Obama Falsely Claims to Cut the Deficit in 10 Years

Obama is confused between reduces deficit spending and reducing the national debt. There is a humongous difference. Also, Obama is planning to reduce the deficit by adding over $7 trillion to the national debt over 12 years instead of 10 years. Huh??

(HotAir) When Barack Obama gave a much-anticipated speech on the budget and deficit spending last week, it turned into a disappointing mix of ambiguities and demagoguery. Most people couldn’t discern any “plan” at all in the speech, only hazy promises with few specifics. As it turns out, Obama himself doesn’t appear to be aware of even those few specifics he did offer. In yesterday’s Facebook townhall event, Obama not only mischaracterized the scope of the Republican plan to cut deficits, he also mischaracterized his own:

Obama Say I Dare You to Repeal Obamacare

Obama is taunting the GOP to try and repeal Obamacare. The president is arrogant and out of touch with mainstream America. In fact, Obama tells the GOP that they went to voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my health care bill, but wasn't paid for. The problem of Obama plight is that Bush was able to sustain it with a strong economy; 57 weeks of economic growth after Sept 11. Also, the tax cuts to business kept the unemployment around 5.7%. Obamacare cost more than the 2 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq combined. Obama increased spending during an economic turmoil and started a war in Libya without asking Congress permission. Unemployment is still at 10% (Gallup survey) and inflation is through the roof. So, there is no comparison to the matter.

(CBS NEWS) In what he thought was a private chat with campaign donors Thursday evening, President Obama offered the most revealing behind-the-scenes account to date of his budget negotiations with GOP leaders last week.

CBS Radio News White House correspondent Mark Knoller listened in to an audio feed of Mr. Obama's conversation with donors after other reporters traveling with the president had left the room.

In the candid remarks, Mr. Obama complains of Republican attempts to attach measures to the budget bill which would have effectively killed parts of his hard-won health care reform program.

"I said, 'You want to repeal health care? Go at it. We'll have that debate. You're not going to be able to do that by nickel-and-diming me in the budget. You think we're stupid?'" recalled the president of his closed-door negotiations on the bill to fund the federal government until September.

Mr. Obama said he told House Speaker John Boehner and members of his staff that he'd spent a year and a half getting the sweeping health care legislation passed -- paying "significant political costs" along the way -- and wouldn't let them undo it in a six-month spending bill.

Mr. Obama bemoaned GOP leaders' attempts to attach a measure to the budget bill which would have cut funding for Planned Parenthood.

"Put it in a separate bill," the president said he told Boehner and his staff. "We'll call it up. And if you think you can overturn my veto, try it. But don't try to sneak this through."

CBO Says Budget Deal Will Cut Spending by Only $352 Million

LIKE I SAID, "NOT ENOUGH!!!!!"

(National Journal) A Congressional Budget Office analysis of the fiscal 2011 spending deal that Congress will vote on Thursday concludes that it would cut spending this year by less than one-tenth of what both Republicans or Democrats have claimed.

A comparison prepared by the CBO shows that the omnibus spending bill, advertised as containing some $38.5 billion in cuts, will only reduce federal outlays by $352 million below 2010 spending rates. The nonpartisan budget agency also projects that total outlays are actually some $3.3 billion more than in 2010, if emergency spending is included in the total.

The astonishing result, according to CBO, is the result of several factors: increases in spending, especially at the Defense Department; decisions to draw over half of the savings from recissions; and cuts to reserve funds and and money for mandatory-spending programs that might never have been spent.

Obama Speech is Weak and Has TOO Many Hole

Today, President Obama gave a speech on deficit reduction. Besides pandering to the Liberal base, the speech is nothing more than a class warfare tactic to increase the tax on the rich. America heard that cliché before many times and I think we are sick of the rhetoric. When Liberals and Democrats say tax the rich, they meant to tax everybody. Look at the price of food and other consumable goods. Look at the gas price we are currently paying. These are form of taxes that everybody pays.

