and the FY 2009 deficit wasn’t the result of lower revenues (which even though lower than FY 2007 were still 12% larger than the FY 2004 revenues 5 years earlier).

The FY 2009 deficit was the result of spending that was 53% larger than it had been just 5 years earlier!

That outrageous explosion of deficit spending, done by the Democrat majority, led to a FY 2009 deficit that was more than triple the largest deficit of the Republican majority years!

Too bad it isn’t the electoral map – yet!

http://hillbuzz.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Screen-Shot-2012-09-25-at-3.10.12-AM.png?cda6c1

Speaking of legislative majorities, which party controlled Congress the two years previous to Obama’s election as President? Why, it was the Democrats. Who passed that budget that Obama “inherited”? The Democrat-controlled House and Senate — including a Senator named Barack Obama. And which President signed it into force with an omnibus spending bill in March 2009? Obama did, which means he inherited the budget and its deficit from himself.

I wish more people would bring this up when some lying Democrat talks about the inherited deficit from Bush. Obama and his party own the last 6 years and when you compare unemployment, gas, deficit, etc… from six years ago the numbers are staggering!

Obama did, which means he inherited the budget and its deficit from himself.

it speaks for itself, comment not required.

TRANSCRIPT:

TRANSCRIPT: Mitt Romney Delivers Remarks to the Clinton Global Initiative

9:27 am ET September 25, 2012
*******************************

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/09/25/transcript-mitt-romney-delivers-remarks-to-the-clinton-global-initiative/

canopfor on September 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/09/25/transcript-mitt-romney-delivers-remarks-to-the-clinton-global-initiative/

‘tax cuts that weren’t paid for’…this man is an idiot…

jimver on September 25, 2012 at 8:37 AM

…but doesn’t it make you ‘face palm’ WHILE you are laughing?…I keep thinking HARVARD…the JugEarred dope and HARVARD!

Live

Video: Romney delivers remarks at Clinton Global Initiative

http://www.breakingnews.com/

canopfor on September 25, 2012 at 9:09 AM