A wonderful example of concealing the truth beneath half-truths.
The highest Bush deficits (refer to the Whitehouse.gov website) were 2004 ($413 billion, due to Afghanistan and Iraq) and 2008 ($459 billion due mainly to the mortgage meltdown). We’ll argue below about assigning blame for those.
The first Obama deficit was 2009 ($1,413 billion, due partly to the recession but mainly to the $800 billion Stimulus bill). It is true that Obama’s deficits “decreased every year of his presidency”, as Ron says, but what Ron conceals is that they decreased from an historically unprecedented high to finish at a level ($585 billion) still higher than any deficit during the Bush terms or any president in our history. Obama added to the national debt an amount equal to the total from all previous presidents combined. Ron can attempt to conceal that fact, but can’t erase it.
Let me say that again clearly, the smallest Obama deficit was higher than the largest deficit of President Bush or any previous president. Would anyone get that from Ron’s post? I doubt it. As I say, a wonderful example of concealing the truth beneath half-truths.
Now no doubt Ron will want to claim that the deficits under Bush were due only to Bush’s policies while the deficits under Obama were inherited from Bush. That’s all we heard from Democrats during Obama’s term in office, it’s all Bush’s fault and Obama inherited all his problems.
In anticipation of that, here why that doesn’t wash. Bush’s deficits were partly due to the Middle East wars, which are fairly laid at his doorstep, but also due to the mortgage meltdown, which was caused mainly by policies enacted from 1992 to 1999. In 1992, zero US mortgages were liar loans; when Bush took office, already 1/4 of all US mortgages were liar loans. Bush inherited that. Two Democrats, Dodd and Frank, blocked all Bush’s attempts to reform Fannie and Freddie, so the situation kept getting worse. The meltdown and recession were bipartisan failures of both presidents, both Parties, and Congress. [Here’s a good summary from the Liberty Lawsite, and here’s a detailed account from a prior Chief Credit Officer of Fannie Mae.]
Obama’s deficits were partly due to huge spending increases from his futile attempts to stimulate the economy with Keynesian spending, and mostly due to his over-regulation which kept GDP growth below 2% annually, with correspondingly lower tax revenues and higher unemployment.
The other side of the deficit coin, spending, is similarly lopsided against Obama. Bush’s spending started at $2.0 trillion and ended at $3.0 trillion annually. Obama’s spending started at $3.5 trillion and ended at $3.9 trillion eight years later. (Remember that Bush was burdened by spending for the hot Iraq war, which was over when Obama took office. Obama spent the next three years telling us how peaceful Iraq was, to justify his withdrawal.) I don’t think Ron or any Democrat can tell us what we got for the extra trillion dollars Obama was spending each year, which caused the National Debt to rise by an average 1,200 billions per year every year Obama was in office.
Ron’s analysis just doesn’t stand up to the facts.