jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (18 posts)

Is Romney a bold face liar when he claims Obama's federal spending is unpreceden

  1. pagesvoice profile image84
    pagesvoiceposted 5 years ago

    Is Romney a bold face liar when he claims Obama's federal spending is unprecedented?

    The facts are as follows: Reagan '82 - 85 federal spending was 8.7 and 86 -  89 4.9. Bush I 5.4 and Bush II 7.3 - 8.2. Clinton  was 3.2 - 3.9 and Obama 1.4 on government spending. Without talking about Obama and simply answering the question at hand...is Mitt Romney lying about federal spending?

  2. profile image0
    Larry Wallposted 5 years ago

    Comparing percentages of spending increases to actual dollars spent can be misleading. If President X increases spending by five percent, and then President Y increases it by 2 percent, is he really reducing spending or just taking advantage of the increases enacted by the previous president.

    The real guide would be a chart showing:

    Revenue for the fiscal year        Spending for the Fiscal Year      Difference + or -

    You would then need footnotes. We spent more than plan after 9-11. We spent more than planned after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

    We spent more than plan when the economy collasped and more than planned when the price of oil shot up.

    Now that the price of oil is going down. Obama may come out as reducing spending to such a point that we ma show a "surplus".

    Numbers are tricky--politicians are masters at manipulating them.

  3. profile image0
    screamingposted 5 years ago

    Romney is a master of manipulation and avoids answering any question with a question. But then again, most I talk to are voting against President Obama even though they dislike Romney. I wonder what their real reason is?

  4. mbergo profile image70
    mbergoposted 5 years ago

    Where did you get your numbers?
    From http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
    US Federal spending has not grown much since 2009. However, the increase was absurd for that year.
    2000: 1.8 Trillion
    2005: 2.5 Trillion
    2008: 3.0 Trillion
    2009: 3.5 Trillion
    2012: 3.8 Trillion

    1. pagesvoice profile image84
      pagesvoiceposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The figures presented are the percentages of annualized growth of federal spending as presented by the Wall Street Journal on May 22, 2012. Fact: Gov't spending under Obama is slower than anytime in the last 60 yrs., including the stimulus bill.

  5. Prakash Dighe profile image80
    Prakash Digheposted 5 years ago

    I'm not sure about your figures - and as given in your note below, the way Wall Street Journal has calculated them does not make it easier. But if you remove the spending on stimulus packages - which I personally feel were necessary to boost the economy - then federal spending has certainly not gone up, and Mitt Romney would be lying about it.

  6. wwoods1 profile image61
    wwoods1posted 5 years ago

    Does it really matter, all politicians tell lies and I bet President Obama has told his share.  So you see since I don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth and I believe that either one will do whatever it takes to win, I can easily say hes lying.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      More than his share.  Most politicians will do almost anything to get elected and lying is part of the equation!

  7. junko profile image78
    junkoposted 5 years ago

    Yes, Romney is lying and repeating other people's lies The bases of the Republican-Tea Party is rooted in true lies mixed with truth. If they ran on their record, they would walk and not have a dog in the race. Old Guard Republicans refused to be a part of the lying and are letting the newbees and young republicans drive the party in a bigger ditch.

    1. profile image0
      Fatigmonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      All politicians past, present and future in any party are liars.  Obama is probably the top liar of all and he has nothing but contempt for our constitution and anyone that does not agree with him is labeled a racist regardless of color.

    2. profile image0
      screamingposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I'm wondering if Romney is running to help the country or if he feels it's important to his families legacy. Given his dad lost his bid.

  8. shea duane profile image60
    shea duaneposted 5 years ago

    I think both parties create 'talking points' that are spun to their advantage. That being said, the US was in good financial shape after 8 years of Clinton, and it will take a lot of years to clean up after GW Bush. I think this question is really difficult to answer in a single paragraph (or even multiple paragraphs). Romney, I'm sure, has spinners who can back up his statements with some version of the truth. I mean, Obama inherited war debts that have to actually be paid. Mr. Obama has a difficult job, but I think he is doing better than McCain could have done, and I think he will do better than Romney would do if he had a chance (please Lord, protect your children from Mitt and his flip flops).

  9. American Romance profile image60
    American Romanceposted 5 years ago

    How can he be a liar when it's all documented?  President Obama spent more in three years then Bush did in 8!   To date Obama has spent more than all the presidents combined through the history of this nation!  If that is not a reason to vote him out then what is?.................he certainly never mentioned this when he was runnng for office!

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      That is obvious!  Why has this response received negative voites?

  10. tmbridgeland profile image84
    tmbridgelandposted 5 years ago

    Not really a lie. Spending as a raw number is indeed higher under Presidnt Obama than any former president, so the word 'unprecedented' is correct. We can argue why that is, but he is the president and can submit any budget he pleases. It is congress anyway that spends the money, not the president. I put most of the blame on the House and Senate for the growth in spending.

  11. Attikos profile image80
    Attikosposted 5 years ago

    Well, if you're going to tell a lie it's best to be bold about it. Whether or not Romney is, i.e. either lying or bold, remains to be seen. This issue is so spun out by partisan political propaganda and the venomous hatred dripping from some of these posts it's hard to tell, so I'll withhold judgment until enough information is available, and the distortions of the campaign season settled down, to permit balanced examination of the matter.

    Bold or not, though, it's a safe assumption Romney does indeed have a face. I suppose that's something.

  12. Catherine Kane profile image82
    Catherine Kaneposted 5 years ago

    Bold faced liar is a pretty strong term.

    He's definitely innaccurate.This could be a lie, or it could also be not knowing what he's tallking about (ignorance)

  13. lone77star profile image85
    lone77starposted 5 years ago

    US Government figures show that Obama added the most to the national debt of any president, by far!

    Bush was insane ($5 Trillion in 8 years), but Obama skyrocketed the debt ($5.3 Trillion in 3 years). That's adding to the debt! In 2001, the debt was already a nightmare at $5 Trillion. Now, it's $15.3 Trillion.

    When that Debt Bubble pops, the puppet masters behind Bush, Obama and Romney will be grinning all the way to the bank. With a worthless dollar, their foreign currency or other assets will be able to buy up the rest of America they don't already own.

    The 99% will be slaves to the Wall Street and Rothschild elite.

    I've been saying recently that Obama betrayed his Oath of Office, but then I remembered he never really gave an Oath of Office. He and the Supreme Court justice muffed it. On purpose? After all the support I gave Sir Barry, that wouldn't surprise me.

 
working