[Zeitgeist]

Something like this?
http://piggington.com/marion039s_leg

[Zeitgeist]

Something like this?
http://piggington.com/marion039s_leg

[Zeitgeist]

Something like this?
http://piggington.com/marion039s_leg

[Zeitgeist]

Something like this?
http://piggington.com/marion039s_leg

[Zeitgeist]

Something like this?
http://piggington.com/marion039s_leg

[Zeitgeist]

Both are going to drive the economy into the ground:
George W. Bush spent big, Obama spends even bigger
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
March 18, 2009

Barack Obama promised a government of “change,” but his presidency so far has been more of the same — a lot more of the same big spending condoned by Republican President George W. Bush.
A recent analysis by the Heritage Foundation detailed a startling escalation of government outlays:

• Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. Obama’s proposed 2010 budget would add an additional $1 trillion.

• Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts, which Obama is vastly expanding.

• Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. Obama seeks a $634 billion down payment on a complete government takeover of health care.

• Bush increased federal education outlays 58 percent faster than inflation. Obama would double total education spending.

• Bush became the first president to spend 3 percent of gross domestic product on federal anti-poverty programs. Obama is increasing this spending by 20 percent.

• Even with his tax cuts, upper-income Americans shouldered a greater proportion of the income tax burden under Bush. Obama would continue that trend.

• Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Not counting 2009, which the two presidents share with an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt, Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
In 2007, before the recession, Washington spent $24,172 per U.S. household. Under Obama, that figure rises to $32,463 per household, an inflation-adjusted $8,000 expansion of government spending per household.

“President Obama has framed his budget as a break from the ‘failed policies’ of the Bush administration,” says Heritage budget analyst Brian Riedl. “Actually, his budget doubles down on Bush’s borrow, spend and bail out policies.”

[email protected]
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/George-W-Bush-spent-big-Obama-spends-even-bigger-41459927.html

If you have kids or ever plan to have kids, you should care. This will be their burden. The Bush spending was socialist in my opinion and ill timed. Maybe he wanted to be liked or to leave a legacy. He will probably never be fondly remembered and the legacy he left is one of debt. Obama has time to change the legacy he leaves, but he will have to rethink his view of government and with the people he surrounds himself with, this might be impossible.

[Zeitgeist]

Both are going to drive the economy into the ground:
George W. Bush spent big, Obama spends even bigger
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
March 18, 2009

Barack Obama promised a government of “change,” but his presidency so far has been more of the same — a lot more of the same big spending condoned by Republican President George W. Bush.
A recent analysis by the Heritage Foundation detailed a startling escalation of government outlays:

• Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. Obama’s proposed 2010 budget would add an additional $1 trillion.

• Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts, which Obama is vastly expanding.

• Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. Obama seeks a $634 billion down payment on a complete government takeover of health care.

• Bush increased federal education outlays 58 percent faster than inflation. Obama would double total education spending.

• Bush became the first president to spend 3 percent of gross domestic product on federal anti-poverty programs. Obama is increasing this spending by 20 percent.

• Even with his tax cuts, upper-income Americans shouldered a greater proportion of the income tax burden under Bush. Obama would continue that trend.

• Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Not counting 2009, which the two presidents share with an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt, Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
In 2007, before the recession, Washington spent $24,172 per U.S. household. Under Obama, that figure rises to $32,463 per household, an inflation-adjusted $8,000 expansion of government spending per household.

“President Obama has framed his budget as a break from the ‘failed policies’ of the Bush administration,” says Heritage budget analyst Brian Riedl. “Actually, his budget doubles down on Bush’s borrow, spend and bail out policies.”

[email protected]
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/George-W-Bush-spent-big-Obama-spends-even-bigger-41459927.html

If you have kids or ever plan to have kids, you should care. This will be their burden. The Bush spending was socialist in my opinion and ill timed. Maybe he wanted to be liked or to leave a legacy. He will probably never be fondly remembered and the legacy he left is one of debt. Obama has time to change the legacy he leaves, but he will have to rethink his view of government and with the people he surrounds himself with, this might be impossible.

[Zeitgeist]

Both are going to drive the economy into the ground:
George W. Bush spent big, Obama spends even bigger
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
March 18, 2009

Barack Obama promised a government of “change,” but his presidency so far has been more of the same — a lot more of the same big spending condoned by Republican President George W. Bush.
A recent analysis by the Heritage Foundation detailed a startling escalation of government outlays:

• Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. Obama’s proposed 2010 budget would add an additional $1 trillion.

• Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts, which Obama is vastly expanding.

• Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. Obama seeks a $634 billion down payment on a complete government takeover of health care.

• Bush increased federal education outlays 58 percent faster than inflation. Obama would double total education spending.

• Bush became the first president to spend 3 percent of gross domestic product on federal anti-poverty programs. Obama is increasing this spending by 20 percent.

• Even with his tax cuts, upper-income Americans shouldered a greater proportion of the income tax burden under Bush. Obama would continue that trend.

• Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Not counting 2009, which the two presidents share with an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt, Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
In 2007, before the recession, Washington spent $24,172 per U.S. household. Under Obama, that figure rises to $32,463 per household, an inflation-adjusted $8,000 expansion of government spending per household.