Democrats had their chance when they took over in 2006. Since then, they didn't create a balance budget. In reality, they weren't serious about it. Initially, Obama created a Fiscal Commission and that was a façade. It was ceremonial pageantry. In fact, Obama ignored the commission’s recommendations and disregarded many of their suggestions from the budget. Now, Obama decides to play leadership. In the speech today, Obama wants to put another commission to solve the problem he refuses to confront. This is called "kicking the can" down the road. Obama is hoping a miracle that the deficit will fix itself.

(Weekly Standard) House Budget chairman Paul Ryan's office highlights "key facts" from Obama's speech:

· Counts unspecified savings over 12 years, not the 10-year window by which serious budget proposals are evaluated.

· Postpones all savings until 2013 – after his reelection campaign.

· Runs away from the Fiscal Commission’s recommendations on Social Security – puts forward no specific ideas or even a process to force action.

Calls for the appointment of another commission, after mostly omitting from his Fiscal Year 2012 Budget any of proposals submitted by the commission he appointed last year.

· Non-specific framework fails to meet his Fiscal Commission's own deficit-reduction goals.

Taxes:
· Proposes to raise taxes on the American people by more than $1 trillion, devastating our fragile economy and stifling job creation.

· Endorsed the Fiscal Commission’s ideas on taxes, which specifically called for lower tax rates and a broader base, but then called for higher tax rates. Which is it?

· Government health and retirement programs are growing at more than twice the speed of the economy. At the current rate of spending, revenue would have to rise “by more than 50 percent” just to keep debt at its current level, according to the Government Accountability Office. That means tax increases across-the-board, now and in the future.

Medicare:
Instead of proposing structural reforms that would actually reduce health care costs, the President proposed across-the-board cuts to current seniors’ care.
· Strictly limits the amount of health care seniors can receive within the existing structure of unsustainable government health care programs.

· Gives more power to unelected bureaucrats in Washington to determine what treatments seniors should or shouldn’t get, against a backdrop of costs that continue to rise.

· Conceded that the relentlessly rising cost of health care is the primary reason why the nation is threatened by debt, and implicitly conceded that his health care law failed to solve the problem.

· Eviscerates the only competitive element anywhere in health-care entitlement programs – the competition amongst Part D prescription-drug plans – which allowed the drug benefit to come in 41 percent under budget.

Medicaid:
Acknowledges that the open-ended financing of Medicaid is a crippling financial burden to both states and the federal government, but explicitly rejected the only solution to this problem, which is to give states the freedom they need to design systems that work for the unique needs of their own populations.

Defense:
Proposes more cuts on top of $78 billion in cuts included in his own defense budget, which he proposed just two months ago – all at a time when he continues to task the military with new missions.

Budget Cuts Axes Czars Already Gone

The budget cuts proposed by Republicans is a sham. The cuts are either spending proposed by Obama (never implemented) or money left over from stimulus, census, or money to pay for Obama's czars. They are not real concise budget cuts. Billion dollar in spending cuts is nothing to the trillions we have in deficit. I can't believe Washington assumes the American people are stupid. The American people are frustrated. Washington saw how capable the Tea Party Movement can destroy a politician's future. It is too late for retribution. The fury of the movement will be seen 2012.

(Politico) House Republicans won a symbolic victory by dethroning four White House "czars" under the contentious federal spending agreement rolled out early Tuesday morning, but symbolism may be all they got.

The language in the short-term budget agreement seeks to put four of President Barack Obama's policy czars out of jobs — those appointed to assist the president on health care, climate change, autos and manufacturing, and urban affairs.

The catch: At least three of those four czars have already moved out of the czar jobs.

House Republicans attached an amendment to a spending bill that passed the chamber in February to block funding for nine White House policy advisers. Louisiana Republican Rep. Steve Scalise, the author of that amendment, warned at the time against what he called "a very disturbing proliferation of czars" under President Obama.

With the narrower anti-czar rider, both sides have an opportunity to claim victory. Republicans walk away with the talking point that they dethroned unelected officials playing key roles on controversial policy initiatives; the White House and Senate Democrats can claim they protected most of the advisers that matter — those who are still there.

