Obama Blames His Three Year Long Borrowing And Spending Spree On The US

August 06, 2011
Obama: US ‘Must Do Better’ After Credit Downgrade


No matter how many speeches he makes, the conclusion is clear: Obama’s greatest failure is spending America into enormous deficits, and being clueless about how to get the economy to recover.  His speeches, riddled with “I” and “We” are mostly serving to indict him for his failings.  Appearing on TV more than any other sitting president, Barack Obama is constantly “explaining” why things aren’t working, when he should be working on what to do different and better.

Instead he is “campaigning,” which is the only thing he knows how to do reasonably well.  But he can’t fix the economy; he has neither the experience nor the knowhow to do it.  His failed, misguided policies have only exacerbated the size of his mistakes and shortcomings.


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to Obama Blames His Three Year Long Borrowing And Spending Spree On The US

  1. Brian says:

    Really, we’re screwed here…the Repubs wanna basically destroy our economy for a monarchy, while the Dems panic when they have to cut even a bit of spending. This whole mess was a 3 decade process, when the Reagan wave of deregulation and tax cuts gave rise to a financial sector which increased in size and power several times over, and their first goal was to basically destroy our manufacturing sector, when they figured out they could pay even more for themselves by hiring illegal immigrants for slave wages, demolishing the unions with no protection thanks to the likes of Greenspan and getting their new buddies in Washington to rewrite the tax code for them.

    • Republicans, monarchy? What are you talking about?

    • sunsettommy says:

      What about the housing crash.The one the Democrats set up so well from 1979?

    • Blade says:

      “the Repubs wanna basically destroy our economy for a monarchy …”

      Brian, why all of a sudden do you sound like Ill wind blowing aka Villabolo aka Terra Incognita aka Trollobolo aka trollobollo aka mecago aka enelcuno delatuya aka gaya hap

      Also consider that your statement:

      “… they figured out they could pay even more for themselves by hiring illegal immigrants for slave wages, demolishing the unions with no protection …”

      is schizophrenic since union leadership is mightily pro-illegal alien since it allows them to swell their ranks with non-thinking members. This is a marked change from the previous era of blue collar Teamsters and others that went for Reagan, kicked the crap out of the anti-american radicals in Chicago, and who would never tolerate 15 to 35 million illegal aliens ‘doing the jobs that Americans don’t want to do’.

      If you really are against illegal aliens invading the USA, you would not go near the Democratic Socialist party, ever. Yes, the slave analogy is a good one, since the (D)’s are in their traditional pro-slavery comfort zone.

      • That’s a good point. I know, and have known, quite well a good number of union members, union organizers, and even a few paid agitators for unions. Precisely 100% of them were and are entirely in favour of illegal immigrants to the United States being given full rights within the United States, and a vast majority of them actually argue for special recognition for illegal immigrants, including the right to vote without registering, the right to receive government monies without providing evidence of need, and the right (not privilege as most actual citizens have) to operate a motor vehicle (& in most cases without insurance or registration).

        In fact, I’ve never seen one single activity or statement by any union or union member indicating even the slightest inferred opposition to illegal immigration. To blame corporations in general (which isn’t an entity in any sense), or a political party that happens to be receiving virtually no money from the unions & racial supremacist organizations for the problem is disingenuous at best.

  2. sunsettommy says:

    What we need a is a lot of spending CUTS.

    Forget about raising taxes.It will not even be close to making up the deficit spending.We have had enough tax cuts.It is still to start a wave of spending CUTS.

    Leave the freaking tax levels alone.CUTTING SPENDING is the real solution.

    Also eliminate programs that have no business existing.

    • Jon P says:


      Federal spending has increased 14% in each of the last two years. We now spend $3.7 trillion per year $1.4 of that is borrowed.
      Eliminate the Bush tax cuts for those who make $250k+ a year, that only adds $70 billion in revenue (CBO). Eliminate all the 2001,2003 tax cuts would only add $370 billion revenue. And nobody is advocating for that, yet we would still be over $1 trillion short to balance the annual budget.

      The last “deal” to raise the debt ceiling is a joke, it only lowers the rate of spending increases. So instead of having a $24 trillion debt in 10 years we will have $22 trillion in debt. And it’s first year, 2012 is just sad, only reduces spending by $25 billion out of a $3.7 trillion budget! And Dem/Libs are crying that this reduction in spending is going to hurt the economy.

      Those are the facts and numbers. Anyone who thinks we do not have a spending problem is, what shall I say, mistaken. Any more stupid, like the 1st comment, I might be less charitable in my description of the misguided.

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

        Raising taxes does not increase revenue in the long run. Raising revenue through raising taxes is an economic flight of imagination from the political left.

