Obama's inherited Deficit

[Randy Due]

Good reading. Just so everyone understands Congress approves budgets and authorizes spending.
All a president can do is submit a budget, lobby congress for its approval and veto any budget he disagrees with then hope his veto isn't overridden.
Remember who is really responsible for our current economic mess when you vote on 11-4-2010.

The Washington Post babbled again today about Obama inheriting a huge deficit from Bush. Amazingly enough,...... a lot of people swallow this nonsense. So once more, a short civics lesson.
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress,and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party. They controlled the budget process for FY 2008 and FY 2009, as well as FY 2010 and FY 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For FY 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the FY 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete FY 2009. Let's remember what the deficits looked like during that period: (below)

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the FY 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.
In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.

There is no way this will be widely publicized Unless each of us sends it on!
This is your chance to make a difference.

[sbsion]

the point is mute anymore......the defecit is a far gone conclusion that only "tribalisms" can resolve, bring on the war

[p51-mustang]

This is just more partisan rhetoric designed to make Bush look like the good guy and Obama bad. Its nonsense. Both Bush and Obama are rotten sock puppets for the ruling class. Both could veto unconstitutional spending but neither did. Congress and both these POTUS cons are criminal in thier dereliction of duty.

[Spence]

The President actually submits the budget and Congress approves 95% of the spending the President asks for historically and inserts 5% of their own ideas. But yes, it should work where congress makes and approves the budget if the checks and balance system actually worked anymore.

[joseph]

Most of the federal budget (and for that matter states budgets too) is "back-door" spending. These are obligations (entitlements, interest on debts, etc.) The only way to take a huge chunk out of spending is to either pay off our debts or reduce entitlements. Can you guess which one the regime will choose?

[Rensai]

The President actually submits the budget and Congress approves 95% of the spending the President asks for historically and inserts 5% of their own ideas. But yes, it should work where congress makes and approves the budget if the checks and balance system actually worked anymore.

The problem with the checks and balances system now is that it has been perverted in many ways and it really doesn't exist any more. Things such as making senators elected, rather than the chosen state representatives they used to be have helped ruin it. But by far the biggest problem, is the usurpation of state rights. You won't find that in any of the school books in our public schools, but that was the key to the whole checks and balances system. Originally, the federal government was limited almost entirely to foreign relations, while each state handled its own domestic affairs. That is separation of duties, or checks and balances. The idea that the different branches of the federal government would police themselves, as we are taught in school, is absurd. Rather, the founders felt that the states, being closer to the people, would represent them better and the people, collectively through the states, would have the ability to keep the federal government in check. In the Kentucky Resolutions, Thomas Jefferson made it clear that states even had the power to nullify federal laws in their own territory if they felt the law was unconstitutional. Now that is a balance, unlike the crap system we have today.

[p51-mustang]

The President actually submits the budget and Congress approves 95% of the spending the President asks for historically and inserts 5% of their own ideas. But yes, it should work where congress makes and approves the budget if the checks and balance system actually worked anymore.

The problem with the checks and balances system now is that it has been perverted in many ways and it really doesn't exist any more. Things such as making senators elected, rather than the chosen state representatives they used to be have helped ruin it. But by far the biggest problem, is the usurpation of state rights. You won't find that in any of the school books in our public schools, but that was the key to the whole checks and balances system. Originally, the federal government was limited almost entirely to foreign relations, while each state handled its own domestic affairs. That is separation of duties, or checks and balances. The idea that the different branches of the federal government would police themselves, as we are taught in school, is absurd. Rather, the founders felt that the states, being closer to the people, would represent them better and the people, collectively through the states, would have the ability to keep the federal government in check. In the Kentucky Resolutions, Thomas Jefferson made it clear that states even had the power to nullify federal laws in their own territory if they felt the law was unconstitutional. Now that is a balance, unlike the crap system we have today.

Nullification by the states is the key here. The states need to get together and push back on the Feds. If the feds still push back to the states then the states should have a con-con and start a new fed govt. Its gotten to that point! Jefferson is so brilliant!

[Col. Flagg]

The President actually submits the budget and Congress approves 95% of the spending the President asks for historically and inserts 5% of their own ideas. But yes, it should work where congress makes and approves the budget if the checks and balance system actually worked anymore.

The problem with the checks and balances system now is that it has been perverted in many ways and it really doesn't exist any more. Things such as making senators elected, rather than the chosen state representatives they used to be have helped ruin it. But by far the biggest problem, is the usurpation of state rights. You won't find that in any of the school books in our public schools, but that was the key to the whole checks and balances system. Originally, the federal government was limited almost entirely to foreign relations, while each state handled its own domestic affairs. That is separation of duties, or checks and balances. The idea that the different branches of the federal government would police themselves, as we are taught in school, is absurd. Rather, the founders felt that the states, being closer to the people, would represent them better and the people, collectively through the states, would have the ability to keep the federal government in check. In the Kentucky Resolutions, Thomas Jefferson made it clear that states even had the power to nullify federal laws in their own territory if they felt the law was unconstitutional. Now that is a balance, unlike the crap system we have today.

Nullification by the states is the key here. The states need to get together and push back on the Feds. If the feds still push back to the states then the states should have a con-con and start a new fed govt. Its gotten to that point! Jefferson is so brilliant!

AMEN!