Budget tricks helped Obama save programs from cuts

This deceitful accounting manipulation is so common with Washington, especially with the Obama Administration. From the unemployment numbers to balancing the budget, it is all about hiding numbers. Everybody in Washington is in on the act. The GOP establishment knew what was going on with Democrats leading the way. Unfortunately, the America public is not privy to the inner works of Washington. Even though most Americans are blinded by the double standard in Washington, there is one thing Americans can agree. The Legislative and Executive branch are crooks. They are looking for ways to make themselves richer and holding onto power as long as they can. This is why both Democrats, Liberals, and the GOP establishment hates the Tea Party movement. The elitist in Washington have a common enemy that can change the total make-up of America. The Tea Party movement will take back America from Washington and return it to the American people.

(My Way News) WASHINGTON (AP) - The historic $38 billion in budget cuts resulting from at-times hostile bargaining between Congress and the Obama White House were accomplished in large part by pruning money left over from previous years, using accounting sleight of hand and going after programs President Barack Obama had targeted anyway.

Such moves permitted Obama to save favorite programs - Pell grants for poor college students, health research and "Race to the Top" aid for public schools, among others - from Republican knives, according to new details of the legislation released Tuesday morning.

And big holes in foreign aid and Environmental Protection Agency accounts were patched in large part. Republicans also gave up politically treacherous cuts to the Agriculture Department's food inspection program.

The details of the agreement reached late Friday night just ahead of a deadline for a partial government shutdown reveal a lot of one-time savings and cuts that officially "score" as cuts to pay for spending elsewhere, but often have little to no actual impact on the deficit.

As a result of the legerdemain, Obama was able to reverse many of the cuts passed by House Republicans in February when the chamber approved a bill slashing this year's budget by more than $60 billion. In doing so, the White House protected favorites like the Head Start early learning program, while maintaining the maximum Pell grant of $5,550 and funding for Obama's "Race to the Top" initiative that provides grants to better-performing schools.

Instead, the cuts that actually will make it into law are far tamer, including cuts to earmarks, unspent census money, leftover federal construction funding, and $2.5 billion from the most recent renewal of highway programs that can't be spent because of restrictions set by other legislation. Another $3.5 billion comes from unused spending authority from a program providing health care to children of lower-income families.

Obama regrets vote against raising debt limit

If the president actually sat and listen to the debates and stop voting present most of the time, he would understood what the bills were about. Ironically, it is comical that raising the debt ceiling crisis is imperative from a president who voted against it as a senator.

(Yahoo) WASHINGTON – The White House said Monday that President Barack Obama regrets his vote as a senator in 2006 against raising the debt limit — the same kind of increase he's now pressuring Congress to approve.

Obama "thinks it was a mistake," presidential spokesman Jay Carney told reporters. "He realizes now that raising the debt ceiling is so important to the health of this economy and the global economy that it is not a vote that, even when you are protesting an administration's policies, you can play around with."

The country will reach its debt limit of $14.3 trillion by May 16. If Congress doesn't raise it by then or shortly thereafter, the government would not be able to make debt payments, leading to an unprecedented default of the national debt and driving up borrowing costs for the government, U.S. companies and consumers, the Treasury Department warns.

Obama State of the Union, I WILL RAISE YOUR TAX

Obama was so late to agree with the GOP budget for 2011 that he is compelled to go on air to tell the nation of his fiscal budget plan to fix the rising deficit. Something doesn't sound right. Overall, Obama is going to raise taxes. Read my lips, "Obama will raise taxes!" I am assuming many voted Obama because he wasn't going to raise taxes because only an idiot would vote someone into power whose platform is raising taxes like income, gas, and consumables. Liberal Democrats are taken off guard. Besides being angry, many Liberals have a low expectation with Obama; hence, a very low approval rating of the president. As usual, the president didn't give specifics of his plan. However, the president does have several days to make up one.

(WSJ) President Barack Obama will lay out his plan for reducing the nation's deficit Wednesday, belatedly entering a fight over the nation's long-term financial future. But in addition to suggesting cuts—the current focus of debate—the White House looks set to aim its firepower on a more divisive topic: taxes.

