So let me see if I get this article straight. (not just your single opinion Foxylynx) I'll use a little analogy here to simplify for all the readers. Let's say I'm nothing more than a post grad college student that has never found any real success on my own. In fact, if it wasn't for my DAD (We'll call him Bush Sr., and my Uncle (we'll call him "Uncle Sam") I would be a total loser. A likable loser, but a loser none the less. (At least at management, but honestly, I was never very bright to begin with) Why am I a loser, you ask? Because when I tried to go out on my own previously, I practically ran every business I ever owned into the ground. But guess what, my Dad is VERY Famous and people liked him somewhat and they know him which means they know me, right? They did no research on me, but hey, my DAD is famous and he ran a company! Why can't I? It only makes sense that I could too. Right? But more important than any of this, I also happen to belong to a VERY POWERFULL fraternally that "used to stand for something" but has changed somewhat over the years. We'll call this fraternity "The Republican Party" for the sake of argument. That's how I got the job really when you think about it. Lot's of people respect this fraternity and my Dad. Also, I seem like an "Aw shucks let's go have a beer and hang out at the ranch type of guy," so people like me too even though I have no business going out and running the company that we'll call "USA, corp". And the people that allowed me to run this business did so, because like the "sheep" that they are...they believed in the values of the fraternity or the "label" it stands for but didn't really know me. They trusted the fraternity to do it right. Granted, they know my Dad, and love USA, corp. So they gave me a shot. Now Flash forward 8 years. OF COURSE, as if any other outcome could be expected, I run this new company (USA corp) into the ground too. The USA corp stock plummets, I rack up massive debt, lots of USA employees lose their jobs, and I even manage to start a war with the neighbor down the block (later to find out it's the wrong neighbor that threw the brick through my front window) I thought it was the neighbor that tried to kill my Daddy with a different brick, now that I think of it. But I promise that has nothing to do with why I retaliated against this neighbor. Promise.) To make matters worse, I follow up all previous blunders by blowing up the wrong neighbor's house too, but at least I offered to rebuild it. Unfortunately, that may take 100 years and lots of USA corps money. Man, the employees weren't to happy about that because they felt "they deserved the money" By now, pretty much everyone at my Company, USA corp, hates me because they realize I'm not too bright, they hate all my mistakes and because they are now broke, have lost their jobs, and MASSIVELY LEFT IN DEBT. Back to reality. Now, I have to ask, that when my "UNCLE SAM" (remember him) who loves USA corp and its employees attempts to "bail out" the company that is USA corp and it's employees in the hopes of turning things around, you're saying (and this article is saying) it's my UNCLE SAM's fault when things aren't immediately better!? My Uncle Sam is the a-hole here in this equation? No way. I don't think so, and any person with half a brain cell knows that if you take "politics" and the "personal" out of this analogy, and if it was "this kid" that was telling "this story", NO ONE would blame the uncle for the mistakes of the likable kid from the popular fraternity, with the famous Dad, who drove USA corp into the ground. No one would blame Uncle Sam for "attempting to fix things". Everyone would blame the kid and the people who allowed him to run USA corp. They might even blame the fraternity. But because this is politics....we'll blame the Uncle. Sorry, I call b.s. here. I'm going to allow USA corp's new president more than 7 months to rebuild the company that took the loser eight years to drive into the ground. I'm going to give him at least half the time we gave the other guy. And I don't care what fraternity this new president is from. Can you blame me? I just want it to be better.

Lets look at the state of things in 2004. In January 2004, Bush vowed to "cut the deficit in half over the next five years" as a percentage of GDP.

But the cost to the public has been a return to the exploding deficits of the Reagan years. Bush blew through Clinton’s surplus in his first year. The 2004 deficit reached $415 billion, a record. Still, its real size is masked by the fact that Bush has shifted $150 billion from the Social Security trust fund in order to make the shortfall look smaller. It’s like pretending you’re richer when you move money from one pocket to another. Both sums have to be repaid, so the real amount borrowed is the $415 billion “nominal” deficit plus the $150 billion from Social Security or $565 billion.

This shell game with federal trust funds taints all official forecasts about Bush’s deficits going forward. For example, the Congressional Budget Office estimates Bush’s cumulative ten year deficit at $2.3 trillion, to be sure, a breathtaking shortfall from the $5.6 trillion surplus he inherited from Clinton. But as with the yearly number, this one ignores the trust fund sleight of hand, an omission of some $2.4 trillion. When this is added back in, Bush’s ten year deficit leaps to $4.7 trillion.

