We Americans are much better informed these days, and while your numbers may be accurate, you failed miserably to account for inflation and any increase in the gdp. I can only surmise that you disincluded this information in order to skew the numbers to your advantage.We call this lying. It is intended to make folks believe something that is not true. We Americans do not approve of lying. The deficit has gone down, compared to the gdp after the Presidents first term,when he inherited two wars. If you want Americans to read your printed word, then you should not lie. This message is presented to you by another American that is tired of being lied to.
Dear Angry Reader,
I would not reference GDP under Obama; it has been miserable, hovering at or below 2% as the economy has not been able to grow enough to employ new would-be workers, which explains the chronic 7%+ unemployment rate that has become under Obama the new normal. Only by keeping interest rates at 2% (and much less for passbook holders), can the federal government service the enormous, and growing, debt.
You give the game away with the serial use of the projective word “lying”—given that your entire argument is both misleading and disingenuous, and can be proven so without a resort to your sort of ad hominem invective.
This year the deficit has gone down only because of sequestration, which, although it was Obama’s original idea, he thought the Congress would never actually implement and so flipped and opposed it. Like the case of increased gas and oil production, the president is now taking credit for a reduced deficit despite rather than because of his efforts. Second, you did not refute my main points at all: the president after two terms is on schedule to have increased the national debt more than have all prior presidents combined. Second, the deficit has gone down to about a projected $660 billion, which in any other administration would be considered scandalous—and by the likes of Obama himself who called George W. Bush’s much smaller deficits “unpatriotic.” Bush’s irresponsible spending now seems sober in comparison to Obama’s.
Reducing the deficit by $400 billion through congressionally mandated cuts to a figure of two-thirds of a trillion dollars is proof of continued fiscal negligence, not sobriety. If you are, in fact, tired of being lied to ask, then consider: the president when campaigning promised to half the deficit in his first term. Instead he doubled it, and kept it at roughly that unsustainable level for the next four years until the 2010 elections eventually led to forced cuts this current year. He said the red ink was a result of a bad economy and two wars. Yet when the economy was said to be recovering, and when Iraq was over and Afghanistan winding down, and when sequestration mandated vast cuts, the annual deficit still is nearly $700 billion.
Why? Out-of-control entitlement spending, vast expansions in the size of the federal government, impending Obamacare, and a still feeble economy: in other words, presidential disingenuousness appears at every turn in matters of the causes of the serial Obama deficits.
You enjoy employing the word “lie” and its many forms. Therefore consider how Obama promised the following: the Affordable Care Act would lower premiums and deductibles, be a one-touch easy online process like Amazon.com
buying, not affect existing health care plans or doctor selection, help to reduce the deficit, make businesses more competitive, and be popular with users. Every one
of those assertions was untrue, and they are now being proven as such—which is why increasing numbers of Democrats are fleeing from the program before the upcoming 2014 election.
This message is presented to you by another American that is tired of being lied to. Indeed!