In a speech Wednesday, Mr. Obama will propose cuts to entitlement programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, and changes to Social Security, a discussion he has largely left to Democrats and Republicans in Congress. He also will call for tax increases for people making over $250,000 a year, a proposal contained in his 2012 budget, and changing parts of the tax code he thinks benefit the wealthy.

Republicans Budget Bill Will Kill Old People

"Fearmongering" is the main arsenal of the Democrats. Scaring any group of people, Democrats feel emboldened and the easiest target is the elderly. As a very big voting group, Democrats need to keep seniors dependent on the government with entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security. Since the GOP is trying to balance a budget, Democrats are screaming Republicans are killing senior citizen. We hear this all the time. The last time Congress balanced the budget was under Clinton in 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001, and that was with a Republican majority. During that time, the "fearmongering" was intense by the Democrat party, but no senior died from a balance budget.


Transcipt from the Rush Limbaugh Show

RUSH: You remember all the grief that Sarah Palin got talking about death panels in Obamacare. She was called a "fearmonger" and all that. Never mind that these so-called nonexistent death panels then were removed from Obamacare. Now, here comes Debbie Wasserman Schultz accusing the Republicans of killing senior citizens, and there is no outcry from anyone, anywhere, that is in any way similar to the outcry Sarah Palin got. That's another example of the blatant double standard which exists.

Here's the Patsy Schroeder sound bite. This is 1995 on the House floor, Pat Schroeder, Democrat congressperson from Colorado.

SCHROEDER: And they had the Big Kahuna of GOPAC come speak, none other than Rush Limbaugh himself, who stood there and said to all these people who paid all this money to keep GOPAC rich, he was hailing the GOP budget! He said, according to the paper and according to the C-SPAN tape, he thought it was wonderful because it would starve the poor and it would drive Medicare recipients, including his mother, to eat dog food, but not to worry, Mom, he says, I'm sending you a new can opener. Wow. That tells you what today's about.

RUSH: It's amazing how history repeats itself: 1995, 16 years ago, the Republicans had a budget, the Democrats react to it the same way. "It's going to kill old people." Now, there's a part of me asking, why does history keep repeating itself? How is it, you have to ask yourself, that the Democrats continue to get away with this? They got away with it in -- well, it's arguable -- they got away with it in '95 in the PR sense. They did not get away with it in '95 at the ballot box; Republicans won reelection in 1996. But they clearly won the PR battle. By winning the PR battle, they scared the hell out of the Republicans and made them timid, started to back off, their forcefulness declined a little bit. May not be that history repeats itself, but the hysteria surely does. It's the same thing. You might also say, "Well, Rush, the history's repeating itself. Back then, the Republicans were talking about the need to get the budget in balance." Well, that is always true. That's something that always has to be done.

You know, we had a bite earlier this week -- maybe latter part of last week -- talking about quick fixes. If we would've tried the quick fix 30 years ago, where would we be today? We wouldn't be in the mess that we're in today if we had stuck to what we started in 1995 when it came to balancing the budget. We wouldn't be where we are today. The problem is that between 1995 and now, we've had a bunch of Democrats in Congress, and we've had some spendthrift Republicans as well. The bottom line is that we're always gonna have people in Washington who are going to want to spend money because that's the ticket. That's the route to success. And it's all personal, in terms of their own career and their advancement. Spending money is one of the quickest ways to ingratiate yourself with people.

And you go talk to some elderly members of Congress about this health care bill and what it's gonna do to this country 10, 15 years down the road, and some of these members of the House and Senate who are in their seventies: "I don't care. I'm gonna be dead." That's really their attitude about it. Under Reagan and Bush, the Republicans had control of the White House and both houses of Congress -- how many old people died then? We can go back and count the numbers. How many old people died during the Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2 administrations? How many old people died because of the Republican budget every year? Answer: zero. And yet the same complaint, the same charge is made. And above all, most of all, you wonder about the idiots that hear it out there, average Americans who believe it, who buy into it.

