can you not resort to infantile ad hominem every time we discuss politics dead?

I was just pointing out that jpc4p posted the same link I posted which you ignored earlier. I just find it funny.

This is a typical left leaning graph from a left leaning news organization. Like dead said, the important word in that graph is NEW. If you don't like what Bush started, why has Obama continued so much of what he started? He extended the tax cuts, hasn't end the wars, did his own stimulus, etc.

Big ups to the NY Times for manipulating the minds of impressionable democrats.

Did I like Bush? Ehhh, not so much. But I think he got a raw deal with 9/11 occuring early in his first term. Is he worse than Obama? No fucking way. Obama is every bit as bad as Bush. The real question is, why do you folks still support him when he's simply doing a lot of what Bush did?

Good points Thraxle. New boss same as the old boss.

ps. We need a /mute on this forum.

welp I tried to approach this civilly, and as I said in my clarification - what I'm looking for is the GOP response, considering all of the anti-Obama rhetoric in spending.

Doesn't look like I got that answer though.

"Why do you folks still support him?"

There's a huge difference between supporting and agreeing with 100%.

Show me a single realistic better option and they'll get my vote in '12.

how on Earth is this "manipulating minds?"

it's pretty fucking straight forward - the costs attributed to new programs of each Presidency according to the congressional budget office.

considering the amount of whining the GOP and it's followers rant about Obama's "socialistic" programs and out of control spending, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is about NEW programs implemented by him, you'd think looking at a comparison of the NEW programs implemented by the previous guy that they supported would give them pause.

I know I know, neither of you supported Bush (or whatever) and think both have spent too much - I'm not looking for that response, was looking for an explanation of the hypocritical rhetoric we hear so much.

Both parties are hypocritical; i suggest you begin looking outside of the party rhetoric.

You chart; assumes that ObamaCare costs 0 dollars. This should tell you enough about the chart. It is simply party rhetoric and propaganda. According to Obama's own budgets; he will have spent and added to the debt more then any other leader in the history of human civilization.

I'm sorry that my response didn't fit your narrative; but if you are looking for a Bush vs Whatever type discussion; you are 3 years late...

dead, are we reading the same chart?

"healthreform and entitlement changes" 153 billion USD

also dead, is it really fair to blame Obama for the still running programs of Bush?

it is not like he has the power to remove them, not all of them at least.