In response to:

Barack Obama: Weapon of Mass Distraction

5thDegreeInSight Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:29 AM
You can't be serious. All spending originates in Congress and specifically in the House of Representatives and since 1930 the only years that we haven't spent more than we have taken in have been years in which there has been a Republican House. In both cases we had a reluctant Demcratic president who went along with the deal and reaped the rewards of the resulting economic growth in his legacy.
Younger Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 11:13 AM
And Harry Truman spoke of the "do-nothing congress." If refusing to spend more than comes in is "do-nothing," let us have such a Congress again; however, we do need a Congress that stops the hemorrage.
5thDegreeInSight Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:34 AM
In case your history is a little weak the two Presidents were Truman and Clinton. Eisenhower made have had one year of surplus when he had a Republican Congress but I'm not bothering to look it up.

President Obama's latest news conference was further confirmation that his voracious appetite for spending was not satisfied but whetted by the fiscal cliff deal, which he views as an appetizer.

We were told that the GOP achieved a coup in the fiscal cliff negotiations because they lured Obama into an agreement to lock in the Bush tax rates except for the highest-income earners. Never mind that Obama agreed to no spending cuts or entitlement reform after demanding a "balanced approach" to deficit reduction; they told us he'd be forced to address those matters in a couple of months in the debt ceiling...