Tuesday, August 11, 2009

We Have Lies, Damned Lies, and Then We Have Politics

The federal budget deficit will hit $1,800,000,000,000 ($1.8 trillion) by September 30. And that is just in President Obama's first year. Here are his projected shortfalls for this and the next three years through September 30, 2012, compared with the shortfalls in all eight years of President Bush's two terms:

(Click on the graph to enlarge it in a new window.)

So, President Obama, how is that plan of yours for "a net spending cut" going?

There could be no finer proof of why one should never vote for a politician based on his promises.


  1. Political promises have rarely been something voters could rely on, but Obama has taken the promise to a whole new level.

    I propose creation of a new political term for it - an "Obama Promise." That's a promise that the candidate not only does not intend to keep, but one which he actually intends actively to work against.

    So a snarky reporter (or even a mere citizen) could ask a pol making a particularly unlikely campaign promise "so, Senator, is that an Obama promise?"

  2. The advantage of running a huge deficit in the first year of a new administration is that you can blame it on the previous administration. Also, if you have smaller deficits towards the end of your term, you can tout the "reduction in the deficit" that you, the incumbent, have brought about.

    Of course none of this has anything to do with the eight years of pent up spending desires of Congressional Democrats being suddenly unleased once they gained a majority in both houses and the executive branch. ;-)