Now let's move ahead to 2009. You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing (from the $800 billion surplus for 2009 through 2012 projected back at the end of the Clinton administration to the $1.2 trillion deficit) as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, President George W. Bush's policies, policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.

The first category -- the business cycle -- accounts for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing. It's a reflection of the fact that both the 2001 recession and the current one reduced tax revenue, required more spending on safety-net programs and changed economists' assumptions about how much in taxes the government would collect in future years.

About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.

Mr. Obama's main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies -- together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama -- account for 20 percent of the swing.

About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama's agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.

Nevertheless, it is apparent that while this deficit now belongs to Barack Obama, it was handed to him by George W. Bush and the Republican Party -- and was not a result of the stimulus or even attempts to reform healthcare or to achieve energy independence.

All I can remember is how the Conservabrats were all whining about the budget surplus when Clinton left office. They all said that that money was THEIRS and how DARE the federal government keep THEIR money from them.

When Bush was ascendant, it was GOOD to be in debt because the tax cuts would create more tax revenues (I know, crazy talk wasn't a language I was fluent in either at the time). Turns out, all his specific tax cuts produced was speculative investment that turned Wall Street into a gigantic casino with rigged games.

Then we had this perception shift that declared "We do not want to be a producer nation, we will become a consumer nation". The unacknowledged issue with this model is the very simple fact that this is the equivalent of a person deciding to quit their job, use credit and burn through their life savings. This feels good, really good, till the repo man takes your car, the County Sheriff nails an eviction notice on the front door and every single one of the utilities shut you off.

We have to wipe the Reaganistic cobwebs from our collective eyes, get back to basics, stop buying cheap goods from countries who have no love of us and start making things here once again.

Many Conservative Philosophers/shills put forth the posit that the rich create jobs and thus drive prosperity. Hogwash. Without prosperous consumers who have secure meaningful employment, those rich folk will have no market for their goods and then begins the times of woe. Rome fell, Egypt fell, Great Britain fell, The dutch fell, Spain fell and to think that we are exempt only hastens our plunge.

Wake up people, you have been led down the path of destruction by people who could care less if you live/die/spontaneously combust. And this HUGE deficit has been building for 28 years now and we have lost the jobs needed to start to pay it off.

Get your head out of your ass, fool. You idiots think Obama can squander money like a moron, and somehow it's still Bush's fault. It could be the result of you liberals suffering from profound retardation and inability to comprehend even the most simple concepts.

My how vocal are the ignorant

Typical Leftist response.

You guys don't read much do you??

Jimbo, I will type slowly, cause you don't read so good.
You see, Bush ain't the Prez no more, so you can't blame him no more.

Whatever mistakes you think Bush made, your Homey Obama is making them by the 'Trillions'

JIM MUELLAR SHORT AND SWEET GET YOUR MOUTH AROUND THIS, 24 TRILLION IN DEBT AND RISING, THATS HARD TO TAKE ANY WAY.

Bush presided over a 2.5 trillion dollar increase during the 8 years in office. Obama's budget, which he came up with in the first few months of office will add 4.9 trillion dollars to the national debt. Bush spent 3% of the GDP, Obama has already increased this spending by 20%. This is not Bush's debt, this spending insanity is Obama's ALONE. He will be the ruination of this country.

You know how you pay off national debt? By spending less than is collected in taxes....Why is such a hard concept for you to understand? Just by your comment I see you are probably 14 or 15 and have no real sense of money or economics. Go to school (including college, and add a econ class or two), get a real job and pay bills; then come talk to me. If you are not a stupid teenager then I really feel sorry for your brain. In terms of brain capacity in a knowledge bee, you would be matched with a tyrannosaurus.

Would you PLEASE explain to me how you PAY OFF "Bush's Debt" by DOUBLING the total amount of Debt? Kinda like paying off my mortgage by taking a second mortgage and taking the money and spending it on a cruise. Brilliant Liberal Thinking!! You must be related to Joe Biden.

Get your head out of your ass first. This whole thing started with people buying houses that they couldn't afford.(Thank you Barney Frank) Any financial analyst will tell you this whole thing started in 2006. And what happened in 2006 you might ask? Hmmmm..The DEMOCRATS took control of the house and senate, and why did your idol clinton have a large surplus between 1992-2000 you might ask? Hmmmm...The Republicans controlled congress, if and when you get head out you might be able to research it and find out "its all Bush's fault" is getting pretty damn old.

Hey Truth, for some reason my posts stacked under your spot.
You know I'm with ya.

