Why is it the Deficit is a big deal now but never was under Bush or Reagan???

[KansasVoter]

So many polls show the defecit as being a worry. Why does it seem it didn't matter when any Rebublican was in office?

Some people are too stupid to vote!

[AndyA]

1. People are hypocrites.

That's why we spend millions impeaching Clinton for a lie, yet do nothing when Bush tells repeated lies that start wars and kill thousands of innocent soldiers.

[WCGreen]

6. It's not the people it's the guile of the political ladership...

[treestar]

2. True, they never seem to worry about it when it comes to war spending

If you look at the numbers, we go into debt whenever we have a war.

But go into debt when it's to help the economy, and it becomes a concern.

[uponit7771]

3. It's not, Maddow put it perfectly "....it's message politics that have nothing to do with policy..."

....and stupid ass'd tweety tried to act like he cared about deficits or that they were better under Bush

[depakid]

4. Because Democratic leaders time and time again allow themselves to be defined

rather than actively framing the narrative and defining the opposition.

Or at times- even fighting back.

[quantass]

5. Technically, the Top 1% are more valuable to America then the rest

since if i recall they own about 80% of the wealth (dont quote me). And so doing anything to help them prosper is seen as more important and so deficit be damned when the concern is to help the rich get richer (such as big bank bailouts for huge bonuses or going into unnecessary wars so as to improve the rich's stock or protect their stolen wealth).

Deficit only becomes important when it doesnt benefit the rich or worse, it is the result of helping the poor (which includes middle-class). Thus, healthcare for all is a deficit issue. Medicade-Part D is not.

Unless we get campaign finance reform in order this is how things will continue to be. Welcome to America...Home of the brave to serve and die for the rich.

[Clio the Leo]

7. Deficits created for dumb wars = good ....

... deficits increased trying to help the less fortunate = bad.

You're not thinking like a Republican.

[fasttense]

8. Because President Obama has empowered the RepubliCONS.

By ignoring their war crimes, their torture of Prisoners, their illegal manipulation of our legal system, their destruction of our civil rights and Constitution, he has let dick and the bushes off scott free to continue to push their lies on Americans.

The deficit is a mirage, a made up number. If our government wanted it could do away with the Fed and create money in a way that empowers the average citizen instead of empowering the banksters. They could reduce the deficit tomorrow, if they wanted.

FDR found that when he concentrated on balancing the budget instead of creating jobs through federal spending, unemployment went up. So, by pushing this FAKE concern for the deficit, it ensures, unemployment will remain staggeringly high. Historically high unemployment ensures that the incumbent political party will be voted out. Then RepubliCONS can take over and run up the deficit yet again.

And I thought I had voted for a liberal.

[bluethruandthru]

17. +1

[eShirl]

9. because they shifted more of the burden of said deficit onto the non-rich.

[ShortnFiery]

10. Right and the greedy ghouls within the upper 1% haven't fully bled-out the Middle Class. eom

[TankLV]

11. Well, aftrer all - bush* couldn't be BAD when he's put on COMMISSIONS and paraded in front of the

cameras!!!

He should have been on TRIAL by now, but instead he's paraded as a senior STATESMAN like Clinton!!!

Obama got exaxtly what he wanted and worked so hard for - BIPARTISANSHIP!!!

[Kokonoe]

12. Deficits don't matter when any Republicon is in office.

Thats a fact.
The biggest worry during a Republicon is be afraid, be very afraid.

[dkf]

13. Do you know what your share of the deficit is?

It's more than many have in assets.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

[GoCubsGo]

14. Because our corporate media tells us when it is or is not bad

And, because a large part of our citizenry has a real short memory and no critical thinking skills whatsoever, and they eat up every shit sandwich the corporate media feeds them.

[Cosmocat]

19. Winner ...

...

Cue yet another in an endless string of scumbags pimping some version of trickle down economics ...

[zbdent]

15. Deficits matter* ... *when Democrats are in charge ...

[Th1onein]

16. The Republicans do this EVERY time the Dems get into office.

During THEIR terms in power, they run the fucking bills up, and then start crying deficit when the Dems get into power. You'll notice, too, that they ALWAYS want to cut social programs to balance the budget.

[ItNerd4life]

18. It's the Independents who are pissed at Obama Deficits

Just as they were pissed about Bush's deficits, it's why many voted for Obama. They wanted change they could believe in.

A fiscally responsible government. Bush nor Obama provided that.

[Igel]

20. Where were you?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/04/politics/04budget.html?scp=1&sq=bush+budget+deficit+2007&st=nyt
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/07/politics/07deficit.html?scp=5&sq=bush+budget+deficit+2007&st=nyt

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/washington/05budget.html?scp=4&sq=bush+budget+deficit+2007&st=nyt

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/20/weekinreview/page-two-july-13-19-numbers-games-decoding-the-deficit.html?scp=13&sq=bush+budget+deficit+2007&st=nyt

Even http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/washington/25fiscal.html?scp=12&sq=bush+budget+deficit+2008+stimulus&st=nyt can't help discussing the * deficit.

And many, many more. Many on the right didn't like the deficits. Those on the left were apoplectic. Congress, nonetheless, continued to increase spending at rates higher than inflation, for all the bloviating about the deficit.

The deficit was a significant part of a recent presidential campaign. The level of real and projected deficits, $200-480 billion/year, was considered absolutely unsustainable. They would ruin the country, push up interest rates, etc., etc. The urgency of the moment required that deficits be reduced.

The moment, apparently, passed, and new urgencies, if not urges, came to the fore.

It's a big deal now because the smallest deficit so far under Obama is about 3 x *'s biggest; and, yes, I cut Obama a bit of slack, but find Axelrod's placing the > $1 trillion of the '08/'09 f/y deficit that Obama asked for squarely in *'s bucket disingenous. The issue's even bigger because there are hopes that the deficit picture will change so that during Obama's second term Obama will be able to wrangle the deficit down to merely twice *'s biggest. It's politics.

[Clear Blue Sky]

21. It was a big deal then. It's also over a trillion now and it wasn't before. Size matters...