“President Obama has framed his budget as a break from the ‘failed policies’ of the Bush administration,” says Heritage budget analyst Brian Riedl. “Actually, his budget doubles down on Bush’s borrow, spend and bail out policies.”

[email protected]
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/George-W-Bush-spent-big-Obama-spends-even-bigger-41459927.html

If you have kids or ever plan to have kids, you should care. This will be their burden. The Bush spending was socialist in my opinion and ill timed. Maybe he wanted to be liked or to leave a legacy. He will probably never be fondly remembered and the legacy he left is one of debt. Obama has time to change the legacy he leaves, but he will have to rethink his view of government and with the people he surrounds himself with, this might be impossible.

[Zeitgeist]

Both are going to drive the economy into the ground:
George W. Bush spent big, Obama spends even bigger
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
March 18, 2009

Barack Obama promised a government of “change,” but his presidency so far has been more of the same — a lot more of the same big spending condoned by Republican President George W. Bush.
A recent analysis by the Heritage Foundation detailed a startling escalation of government outlays:

• Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. Obama’s proposed 2010 budget would add an additional $1 trillion.

• Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts, which Obama is vastly expanding.

• Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. Obama seeks a $634 billion down payment on a complete government takeover of health care.

• Bush increased federal education outlays 58 percent faster than inflation. Obama would double total education spending.

• Bush became the first president to spend 3 percent of gross domestic product on federal anti-poverty programs. Obama is increasing this spending by 20 percent.

• Even with his tax cuts, upper-income Americans shouldered a greater proportion of the income tax burden under Bush. Obama would continue that trend.

• Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Not counting 2009, which the two presidents share with an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt, Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
In 2007, before the recession, Washington spent $24,172 per U.S. household. Under Obama, that figure rises to $32,463 per household, an inflation-adjusted $8,000 expansion of government spending per household.

“President Obama has framed his budget as a break from the ‘failed policies’ of the Bush administration,” says Heritage budget analyst Brian Riedl. “Actually, his budget doubles down on Bush’s borrow, spend and bail out policies.”

[email protected]
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/George-W-Bush-spent-big-Obama-spends-even-bigger-41459927.html

If you have kids or ever plan to have kids, you should care. This will be their burden. The Bush spending was socialist in my opinion and ill timed. Maybe he wanted to be liked or to leave a legacy. He will probably never be fondly remembered and the legacy he left is one of debt. Obama has time to change the legacy he leaves, but he will have to rethink his view of government and with the people he surrounds himself with, this might be impossible.

[Zeitgeist]

Both are going to drive the economy into the ground:
George W. Bush spent big, Obama spends even bigger
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
March 18, 2009

Barack Obama promised a government of “change,” but his presidency so far has been more of the same — a lot more of the same big spending condoned by Republican President George W. Bush.
A recent analysis by the Heritage Foundation detailed a startling escalation of government outlays:

• Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. Obama’s proposed 2010 budget would add an additional $1 trillion.

• Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts, which Obama is vastly expanding.

• Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. Obama seeks a $634 billion down payment on a complete government takeover of health care.

• Bush increased federal education outlays 58 percent faster than inflation. Obama would double total education spending.

• Bush became the first president to spend 3 percent of gross domestic product on federal anti-poverty programs. Obama is increasing this spending by 20 percent.

• Even with his tax cuts, upper-income Americans shouldered a greater proportion of the income tax burden under Bush. Obama would continue that trend.

• Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Not counting 2009, which the two presidents share with an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt, Obama’s budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
In 2007, before the recession, Washington spent $24,172 per U.S. household. Under Obama, that figure rises to $32,463 per household, an inflation-adjusted $8,000 expansion of government spending per household.

“President Obama has framed his budget as a break from the ‘failed policies’ of the Bush administration,” says Heritage budget analyst Brian Riedl. “Actually, his budget doubles down on Bush’s borrow, spend and bail out policies.”

[email protected]
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/George-W-Bush-spent-big-Obama-spends-even-bigger-41459927.html

If you have kids or ever plan to have kids, you should care. This will be their burden. The Bush spending was socialist in my opinion and ill timed. Maybe he wanted to be liked or to leave a legacy. He will probably never be fondly remembered and the legacy he left is one of debt. Obama has time to change the legacy he leaves, but he will have to rethink his view of government and with the people he surrounds himself with, this might be impossible.

[Zeitgeist]

It is the illegal bailout. Anything for the dems to buy votes and protect the failing social security system. What a joke!

[Zeitgeist]

It is the illegal bailout. Anything for the dems to buy votes and protect the failing social security system. What a joke!

[Zeitgeist]

It is the illegal bailout. Anything for the dems to buy votes and protect the failing social security system. What a joke!

[Zeitgeist]

It is the illegal bailout. Anything for the dems to buy votes and protect the failing social security system. What a joke!

[Zeitgeist]

It is the illegal bailout. Anything for the dems to buy votes and protect the failing social security system. What a joke!

[Author]

Posts