PDA

View Full Version : Obama big government huh?



nick1
08-13-2012, 08:43 PM
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

phinfan3411
08-14-2012, 12:01 AM
You are a few months late in this forum, nice try by you though, huh?

Do you, in your wildest dreams, believe this sounds right?

Well, it isn't.

Tetragrammaton
08-14-2012, 12:18 AM
You are a few months late in this forum, nice try by you though, huh?

Do you, in your wildest dreams, believe this sounds right?

Well, it isn't.

Why are you being so rude to the guy for not following the inner workings of a part of a football forum?

Part of the reason the growth is a little skewed is because of just how much spending went on near the end of the Bush Administration. But yes, the Republicans who yell about Obama being such a big spender are pretty ludicrous. A lot of the growth is due to entitlements that are outside of the normal functions of the Presidency.

phinfan3411
08-14-2012, 09:22 AM
You want to talk about how much Bush spent, and how that does not tie into a small government theme, I will be right with you.

My sarcasm is not tied up in the fact that he put this up after it has already been discussed, but more about how he worded it.

Funny to me, sorry, when somebody is so sure they have found some blatantly partisan piece that is right and will prove their devotion to this man is reasoned.

Im pretty sure last time it was brought up it was more like "is this right"?

nick1
08-14-2012, 09:34 AM
I'm sorry like tetra mentioned I don't look at this site all too often

But pertaining to the article, I did my research and thebudget numbers mentioned are correct. And the 2009 budget is under bushs watch. What's the dispute? Percentage wise he is rather conservative with his spending increases

phinfan3411
08-14-2012, 09:39 AM
Also, right or wrong, if you do not know by now I tend to make anti partisanship posts, I don't know, that's just what I do.

Partisanship sucks.

nick1
08-14-2012, 10:25 AM
I would like to see a 3rd candidate for sure just in general

Eshlemon
08-14-2012, 01:18 PM
As posted on previous thread...


..FACT CHECK: Obama off on thrifty spending claim
By ANDREW TAYLOR | Associated Press Sat, May 26, 2012..

WASHINGTON (AP) The White House is aggressively pushing the idea that, contrary to widespread belief, President Barack Obama is tightfisted with taxpayer dollars. To back it up, the administration cites a media report that claims federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since the Eisenhower years.

http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-obama-off-thrifty-spending-claim-231221900.html

nick1
08-14-2012, 04:08 PM
Check your facts

nick1
08-14-2012, 04:10 PM
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/

Eshlemon
08-14-2012, 05:18 PM
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/

From your link...



UPDATE, May 31, 2012

While we have already shared some of the critiques of this fact-check in a previous follow-up story, critics have since noted that two of our fellow fact checkers -- the Washington Post Fact Checker and the Associated Press -- offered more negative rulings on related claims.

The Fact Checker addressed the apparent discrepancy succinctly in a follow-up column, saying "we did not evaluate the same thing."

There’s a widespread misconception that we gave a Mostly True rating to Rex Nutting’s MarketWatch column. After our original fact-check published, White House spokesman Jay Carney tweeted, "PolitiFact backs MarketWatch analysis of federal spending under POTUS & predecessors." Many conservative bloggers read our fact-check the same way, as they attacked us.

The assumption made by both sides is wrong. We examined at a Facebook post



A review over a facebook page is not the same as a review of the Forbes article which Politifact will have to apparantely try to explain again to both democrats positively and republicans negatively is getting traction again.

nick1
08-14-2012, 06:58 PM
ok I do apologize the numbers were off but I still think the main idea is true which is that spending has increased at the 2nd or 3rd lowest rate out of the presidents

"That’s quite a bit larger than Nutting’s $140 billion, but by our calculations, it would only raise Obama’s average annual spending increase from 1.4 percent to somewhere between 3.4 percent and 4.9 percent. That would place Obama either second from the bottom or third from the bottom out of the 10 presidents we rated, rather than last."

---------- Post added at 06:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:57 PM ----------

so for republicans to paint him as worse then Bush is ludacris

CashInFist
08-14-2012, 08:25 PM
Obama is BIG GOVERNMENT, thanks for shedding light on the subject.

Eshlemon
08-15-2012, 01:53 AM
ok I do apologize the numbers were off but I still think the main idea is true which is that spending has increased at the 2nd or 3rd lowest rate out of the presidents

"That’s quite a bit larger than Nutting’s $140 billion, but by our calculations, it would only raise Obama’s average annual spending increase from 1.4 percent to somewhere between 3.4 percent and 4.9 percent. That would place Obama either second from the bottom or third from the bottom out of the 10 presidents we rated, rather than last."

---------- Post added at 06:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:57 PM ----------

so for republicans to paint him as worse then Bush is ludacris

No problem, its all about how you want to spin your numbers anyhow, for instance...


One common way to measure federal spending is to compare it to the size of the overall U.S. economy. That at least puts the level into context, helping account for population growth, inflation and other factors that affect spending. Here’s what the White House’s own budget documents show about spending as a percentage of the U.S. economy (gross domestic product):

2008: 20.8 percent
2009: 25.2 percent
2010: 24.1 percent
2011: 24.1 percent
2012: 24.3 percent
2013: 23.3 percent

Whether or not Bush or Obama spent more is just a political pissing match, both spent a crap load of money. Its like fat guys squabbling over whos the fattest by 5 pounds...when both are over 350.