A question for the Obama apologists

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

To believe your third option, you'd have to believe that a Harvard-educated US Senator has no appreciation for what happens if the US stops paying its bills.

Remember this was pre-recession when the economy was still doing pretty well riding that cheap credit wave. The implications then appeared much less severe than today.

Finally, if that was the case, why hasn't Obama apologized for his Bush-bashing on this issue, if he now has the necessary insight to understand that we have to pay our bills?

Back then the Dems were advocating pay-go. Situation was certainly not the same...

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Remember this was pre-recession when the economy was still doing pretty well riding that cheap credit wave. The implications then appeared much less severe than today.


Back then the Dems were advocating pay-go. Situation was certainly not the same...

-spence

"the economy was still doing pretty well riding that cheap credit wave. The implications then appeared much less severe than today. "

OK. So you claim to work in Finance, and you are saying that with a straight face? Spence, remember the absolute dollars here. You are saying, it was worse for Bush to have us $9 trillion in debt in 2006, than it is for Obama to have us $17 trillion in debt in 2013? You believe that? Our balance sheet is healthier now than it was then?

Whew!

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Remember this was pre-recession when the economy was still doing pretty well riding that cheap credit wave. The implications then appeared much less severe than today.


Back then the Dems were advocating pay-go. Situation was certainly not the same...

-spence

Can you support that statement please? Do you have any support for your contention, that the consequences of US default would be worse today than in 2006? We had two engaged in two wars in 2006, so presumably we couldn't grind to a halt then?

You keep moving the goalposts. First, Obama couldn't have known about the necessity of raising the ceiling in 2006, because he was only a Senator. Now, it's that Obama was correct to oppose raising the debt ceiling back then, because unlike today, it didn't need to be raised.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Back then the Dems were advocating pay-go.
-spence

Which Democrats in Washington advocated "pay as you go"? Now you're saying that the Democrats in Washington, were opposed to spending unless we had the funds on hand to pay for it?

Yes, those Democrats are real budget-hawks. Obama is clearly a real penny-pincher with the US budget, I'm so sorry I forgot that...