THE LAST 3 REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS HAVE ACCOUNTED FOR NEARLY 100% OF OUR INCREASE IN THE DEBT

[mikekohr]

Every President, from Truman to Nixon, steadily paid down the staggering debt that was run up in our fight against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. That pattern came to a screeching halt with Reagan/Bush and Bush. Clinton’s fiscal policy was a brief respite during this orgy of deficit spending.

Clinton balanced 5 budgets, which is 5 times as many balanced budgets as the last 5 Republican presidents combined.


President Obama, like President Clinton, inherited a sea of red ink and a recession from his predecessor. He, like President Clinton, recognizes the importance of getting America back to work and then getting our fiscal house in order.


?

See National Debt Graph @: http://zfacts.com/p/318.html


WHY DO REPUBLICAN ECONOMIC PRINCIPLES EXPAND THE NATIONAL DEBT?
-The answer is simple mathematics. Reduced revenue + increased spending ='s increased debt-

?

http://cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

The two biggest promises of "Trickle Down Economics" are it's greatest failings. Proponents of "Trickle Down Economics” claim that tax cuts, skewed to the rich, will create jobs and increase tax revenues. The graph above disproves the latter claim. Job creation plummets under "Trickle Down Economics (see http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/p/job-growth.html )and nine of the last ten recessions have occurred under Republican leadership (see http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/p/history-of-reces... ).

Two things are certain to grow when a Republican is in the White House, unemployment and the National Debt.


By contrast, "Bubble Up" economnic priciples practiced by Democratic Administrations put people to work, rev up the economy, and balance the Nation's ledger books. Every time. No exceptions.

mike kohr http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/
mike kohr

[Dawgs]

1. That last chart says a lot about Democratic spending versus Republicans.

Let's hope that Obama keeps the trend going.

[Dr Morbius]

2. Here's to the Democratic Party of the United States.

THE ONLY party to turn to for fiscal responsibility.

[Kdillard]

4. Amen. Hopefully Obama will have the two terms necessary to make a difference.

[dotymed]

46. Unless the propaganda machine (MSM)

can be made to tell the truth, I don't think Obama will have 2 terms. If he had adopted the economic policies of FDR, and shown the public that he was going to create good paying jobs for regular (the other 95%) citizens and tax the 5% at previous levels...then 95% of Americans would support him. By not heeding any progressive voices, he instead opted for bush policies that benefit the wealthy. I worked, stupidly, to get Obama elected, only to be told keep my mouth shut.I didn't want a pony, only some equality for the 95% who are suffering. I always said that Clinton was the best republican president we ever had..now I'm not so sure. Why hasn't Obama used the greatly increased (war time president, forever..) power of his office to stop the corrupt decision of the SCOTUS? At least lend your voice and experience to the fight?

[RC]

7. You need to identify the Democratic Party of which you speak.

There are two.

[stray cat]

3. And it would be even higher if Clinton hadn't eliminated it during his term

[emulatorloo]

5. LOL, Don't confuse the teabaggers with the facts. Kick and Rec n/t

[Andy823]

8. Yep!

The word "facts" and "truth" don't seem to be in their vocabulary! The only "facts" and truth they accept come from the likes of Limbaugh and Beck and we all know just how "accurate" they are! :evilgrin:

[phleshdef]

37. Or as Bill Maher said, don't let the truth get in the way of a good klan rally

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. Maybe we should tell people about it

[Andy823]

10. You can try

But remember you can lead a right winger to the truth, or the facts, but you can't make them believe it! If it isn't coming from Fox news, Limbaugh, Beck or any of the other morons on the right, they won't believe it! Trust me I have tried and tried, it just won't sink in!

[rhett o rick]

17. Agree, we cant get thru to the willfully ignorant. However, we need to inform

the millions of "uninformed voters" that are on the fence.

