$9 Trillion in debt! WHO YOU GONNA BLAME?

Read the title of my post as a spoof on the whole Ghostbusters song – the good one from back then, not the idiotic PC reboot that Hollywood douched us with last year – because it is appropriate. The other day another old democrat crone was asked for an explanation of why the country accumulated $9 trillion plus dollars in debt with absolutely nothing to show for it (a lot of vote buying there and Hillary still lost), and Pelosi, in her grandeur, blamed Boosh. I am starting to think Boosh might be some kind of inhumane super fiend, because the guy can do everything impossible.

Let’s all sign it, baby: If the left is called out on something bad, who ya gonna blame? “George BOOSH”! Catchy…

Here we go:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi blamed former President George W. Bush and the Republicans on Friday for the more than $9 trillion that has been added to the national debt under President Obama’s watch.

Pelosi argued that under Obama, the annual budget deficit, which contributes to the national debt, has been reduced dramatically, and said that without Obama’s work, the national debt would be even higher. She also mostly blamed Bush for not paying for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

That same old tired trope again. Obama was great for the economy! Boosh’s Wars! This crap has to be because Pelosi knows for a fact that it was Boosh that bombed the twin towers. She must also think (or want everyone to believe) that it was Boosh whom unilaterally decided to invade Iraq. Thusly, poor godsend Obama struggled to end those evil wars, by losing them, and only managed to start conflicts all over the place – because of Boosh’s mind control, according to Pelosi (or was that all because of the evil Noble Peace Prize whispering in his ear?) – destabilizing the ME and the world in the process, had to spend all that money. It could never be that congress, mostly when it was totally controlled by democrats, felt obligated – probably because of Boosh’s evil super powers, again – to spend trillions more than the broken economy the democrats left us with after their social justice home-loan lending schemes imploded, so they could engage in buying votes, enriching special interests, and fattening donkey campaign coffers.

“When President Obama stood on the steps on the Capitol eight years from next week, the [budget] deficit was $1.4 trillion — one year deficit,” she said. “It’s reduced by 70 percent in his administration. Much of the increase in the national debt that has occurred from this time still springs from two unpaid-for wars, cost that we owe our veterans following that, giveaways that they gave to the pharmaceutical industry, and the high-end tax cuts that have carried forward without any job production. Absent the work of President Obama, this national debt would be even higher.”

Pelosi has some gall. Let me point out that $1.4 trillion dollar deficit was done by the congress she ran after the 2006 election, which remind everyone overrode evil Boosh to spend that money. Those of us that understand who decides how tax payer money gets spent, and who can sign for it or veto it, that is, if they can avoid that congressional override. Based on her own words, we are left basically connecting her accusations of that money being given to fat cats, with her. But somehow it still is Boosh’s fault they did that. Then you got this:

Pelosi noted the work done by former President Bill Clinton to balance the budget or leave a surplus.

You mean the work done by Newt Gingrich, thrice before it stuck? Gingrich dragged the smarter Clinton kicking and screaming away from the leftward turn his people and that crime syndicate capo he married for political convenience had been driving us for the first 2 years of his administration, and dismantled a lot of the horribly costly and wasteful welfare state. I wonder how that expensive welfare state fared under Obama, and if that coupled with the depressing and miserable Obama economy might have more to do with?

And then we have the other shoe about to drop: Obamacare. A monster that is poised to bankrupt America, if it is not slain soon. I bet Pelosi would like us to believe that was also Boosh’s fault even though not a single republican voted for this monstrosity and Boosh was on his ranch in Texas clearing brush. This is the Obama legacy, but the tools want you to believe someone else is responsible for 8 years of amateur hour.

Lets all sing it now: If you are a democrat, and you get called out on being crooks, who ya gonna blame? “George BOOSH”! If someone points out, you fucked America over good, who ya gonna blame? “George BOOSH”!

Catchy indeed. That Boosh guy is the most powerful villain in human history I tell you..

Comments are closed.

  1. Hal_10000

    which remind everyone overrode evil Boosh to spend that money.

    Uh, no. Bush never vetoed a single budget. Also note that if the GOP repeals Obamacare w/o spending cuts or tax hikes, it will increase the deficit (since O-care includes additional taxes).

    Thumb up 0

  2. AlexInCT *

    Uh, no. Bush never vetoed a single budget.

    The only one he would have wanted to veto, would have been the one a democrat controlled congress loaded with things he wanted, threatening to override a veto, anyway. So the spineless douche just signed it. Doesn’t detract from my point that that spending was still done by congress, and that $1.4 trillion dollar deficit was done by Pelosi’s congress.

    Also note that if the GOP repeals Obamacare w/o spending cuts or tax hikes, it will increase the deficit (since O-care includes additional taxes).

    Bleh, another democrat talking point. What about the additional costs introduced by the fact O-care is not collecting enough money to cover the expenditures related to it? Have we factored how much worse those expenses will be (unless your argument is that insurance companies will just jack prices even more to cover the difference, to which I say is that not a tax in and of itself)? What about rolling back the expenditures our government now has related to that care, period? Or are you trying to tell me the republicans will roll O-care back, but then the US government will still budget for and spend money on healthcare it no longer should?

    Love an argument that says that if you roll back an unaffordable, extremely wasteful and costly failure of a government program, it will in the end be more expensive for you because there were taxes associated with it you now lose.

    Maybe these people don’t understand how math works, but I think that when I am committed to spending more than I have on a healthcare program (because of all reasons that the tax mechanism put in place to fund it can’t generate the money needed to even come close to pay for it, of all things), and I kill it, while I lose the taxes, I also lose the expense. Since the expense outpaces the taxes I was collecting in the first place (which is why the program is an expensive failure), when all numbers are tallied (which includes the hidden tax in the form of premium hikes the scumbags making this argument about repeal costing more figured most people wouldn’t catch on to),  I should not be deeper in debt.

    Know what I’m saying?

    Thumb up 0

  3. Hal_10000

    Know what I’m saying?

    Yes. You’re saying, “I’m not terribly familiar with how Obamacare works so I’ll just throw out my usual word salad”. Obamacare includes taxes that more than pay for the subsidies (at least for the time being). You unpass Obamacare, you cut taxes, you increase the deficit. That’s how math works.

    Thumb up 4

  4. AlexInCT *

    Yes. You’re saying, “I’m not terribly familiar with how Obamacare works so I’ll just throw out my usual word salad”.

    I actually am vert familiar with how this boondoggle was supposed to work vs. what it really is working like, despite your desperate need to create this strawman to dismiss my points.

    Obamacare includes taxes that more than pay for the subsidies (at least for the time being). 

    Really? These guys must be lying then. And I assume that after six years of shit the expectation that the 2017 premiums are going to see huge hikes are just because the politicians are spending all that tax surplus on booze, blow, and bitchez. They have to be doing something like that, if they are, as you claim, collecting more now than they are paying out. Especially in light of the fact that the exchanges are all dropping like flies because there is not enough money.

    I keep hearing from these nanny staters you likely get your Obamacare information from that Social Security is doing great and solvent as well, but the fact is that it has been running in the red for 3 or so years. Don’t worry they say however. They have IOUs!

    Maybe the problem is with your understanding of math and how the economic fact twisting of the last 8 years should make you really doubt what they are telling us. After all, this is the administration that has gone without publishing a budget for the duration. And I distinctly remember a conversation we had back when where you told me CBO numbers were gospel, even though they, well, were not.

    Thumb up 0