Debt Ceiling

Glenn Reynolds: Debt Problem Belongs to Obama Now

Barack Obama won't be a first-term president much longer



Over at USA Today, Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds uses a chart put together here at Reason to explain why four years into Obama's presidency, he owns the debt problem. A portion:

In 2003, when we invaded Iraq (one of those "two wars on the credit card" that Obama likes to blame for the debt), and when we passed the Bush tax cuts (the other thing Obama likes to blame for the debt) revenue actually started to climb. The revenue and spending lines start to converge, and, as they head up to 2006 it actually looks as if the two might cross, with revenue outpacing spending.

Even the New York Times noticed, spotting unexpected increases in revenue in 2005, and in 2006 noting that a "surprising" increase in tax revenues was closing the budget gap. The heady possibility of surpluses was in the air. But—look at the graph again—everything changes in 2007.

What happened in 2007? The financial crisis hadn't struck yet. But we did elect a new Democratic Congress, with Democrats controlling both houses for the first time in over a decade. The trend immediately reversed, and became much worse with President Obama's election in 2008 and inauguration in 2009. (In fact, despite talk of "wars on the credit card," we could save a lot of money by cutting defense spending back to where it was in 2007.)

So does that mean that the ballooning debt is all Obama's fault? No. Most of those spending bills got Republican votes, too. But it does mean that, as Politico notes, Obama now owns the 60% increase in the debt that has occurred on his watch, and can no longer credibly blame Bush (under whom plenty of Democrats voted for spending bills).

Reynolds also wishes the 2006 version of Barack Obama, who understood the problem with raising the debt ceiling, were president today.

Read the whole thing here.

NEXT: Damon Root on Sonia Sotomayor's New Memoir

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Suggesting Obama bears responsibility for the debt? You just threw red Shrike bait into the waters of Reason.

    1. They should ban him just for this one article. His agony would be delicious.

    2. I like SIV’s theory that shriek is Mo. It works.

      1. You think so? Mo was always an annoying liberal. But if Mo is shrike, he really has gone to a very dark and stupid place.

      2. Better trolling, if true—I don’t think it is—than Neil/Cesar?

        1. No way. Neil was genius, because he was fun. shriek is just obvious and boring.

      3. Where is the evidence for this? Because you’re just slandering someone if you don’t have any. That’s rather uncouth, IIDSSM

  2. BOOOOOOSH!!!!!11!!!

    There, I’ll save our trolls a little typing.

    1. Thanks

  3. I don’t think you understand how it works, Eddie. Obama only owns good things. Anything bad that happens is Bushitler W. McChimpiburton’s fault.

    1. It will take a thousand-year Reich to undo the damage done by Bush.

      1. You think Robert Reich will live that long?

        1. As a brain in a jar, sure.

        2. He’s proof that insanity gets airtime.

      2. It will take a thousand-year Reich to undo the damage done by Bush.

        We’re five years in.

  4. It’s not a debt problem, it’s a spending problem. We don’t say someone who is addicted to gambling or shopping has a debt problem.

    1. Think of how much this administration acts like a voluntary welfare recipient. Don’t get a better job or stop spending, just look to someone else to pay for everything for you.

      1. Voluntary? VOLUNTARY? This administration acts like what it is: a mugger. There’s nothing voluntary about it.

        1. Well, I think they WANT to be muggers, so it’s kind of like they’re volunteering for it.


        2. He’s saying that the person is choosing to be on welfare indefinitely, and not there because they’re having trouble finding a job. They are voluntarily choosing to be a welfare queen.

          1. Or what Auric said better than I did.

        3. No, of course I agree with that. What I was saying was that they have the same spending/saving philosophy that someone on welfare who doesn’t have to be (SLD) has.

          1. No, because a welfare recipient can’t decide to take more by passing some bullshit laws. They are parasite thieves, don’t legitimize them by removing the violence they perpetrate.

            1. Who are you, the analogy police? Fuck that.

              1. No, fuck you!

    2. You obviously didn’t get the memo, we don’t have a spending problem.

      1. We have a problem spending?

        1. Spending, we have a problem.

          1. Have we, spending a problem?

            1. Spending, a problem we have.

              1. This would be more fun with a really hoppy beverage.

  5. Obama is brilliant from a political perspective. He now annually spends slightly less than the 2008 spending + the one-time cost of TARP in 2008 as the baseline and can honestly argue he has cut spending over the last year of his predecessor. Returning to 2008 spending minus the $700B for TARP would more than halve the annual deficit.

    1. But only a delusional retard would not see through that. Since that apparently describes 51% of the voting population, I guess he is set.

    2. can honestly argue he has cut spending over the last year of his predecessor.

      Only if you attribute the stimulus spending to Bush.

      Throw that into the mix, and his “baseline” includes several hundred billion of his own spending that was approved after Bush was longgone.

      1. Only if you attribute the stimulus spending to Bush.

        Which is what our resident retard sock puppet does all of the time.

  6. it’s like Obama is the only person who has yet to realize that he won the job. In 2008. But, when all you know to do is campaign……

    1. Funny, that. It’s his supporters, too. One of my “friends” from college was just whining on and on on The Facebook about some appointment or another, and I just wanted to say, “Your guy WON. What are you complaining about? STFU and bask in your statist glory!”

      So it’s him AND his evil minions. Irritating.

  7. Reynolds also wishes the 2006 version of Barack Obama, who understood the problem with raising the debt ceiling, were president today.

    Uhm, he is. I had no idea Reynolds had such an infantile understanding of politics.