[rhett o rick]

16. One of our biggest challanges is how to inform the "uninformed voters".

Do you have any ideas?
I think we need liberal talking points on a site that we can use to print flyers to pass out at malls and stores. Maybe under windshield wipers.

[Enthusiast]

22. Maybe it would be nice if the M$M

allowed us to mention it.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

54. Goebbel's Main Stream Popaganda

Goebbels would be proud of the MSM in this country!

[Overseas]

9. K&R ! //nt

[4lbs]

11. Wait... this can't be correct. Faux News tells us that Democrats are nothing but "tax and spend"

liberal, hippie, Socialist, Commie, Nazi, elitists.

They are always right.

[PatSeg]

18. But they didn't lie

They all "tax and spend", but the republicans "spend" MORE.

[Lasher]

36. Yes, they do spend more, and they tax less.

Double whammy of debt.

[PatSeg]

50. Then they wait for the magic Debt Fairy

to come along and fix the deficit! Or a Democratic president who can fix their mess so they can spend more the next time they're in the White House.

[Lasher]

52. That is true and there is more to it: Starve the Beast

Starve the Beast has been a Republican strategy for the past 30 years. It is real. It is ongoing. And it is sinister.

Republicans have driven up deficits quite deliberately, hoping to use the resulting national debt to force destruction of our social programs which they hate. The last 3 Republicans have done their jobs effectively, leaving us with massive debt and handing Obama the worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression.

According to their plan we're supposed to gut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other social programs while leaving most other spending intact - notably military spending. So far their scheme seems to be working. Obama has formed a commission to reduce debt, and military spending is specifically excluded from their scrutiny.

Within a year the commission will come up with their recommendations, and they will include massive cuts to these social programs. Our only hope is to stop this next year in Congress, most likely in the Senate. I sure hope Republicans don't regain control of Congress in the midterms.

[PatSeg]

53. Starve the Beast

as long as its not the military. Yes, it is sinister and very obvious, yet the majority of the people just don't see it. Republicans are very skillful at diverting attention to bogus social issues and fear-mongering, and of course, they lie a lot as well.

It is to our advantage that republicans aren't terribly creative. They keep using the same old playbook - it worked before, it has to work again. I think we may lose a few seats, but I don't see us losing control of Congress if the republicans keep up their current strategy. Of course, I've learned to expect the unexpected.

[Wally Pipp]

31. Separated at birth?

Looking at the picture you posted of Michelle Bachmann (bottom row, far right) reminded me of an image I had seen years ago. After several seconds of searching, I was able to come up with the image I remembered:

&imgrefurl=http://riverdaughter.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/obat-fauxrage/&h=387&w=305&sz=63&tbnid=FlOaY253n5l83M:&tbnh=253&tbnw=200&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbatboy%2Bimage&usg=__nN0BVMhLZ7zcC8q27EHiq6MA-3Q=&ei=xnLKS7rGNYHGlQfw1MHfBQ&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=1&ct=image&ved=0CAgQ9QEwAA

When the two photos are compared, the resemblance is eerie, dare I say, frightening? and has anyone ever seen the two of them at the same event at the same time? No? Hmmmm.

I'm not saying that the two of them are the same person, but I have to say that the obvious resemblance between the two warrants some sort of Congressional investigation.

I'm just sayin'.

[BluDemocratGirl]

38. Yep That's what the Party of HELL NO are

A bunch of idiots, morons, lunatics, and assholes!

[Stumbler]

40. As I've said dozens of times in life:

Better to be labeled "tax & spend" than to actually be "borrow & spend." Honestly, why are we buying things on credit for $120 tomorrow rather than simply paying %100 today? I never understood it and still don't...

[Rage Inc.]

12. K & FUCKING R!

[Canuckistanian]

13. It's the "Two Santa Clauses" theory

Whenever a Republican gets into office, they start spending like mad on all the goodies that RWers like - like wars, tax cuts for the rich, government contracts, etc. That's one Santa Claus.