    • Beano says:

      The ratings agencies agree with you.
      What part of this argument does Obami-the-won-can’t-do, not understand about this?

      In Australia it is well understood by the seasoned voters – blue and white collar – that the Liberal (socialist) governments create a financial mess and then a conservative government must be bought into power to clean the mess up. Socialist governments are voted in by younger unseasoned new voters who don’t understand the system.

  3. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    17 months left of Obamaworld.

    • Jon P says:

      I agree that raising taxes will not raise revenue, I was just pointing to those economically challeneged people on the left, even using fantasy CBO numbers about the Bush Tax Cuts, we still have a spending problem.

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:


        I did know that you meant that, and I should have said that in my comment. I was remissed to not have put that in it.

  4. Latitude says:

    Euro-Area Central Banks to Hold Crisis Call; G-7 Officials to Discuss Coordinated Action; Ratings of UK, France in Jeopardy; Meeting Agenda

    Euro-region central bank governors will hold emergency talks tomorrow aimed at stopping Spain and Italy from becoming the next victims of the sovereign debt crisis and limiting the market fallout from the first U.S. rating downgrade in history.


  5. Latitude says:

    It Just Went From Bad To Far, Far Worse As Germany Says Italy Is Too Big For EFSF To Save, Refuses To Carry Euro Bailout Burden


    • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:


      Rick Perry is the guy you want to be Pres, am I remembering that right?

      Here he is from this morning, 8/6/11:

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

        Him quoting from the Bible and praying is sure to make the political left squawk and kakkle their misinterpretation of the “separation of church and State”.

      • Jon P says:

        Here are a couple more right-wing extremists that did not enderstand the separation of church and state!


      • Squidly says:

        Except that, nowhere in ANY founding documents do the words “separation of church and state” exist. Not in our Constitution, not in the Declaration of Independence, not in the Federalist papers, nowhere.

        The 1st Amendment (to which most touting “church and state” are actually referring), is EXPRESSLY and PRECISELY designed to protect the individual FROM the state, NOT the other way around. There is NOTHING in any founding documents that protects the government from the church. None, notta, nill …

        Absolutely amazes me how so many people cannot seem to correctly interpret something so simple as the 1st amendment, or, they just spout bullshit to try to support their own twisted agenda.

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

        If I am remembering the number right 17 of the signers of the Constitution were seminary graduates. And the man called “The Father of the Founding Fathers”, John Locke, was a minister, a very intelligent one at that. Key Founding Fathers attended his church and listened to his sermons for years. He was a brilliant man. His sermons were not the hateful sermons of President Obama’s minster of 20 years. They were brilliantly thought out arguments on freedom, and law that were easy to understand.

        John Locke’s book, “The Second Treatise of Civil Government” is on audio on YouTube in 11 parts.

        Part 1

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

        All of the modern American beliefs about “separation of church and state” are intentionally perverted aberrations from the far left of politics, i.e., from communists/Marxists/socialists/power mongers.

      • Latitude says:

        “Rick Perry is the guy you want to be Pres, am I remembering that right?”

        AAM, It changes every day……

        Right now I just want a Pres with some whipass….
        I’m sick and tired of this nelly sissy we have now……….

  6. Phil Nizialek says:

    I think this is the same Brian who regularly posts progressive talking points on WUWT. Engaging him is useless, because he is tied to a script provided by the Daily Kos, and is incapable thinking for himself.

    That being said, tax reform, as opposed to tax increases, needs to be a part of any debt reduction package. It’s time the politicians stopped using the tax code as a means to push their pet projects, or nudge folks into makinf economic and social descisons based on the effect they will have on their taxes. Taxes should be the means by which government raises revenues to carry out its legitimate functions, not some means of funding of social experiments.

  7. Dan Zeise says:

    My wife and I reviewed our current financial condition as a family.
    We make $60,000 per year have $420,000 in debt and spend $90,000 per year.
    We can make ends meet if we cut our spending $30,000 over the next ten years.
    By 2021, we will only have $690,000 in debt.
    I believe that banks will have no problem lending to us.
    What can go wrong with our plan? Afterall, we will be cutting planned expenditures by $3,000 per year.

    • Independent says:

      You’re being a bit generous to our wise and powerful government. To better reflect reality, we should say you plan to spend $92,000 next year but just made a decision to actually only spend $91,975. The year after you had planned to spend $94,000, but instead you plan on spending just $93,940. And so on. Of course, you are hoping (and predicting) that your income increases, although you have no guarantee of that. You tell the bank you have made significant “cuts” in what you will spend, although most of them you’ll actually implement in 8 or 10 years. You also have $25 million in promises out there that are off the books.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s