      1. In case I didn’t provide enough info with my comment:

        In 2006, Barack Obama was a political opportunist. He’s the same political opportunist in 2013.

        Reynolds thinks that in 2006, Obama was pure and good and all that was righteous. But he wasn’t. It just so happened that his political opportunism had him voting in the correct way in 2006.

        So again, he is the same guy he was in 2006.

        1. Reynolds is obviously being sarcastic in wishing for a version of the President who would actually act against increasing the debt ceiling, just as he did in 2006. If you think Reynolds really believes 2006 Obama was pure, noble, and just, you’re as delusional as you think Reynolds is.

          1. Apologies. I don’t follow Reynolds. So I took it at face value. I presumed to believe that Reynolds actually wanted 2006 Obama in the whitehouse. There are even some committed liberals who want 2006 Obama in the white house. However, I stand by what I said to those who are serious when they wish 2006 Obama is in the White House (Reynolds aside).

            1. No, *I* should apologize. I was very harsh and jerkish. I need to be less confrontational over disagreements. Sorry again.

  8. OH! Almost forgot:

    No, fuck you, cur spending!!

    That is all.

    1. “cur spending!”

      We should NOT be spending more on curs, I don’t care how much you want that doggie in the window!

      1. Fuck you, cunt spending?

        1. God, not the Sandra Fluke bullshit again.

  9. Off Topic… looks like the Christian whackos are at it again:

    Southington, Conn. community leaders announced today that they have canceled plans to collect and destroy violent video games, among other forms of media

    Oh wait, these aren’t Christians, they’re liberals. It’s all so confusing.…

    1. Southington is a rich town. They had a good soccer team.

    2. Not to be outdone, the oh, so lefty Chron TV critic gets has pants in a wad:
      “But even if the nation weren’t supposed to be engaged in a “conversation” about media violence […] “The Following” does not belong on network television.
      Read more:…..z2I4d22rLb

      Fuck this guy, his ‘conversation’, and his infantile attempts as censorship.

      1. But he said he didn’t like censorship. It’s right there in the article. He just wants some censorship couched in a “national conversation”.

        1. Paul.| 1.15.13 @ 2:29PM |#
          “But he said he didn’t like censorship. It’s right there in the article”

          Right. Asshole only wants censorship on what *he* wants.
          Fucking idiot; did he ever read history and see why we have a constitution?

      2. Never read the comments. But I couldn’t help myself:

        flying 10:00 AM on January 15, 2013
        Fox News channel, Rush Limbough, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Alex Jones, Ted Nugent, Sean Hannity and all the other Nutjobs should be deemed domestic terrorists as defined by the GOP passed Patriot Act..

        And this gem:

        imwired 9:20 AM on January 15, 2013
        TV producers are looking for profits before engaging in societal compassion at any cost, including deaths of children.

        I know it’s an often used phrase around these boards, but we are truly fucked.

        1. I love how it is the “GOP passed” Patriot Act even though it passed with overwhelming Dem support initially and has been renewed multiple times by a DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS.

          1. Y’know, I voted for Bush. But I was never a TEAM guy. When Bush was starting to propose the Patriot Act, and rattling the sabres at Iraq, I thought Hillary, et al would act as a check to Bush. But they did nothing. They rubber stamped everything his administrations wanted. The TEAM dichotomy was obliterated after 9/11, and replaced by TEAM FUCK YOU. Screw all those shitheads, I’m a libertarian.

            1. They all loved the war right up until the moment that it was politically advantageous to hate it.

              Iraq was one of the most Wilsonian wars this country has ever fought. It was about human rights and the authority of the UN. Had a Democratic President fought it, the Dems would have hailed him as a liberator for doing it.

              1. Wilsonian

                Apt description, and exactly why I opposed it.

                Wilson is a strong candidate for worst president in US history.

    3. That’s what we’re reduced to? Burning Beatles records? At least someone stopped it this time.

      1. Probably because all that got donated to the cause was three used copies of Duke Nukem Forever.

        Where’s the fun in torching that?

        1. If only I could torch a copy of Diablo III, but I bought it digitally.

          1. I got two solid months out of that game. I don’t regret it.

    4. Violent video games don’t cause people to kill people, hallucinations of Commander William Riker cause people to kill people..

  10. Debt Problem Belongs to Obama Now

    Which is why for leftist sycophants the debt is no longer a problem. But it is still Bush’s fault.

  11. If they mint a trillion-dollar coin, they should put Obama’s head on it.

    That will justly immortalize him for all time as the owner of fiscally irresponsible money-printing schemes.

    1. “If they mint a trillion-dollar coin, they should put Obama’s head on it.”

      For some reason the guillotine popped into my mind when I read that.

      1. Many people whose heads have been on coins have ended up losing them due to fiscal irresponsibility.

  12. Reynolds says “Spending keeps going up. Revenues, however, are not.”

    That’s a strange thing to say, since revenue went up in 2012, and spending went down in 2012.

    The last segment of that red line should go down, not up.

    I’m not saying there’s not a big problem, but you might as well get the facts right, or Obama can just say “No, their chart is wrong, they made a mistake.”

  13. spending went down in 2012.

    Its true, FY 2012 spending was down compared to FY 2011.

    In one of those inexplicable coincidences, though, spending spiked just after they closed the books on FY 2012. Weird, huh?…..iness.html

  14. She added: ‘For me, doing swim, it’s the best part of being a Victoria’s Secret Angel
    Sexy bikini because I love the sun and the ocean.

  15. Nicest chat and chat Iraqi entertaining Adject all over the world

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.