I bet your ahole is killing you from constantly sticking your tin foil covered head up there

moderate,
don't you have some nasty carpet to clean, or something? Hey, I give you credit though, That was a pretty good comment for a retarded chimp.

If the bill is so bad why do republicans have to lie about it? Can't
they just portray it as it is? If the bill so bad why has the health
insurance industry spend millions everyday fighting it? Why are they
paying people to disrupt town hall meetings, won't stating their case
do it? Where is the GOP plan? Why have they refuse to present one?

MYTH: Grassroots Protester's are Disrupting Town Halls
House Republican Leader John Boehner's Office: "Back home for the
August recess, rank-and-file Democratic Members of the House are
facing a backlash from their constituents."

FACT: Lobbyist-Run Groups Are Orchestrating Extremist Mobs
Republicans and well-funded special interest groups are sending
far-right extremists to local town halls to stop any meaningful
discussion of Health Insurance Reform. Some of these mob scenes have
turned especially ugly -- including the hanging of Members of
Congress in effigy and use of Nazi SS symbols.
Read more on the DCCC Blog: The Stakeholder

[Anti-Reform Group Takes Credit For Helping Gin Up Town Hall Rallies,
The Plum Line;
The danger in the rights's anger, Politico]

MYTH: "Government-Encouraged Euthanasia"
House Republican Leader John Boehner claimed the House bill "may
start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged
euthanasia."

FactCheck.org: The claim is "nonsense."
The bill never requires anyone to discuss end-of-life care. Rather,
the bill ensures medical professionals who do offer this type of
counseling at the patients request are reimbursed for their time,
just as they would be for other types of counseling or medical
services.
[False Euthanasia Claims, FactCheck.org, July 29, 2009]

MYTH: Private Plans Outlawed
Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) claimed on his website that individual
private health insurance plans will be outlawed in 2013 under the
Democratic health care plan.

PolitiFact.com: Private health insurance not banned
In fact, PolitiFact rates this myth so misleading that it calls it
"Pants on Fire." Individual policies will continue to be available,
but people will buy those policies through the national health
insurance exchange, which will ensure that people with pre-existing
conditions will be able to get coverage. The House bill also allows
for existing policies to be grandfathered in, so individual
purchasers who like their coverage will be able to keep it.

[Private Health Care Not Banned, Politifact.com]

MYTH: 120 Million Americans Will Be Deprived of Health Care
Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.): Democrats' plan "will deprive roughly 120
million Americans of their current health care coverage."

PolitiFact.com: "False"
The 120 million number Pence cites comes from the Lewin Group, a
wholly owned subsidiary of insurance giant UnitedHealthCare, which
based its numbers on several public-option scenarios that are
dramatically different than what Democrats have proposed. The
Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 11 million-NOT 120
million-Americans will end up voluntarily enrolling in the public
option, and none of them will be "deprived" of coverage.
[Politifact.com]

MYTH: Illegal Immigrants May Be Covered
Rep. King (R-Iowa) issued a press release with this headline: "CBO:
5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare."

FactCheck.org: "Not True"
H.R. 3200 includes a provision that specifically says that there will
be no federal funds spent to cover illegal immigrants:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 - NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS

Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for
affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully
present in the United States.

[Misleading GOP Health Care Claims, FactCheck.Org, July 23, 2009]

MYTH: There is a Republican Plan
Minority Whip Cantor: "The Republican plan" provides "access to
affordable basic coverage."

FactCheck.org: "Republicans have yet to coalesce around a single
plan."
Even though the House Republicans' "Health Care Solutions Group"
guaranteed a counter proposal, they have refused to release a plan to
the public.
[Misleading GOP Health Care Claims, FactCheck.Org, July 23, 2009]

MYTH: Widespread Tax Increases
Newt Gingrich: Reform plan would increase taxes on "virtually
everyone."

FactCheck.org: Less than 1.4% Would Face Higher Taxes
According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, less than 1.4 percent
of all U.S. households would face higher taxes under the proposal. The
surtax for those upper-income folks would start at 1 percent and go up
to 5.4 percent with top incomes over $1 million.

Well now, another Obot speaks up and takes his place in the "Moron Hall of Fame"

If what Bush did was "get us in a hole"...then what is the Big Zero doing to get us out???

thats right, my bad..I forgot, you Leftist Obots believe the way to "get out of a hole", is to dig another hole, only "deeper"...you throw the dirt out of the hole you are digging into the hole that was dug by the previous person...makes perfect sense to me!!!

Forgive me for being so dam stupid, you have enlightened me...a "teaching moment"