Obama has a plan to reduce the soaring budget deficit...LOL

Again, Democrats use class warfare to instill fear and unquestionable animosity among groups of people. With Obama leading the charge claiming credit that the 2011 budget is the biggest annual spending cut in history, it could have been avoided if the president stopped spending wastefully. There is nothing to celebrate. We are still on a yearly trillion dollar deficit. Obama expands the government and added many entitlement programs into the system, and he expects the rich to pay for it. It is not only the rich, but rather, it is everybody. I am looking forward to hear how Obama will cut the US deficit. More likely it will involve more spending and cut the military budget.

(Yahoo) WASHINGTON (AFP) - Aides say President Barack Obama will lay out plans to reduce the soaring US budget deficit on Wednesday, setting the stage for a major battle that could define his reelection campaign.

Washington is still regrouping from the political jousting that led to the near shutdown of the federal government at the weekend, but looming on the horizon are even bigger battles over the debt ceiling and the 2012 budget.

Opposition Republicans put pressure on Obama in the long-term budget debate by unveiling a spending blueprint last week that would cut government expenditures by $6 trillion over the next decade.

Republicans want to slash funds for Medicare, benefits for the elderly, and Medicaid, a health program for people with low income, but Democrats would prefer to make up much of the deficit by raising taxes on the wealthy.

The president, by contrast, would take "a scalpel, not a machete" to the social welfare programs and look to rein in the deficit "in a balanced way," Plouffe told ABC's "This Week" program.

Flashback: Obama pledges to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term

I have waited to this point to bring this article back from the archives. Obama has served for over 2 years in office and I am still waiting to see the $1.3 trillion national deficit to be cut in half by the end of his first term. It was on February 2009 when Obama made that very bold and idiotic statement. With the recent cuts to avert a government shutdown, Obama is still running a trillion dollar yearly deficit. In addition, Obama promise transparency which he reneged. Obama promised to end accounting tricks to make the numbers look good, which he reneged. Obama also pledged to end no-bid contracts in Iraq, end waste in entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and reinstate "pay as you go" rule, which were all lies. Obama boast that the estimated $1.3 trillion deficit inherited from the Bush administration will be halved to $533 billion by 2013, or from 9.2% of the gross domestic product. In reality, Obama's math is extremely fuzzy and his optimism foolish.

(CNN) WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama pledged Monday to cut the nation's $1.3 trillion deficit in half by the end of his first term.

He identified exploding health-care costs as the chief culprit behind rising federal deficits during a bipartisan "fiscal responsibility summit" convened to discuss ways to restore fiscal stability without deepening the recession.

Meeting with the congressional leadership of both parties, as well as a range of business, academic, financial and labor leaders, Obama warned that the country cannot continue its current rate of deficit spending without facing dire economic consequences.

Deal falls short of GOP cut pledge; As good as we could get, Boehner says

Not enough!!!! Need more purging in the GOP establishment starting with House Speaker Boehner. Need more Tea Party supporters to change Washington! The GOP caved in! Pitiful! If it took this long to pass the 2011 budget, just wait till they do the 2012 this year. It's not over yet, folks!

(The Hill) The bipartisan deal struck late Friday falls short of the House Republican campaign pledge to cut $100 billion in fiscal 2011 spending.

The pact cuts $78.5 billion when compared to President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget request, which was never enacted.

Comparatively, the accord cuts $39 billion in actual spending, which is $22 billion less than bill the House passed in February.

In a brief interview, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told The Hill the agreement was "as good a deal as we could get."

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the Republican Study Committee, said he expects "significant" opposition from conservatives, both to the short-term fix and the long-term spending bill. He said he will vote against both.

GOP budget would kill 70,000 children

Idiot liberals! So, Democrats funding for abortions isn't the same thing? I say screw it! If China wants to be the next world leader, let them help fund it. We can't be saving the world, and at the same time, lose our world exceptional status. Enough is enough. If we don't cut spending, there will be more than 70,000 children dead.

(Foreign Policy) As Congress struggles to negotiate a budget deal to keep the government running, the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) told lawmakers Wednesday that the GOP version of the budget bill would result in the deaths of at least 70,000 children who depend on American food and health assistance around the world.

"We estimate, and I believe these are very conservative estimates, that H.R. 1 would lead to 70,000 kids dying," USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah testified before the House Appropriations State and Foreign Ops subcommittee.