Then, after running up the debt, they hand power over to Democrats and IMMEDIATELY start screaming about that debt and the deficit. Which makes them the Santa Claus again.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

[Enthusiast]

23. And their strategy works

like a charm. You forgot to say they accomplish this because they have bought much of the media and this assists them in their endeavor.

[old mark]

14. This is NOT what the MSM says - they say the Dems did all the bad stuff, and

we should all kick and scream till there is another republican president, when everything will be GOOD and we can all be quiet and obey our leaders like it says in the constitution so god won't be mad at America any more.
-----

Please don't introduce any reality into politics - think where it might lead...

mark

[mikekohr]

15. ERROR in first sentence

It should read, "Every President from Truman to Carter"

Sorry

mike kohr

[craigmatic]

20. That does make sense. Carter was the last of the New Deal coalition after him the country went to

crap finacnially.

[craigmatic]

19. It's because repubs love spending on war and the military. Spending on the social safety net

is cheaper and does more long term good than all these new weapons systems that we almost never used before bush. It's too bad the military industrial complex is the only real employer for people in this county as far as stable manufacturing goes.

[chill_wind]

28. +1

[polmaven]

21. "Wish I could recommend

this more than once. It is a great chart. I have bookmarked for future use!

[rhett o rick]

24. Thank's Mike. I do have a question. The bar chart shows % increases in both

revenue and spending. What does the percentage refer to? In other words, percentage of what?

[mikekohr]

34. See reply #33 nt

[Grand Taurean]

25. k/r

[baldguy]

26. I remember 1980.

Carter's $20B deficit was way too much for America to handle, so the RW morons rose up and elected Reagan. When the Old Geezer and the BFEE Patriarch were done, we had a $220B deficit.

[chill_wind]

27. That says it all. Concepts all Americans should be able to digest.

They've been a party of disingenuous political liars and frauds since forever.

[droidamus2]

29. That's the way they do it

Give everybody, especially the rich, tax cuts and then bring on 'plastic prosperity' by putting a mountain of spending on the national credit card. The Republicans also like to make sure that a lot of that 'prosperity' means our tax money going into the pockets of their corporate cronies (which surprisingly are the same people that get the biggest tax cuts - NOT!)

[kjones]

30. well, i think these graphs are a bit misleading.

I'm not entirely sure what the first graph means. If it really means debt, that's excellent...but
I have a sneaking suspicion that it is actually a deficit graph...which would be entirely different.

The second graph shows % increase in revenue and spending...not the difference, which is pretty important
to make any definitive judgments.

I'm not saying the graphs don't show positive things...just that they can be somewhat misleading.

[mikekohr]

33. The First Graph shows the TOTAL Federal Debt in relation to GDP

We as a nation have had a debt since Andrew Jackson was president. But because of inflation, population growth, and increase in GDP, the only true "apples to apples comparison" is to compare the debt to the annual GDP of a particular year. Raw numbers or totals distort the picture.

For example GWB ran up far more total debt than did Ronald Reagan, but Reagan ran up far higher debt in relation to the nation's GDP, in effect Reagan is the biggest deficit spender in recorded human history, in-spite of the fact that GWB ran up far higher total cumulative amounts of debt. Under GWB the population was larger, the economy (GDP) was far bigger, and inflation reduces his debt expansion in constant terms as opposed to Reagan.

The second chart points to the difference between a particular president's increase in spending over the previous president, and the increases in revenue (taxes) that particular administration took in. Every president will spend more than his predecessor (inflation, population growth, increased GDP). His tax policy will determine how much revenue is collected. How the tax policy is targeted may increase job creation, (ex Clinton) which will help increase revenue. The second chart disproves the claim that "Trickle Down Economics," increases tax revenues and spurs job creation. The opposite occurs. Revenues plummet, and job creation slows dramatically (see http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/p/job-growth.html ) Combined with higher spending increases this results in massive deficits and an increase in the cumulative National Debt.