"Of that 70,000, 30,000 would come from malaria control programs that would have to be scaled back specifically. The other 40,000 is broken out as 24,000 would die because of a lack of support for immunizations and other investments and 16,000 would be because of a lack of skilled attendants at birth," he said.

The Republican bill, known as H.R.1, was passed by the House, and would fund the government for the rest of fiscal 2011. It would effectively cut 16 percent from the Obama administration's original fiscal 2011 request for the international affairs account.

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) pointed out that H.R. 1 would provide $430 million for the International Disaster Assistance (IDA) account, which is 50 percent below the president's fiscal 2011 request and 67 percent below fiscal 2010 levels.

The Democrats are the Real Party of NO

(Fox News) From Washington to Wisconsin, the battles over government spending are clarifying which party is the real Party of No. It's Democrats in a landslide.

They say no to deficit and debt reduction. No to bringing sanity to public-employee costs. And Hell No to voters who want smaller, less-expensive government.

So much for President Obama's plea for an "adult conversation" on entitlements. Maybe he meant "adult" as in XXX.

His was an especially cynical posture because his partymates were helping to whip up a frenzy among teachers and others in Wisconsin. A proposal there for unions to agree to givebacks in their Cadillac benefit plans and lose the right to negotiate future benefits was met with a near-riot.Obama supported the unions and Dem legislators are hiding in other states to avoid voting. Meanwhile, schools were shut so teachers could march to prove their dedication to themselves, err, children.

Wisconsin's new GOP governor, Scott Walker, invited Obama to butt out. "We're focused on balancing our budget," he told reporters. "It would be wise for the president and others in Washington to focus on balancing their budget, which they are a long way from doing."

Democrats Game Plan is to Blame Republicans for a Government Shutdown

The Democrats game plan is a scare tactic using class warfare as their initial assault. Next will be a cowardly blame game on the Republican party. This is typical of Democrats. It would be wiser to follow the Wisconsin Democrats and leave town. This whole thing is a joke. The Democrats are claiming that cutting $100 billion will affect society adversely. The budget deficit is in the trillions of dollar and the Democrats are complaining $100 billion. Let the shutdown of the government happen. This time around the American people understands the dilemma this country faces. The American people are more educated that Washington is corrupt. It is ironic how the Democrats are trying to find their way to the American people after ignoring them for the past 4 year. Democrats in Washington are a bunch of scumbags.

(The Hill) Democrats headed back to their districts for the Presidents Day recess hope to drive home the message that Republicans should be blamed if the fight over spending cuts ends in a government shutdown.

House Democrats were still deciding Friday on how much advertising to buy during the week, but they had settled on a message of pointing out specific cuts in the House GOP spending bill and portraying them as unreasonable, a Democratic strategist said.

Democrats will tell constituents that the GOP bill will kick 218,000 children out of Head Start, cause 7,000 special education teachers to loose their jobs, devastate cancer and diabetes research and deny assistance to homeless veterans.

Key part of the Democrats’ messaging strategy will be to place the blame on the Republicans if an agreement on the CR can not be reached and the government is forced to shut down.

If Republicans cuts are successfully painted as unreasonable, then it is easier to blame them if a shutdown occurs, a Democratic aide said.

One aspect of the message is that the spending bill “destroys jobs” at a time of economic recovery. It says Democrats will trim spending by “going after tax loopholes and wasteful subsidies, instead of the reckless and indiscriminate cuts in the GOP spending plan.”

Democrats will also point to efforts they were made by their party to save American jobs. They will highlight attempts to pass a Build America Bonds initiative and a bill ending government contracts for companies that offshore jobs, according to the House Democrats “District Work Plan.”

Gov’t Has Borrowed an Additional $29,660 Per Household Since Obama Signed Stimulus

This is absolutely obscene...............

(CNSNews.com) - The federal government has borrowed an additional $29,660 per household in the United States since President Barack Obama signed his economic stimulus law two years ago.

That brings the total national debt to $125,475.18 per household.

DEBT NOW EQUALS ENTIRE ECONOMY

In other words, we are now broke thanks to Obama..........................