In a nutshell, "Republican presidents do not live within their means." Our children will pay the difference.

[mikekohr]

35. Here is a graph on job creation to compliment the original post

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mHSyEv8vBt4/S6Zvl-nui8I/AAAAAAAAACQ/3j0wUSj78mk/s640/Job+growth+graph.jpg?

Many Americans are aware that George W. Bush has had the worst job creation record since the government began tracking these figures in 1939. But Bush's colossal failure to manage the economy overshadows a much larger story.



The record shows two unmistakable patterns:
Every time a Republican succeeds a Democrat in the White House, the job creation rate plummets.
Every time a Democrat succeeds a Republican in the White House, the job growth rate soars. Every time! No exceptions!


Over the last seventy years, the decrease in monthly job creation when a Republican succeeds a Democrat is 68,913

Considering the steady growth in population of the United States during this time frame the job creation rate should steadily increase each month (currently it must grow by 138,000 per month to keep up with population growth). This trend only manifests itself when examining Democratic administrations:

Listed below is the average job growth increase for all terms served:



http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mHSyEv8vBt4/S6Z6xo0qSnI/AAAAAAAAACY/p8SkoEnN5dw/s640/job+creation+by+president.jpg?

By: mike kohr Graphics by: Bonny Kohr http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-record-on-record/

[defendandprotect]

32. Regan alone created more debt that all presidents before him COMBINED...!!!

[political_Dem]

39. Let the truth be told. K & R!!!

:kick:

[PinkFloyd]

41. This proves yet again that voting is just like driving....

Push (D) to move forward and (R) to go backward.

[onlyadream]

42. Wow, thanks for posting

I wonder if teabaggers know how to read graphs.

[indimuse]

43. Thanks!

knr!

[DeSwiss]

44. K&R

- Any way you slice it.....

[rhett o rick]

45. Another question if I may.

You say, "Clinton balanced 5 budgets, which is 5 times as many balanced budgets as the last 5 Republican presidents combined." Does that mean that the 5 Republican presidents balanced the budget one time? If so who was it?

I hope you dont mind me using what you have here. I will give you credit. I am trying to put out liberal talking points to fire at the republicans. I am not good at it so I borrow from others. My site is: http://watercoolerwars.blogspot.com/ I borrowed the water cooler war idea from Thom Hartmann.

NGU

[mikekohr]

48. Nixon balanced one budget

The last Republican president in 30 years to do so.

We are a proud family with a long tradition of accomplishment. WE NEED TO TELL OUR STORY! If we don't the trolls on the other side will, with something less than the truth. Republican focus on emotional issues because they want to distract attention from their record of FUBAR, failure and "F" up.

http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/

mike kohr

[rhett o rick]

49. Very good. Thanks nm

[NewJeffCT]

47. One of the US' biggest foreign policy strengths pre Reagan and post WW2

was the fact that our debt was so low in relation to our GDP and most other countries were in far worse shape than us in that regards. So, the US could leverage our financial strength ("how about we call in those loans we made to you?"... which is what China can do to us now.) to influence other nations in foreign policy.

Now, we can't do that, as we have so much debt, it would be an empty threat. Thanks Ronnie & the Bushes.

[mstinamotorcity]

51. Thanks for the graphs

a lot of these younger folk who have not lived through these administrations need factual basis to see. Those of us that lived through some of those administrations didn't need a graph we felt the graph literally.

[alp227]

55. I dare you to go to a Tea Party rally and show these charts.

Inconvenient facts scare conservatives, so you'll get shouted down by those narrow-minded fools. Oh, maybe some anti-Republican Teabaggers might agree with you; some Teabaggers hate both major parties but hate the Democrats much much more because the Democrats are liberal.

[mikekohr]

56. I'll take you up on that dare

The Tea Party fringe has not gained a lot of traction in this county in North-Central Illinois however.

http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com/

mike kohr

[FrenchieCat]

57. K&R