(Washington Times)President Obama‘s budget, released Monday, was conceived as a blueprint for future spending, but it also paints the bleakest picture yet of the current fiscal year, which is on track for a record federal deficit and will see the government’s overall debt surpass the size of the total U.S. economy.

Mr. Obama‘s budget projects that 2011 will see the biggest one-year debt jump in history, or nearly $2 trillion, to reach $15.476 trillion by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year. That would be 102.6 percent of GDP - the first time since World War II that dubious figure has been reached.

And the budget projects the government will run a deficit of $1.645 trillion this year, topping 2009’s previous record by more than $230 billion. By contrast, 2007’s deficit was just $160 billion altogether.

Still, amid the other staggering numbers in the budget Mr. Obama sent to Congress on Monday, the debt stands out because Congress will need to vote to raise the debt limit later this year, and because the numbers are so large.

Republicans argued Monday that the Obama administration‘s new budget fails to appreciate the depth of the country’s fiscal plight.

$32 Billion in Budget Cuts Proposed by GOP

Not enough, but at least it is a start......

(New York Times) WASHINGTON — After clamoring loudly about their plans to curtail federal spending, House Republicans announced Thursday that they would cut $32 billion for the remainder of the fiscal year — a minuscule amount compared with a projected annual deficit of nearly $1.5 trillion.

The Republican proposal is effectively $58 billion less than the domestic and foreign aid programs in President Obama’s budget request for 2011 — far short of the $100 billion in cuts that Representative John A. Boehner promised before the November elections that catapulted Republicans into the House majority and made him the speaker.

Republicans said that their cuts, prorated for the balance of the fiscal year, still fulfilled their campaign pledge to reduce to 2008 levels the government’s discretionary spending on everything other than national security. They said that the Democrats’ failure to approve a budget or pass any of the normal spending bills precluded further cuts.

But their unwillingness to impose steeper reductions also reflected the severe difficulty they face in slashing spending on the wide scale demanded by some Republicans, especially Tea Party-backed freshmen elected partly on a promise of fiscal restraint.

The Republican Study Committee, a conservative bloc that counts a majority of House Republicans among its members, has called for more than $100 billion in cuts this fiscal year, and $2.5 trillion in reductions over the next decade. The group sent a letter to Mr. Boehner urging him to meet or exceed that because voters expected no less.

111th Congress Added More Debt Than First 100 Congresses Combined: $10,429 Per Person in U.S.

Before criticing about Republican spending, Democrats are worst.......

(CNS News) The federal government has accumulated more new debt--$3.22 trillion ($3,220,103,625,307.29)—during the tenure of the 111th Congress than it did during the first 100 Congresses combined, according to official debt figures published by the U.S. Treasury.

That equals $10,429.64 in new debt for each and every one of the 308,745,538 people counted in the United States by the 2010 Census.

In fact, the 111th Congress not only has set the record as the most debt-accumulating Congress in U.S. history, but also has out-stripped its nearest competitor, the 110th, by an astounding $1.262 trillion in new debt.

Democrats controlled both the House and Senate in the 110th and 111th Congresses.

Obama Spent in Excess of $1 Trillion During each of the Last Two Years

(Wall Street Journal) The U.S. government ran its 26th straight monthly budget deficit in November amid wrangling over a package that would extend big tax cuts to Americans trying to recover from recession.

The Treasury Department, in its regular budget monthly statement, said the government spent $150.4 billion than it collected in the second month of fiscal 2011.
Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had expected a shortfall of $126.5 billion. November is traditionally a month for deficits.

Washington has spent in excess of $1 trillion during each of the last two fiscal years, as revenues were reduced by the deep recession. At the same time, the economic slump and Wall Street bailout raised the government's expenses.

The budget statement Friday said federal spending totaled $585.7 billion so far this fiscal year, with revenues at $294.9 billion. In the last two months, the federal government spent $128.3 billion on defense, $36.8 billion in interest payments on its debt, and $20.0 billion for unemployment benefits.

The U.S. budget deficit in fiscal 2010, at $1.294 trillion, was the second-highest ever, behind the record 2009 deficit of $1.416 trillion.