Still Thinking About Voting For Obama?

Hat tip to Common Cents.

Scary Chart Of The Day

I think this one definitively disproves the Obama myth that today's deficit is the result of the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Via Instapundit.
 

I Think It Would Make A Great Bumper Sticker

Courtesy of Vodkapundit.

Under Obamanomics, the 47% — and everyone else — will be paying more taxes soon enough

 

Pethokoukis:

One of these two things has got to give: Either a) the projected future explosion in federal spending is reduced or b) a good chunk of the 47% of Americans who currently pay no income taxes will have to start (or perhaps pay a value-added tax).

Less spending or just about everybody — including the broad middle class — will pay more. Lots more . . . .

Why won’t President Obama — unlike Paul Ryan — release a long-term budget plan? Simple. If he did, it would show the only way to realistically pay for the Democratic spending agenda is to eventually raise taxes on pretty much everybody.

And this chart represents an optimistic assessment.

Everything You Need To Know About Obamanomics

Since Obama has taken office ….
[through Q2 2012 for comparative purposes]

      For every $1 added to the economy, we’ve added more than $3 in debt
      added $5.23 trillion in debt vs. $1.68 trillion to the economy
      50% increase in debt vs. 12% increase in economic output

Total Public Debt:
$10,626T [Jan 20, 2009]
$15,856T [Jun 30, 2012]
--> $5.23 trillion increase in debt

The DNC Kicked Off In Charlotte Today

While the national debt hit $16,000,000,000,000.

Are You Better Off Now Than You Were Four Years Ago?

Chris Wallace confronts Axelrod with facts and Axelrod squirms.

Those facts are the following (and should be regularly featured in Romney campaign ads from now until November:

Unemployment: 7.8% then, 8.3% now

Median income: $54,983 then, $50,964 now

Gas prices: $1.85 per gallon then, $3.78 now

National debt: $10.6 trillion then, $15.9 trillion now

On the other hand, the Democratic governor of Maryland can at least admit the painfully obvious truth.

Ryan's Budget Is Radical?

Far from it.  Of course, I was raising this same point months ago.

Math

Erick Erickson:

If Barack Obama gets his way and raises taxes on everyone making $250,000.00 a year or more, the amount of money he brings in will not close his own budget deficit. Nevermind the national debt — he won’t close this year’s budget deficit.  

In fact, if we get the Democrats’ their wet dream of tax policy and take 100% of all annual income of everyone making $250,000.00 a year or more, we still won’t close Barack Obama’s budget deficit.

This is why Barack Obama will continue to simply demogague the Ryan plan, rather than present an actual plan of his own.  It is mathematically impossible for any real plan to match his own and, thus, the lie would be revealed.

Romney-Ryan 2012

In taking the weekend off from blogging (for the first time in a long while), I failed to cover Romney's selection of his running mate: Paul Ryan.  The Wisconsin Congressman and Chair of the House Budget Committee is a bold, but brilliant choice.  By picking Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney has shown that he is committed to tackling the biggest problem our nation faces, entitlement reform.  The choice the American people now face in November has never been clearer: we will either embrace fiscal reform or we will march off the fiscal cliff.  And there is perhaps no one better to explain that choice than Paul Ryan.

For more thoughts consider Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds article from USA Today and Allahpundit's thoughts over at Hot Air. 

The Case Against Reelection

Krauthammer: 

There are two ways to run against Barack Obama: stewardship or ideology. You can run against his record or you can run against his ideas.

The stewardship case is pretty straightforward: the worst recovery in U.S. history, 42 consecutive months of 8-plus percent unemployment, declining economic growth — all achieved at a price of an additional $5 trillion of accumulated debt.

The ideological case is also simple. Just play in toto (and therefore in context) Obama’s Roanoke riff telling small-business owners: “You didn’t build that.” Real credit for your success belongs not to you — you think you did well because of your smarts and sweat? he asked mockingly — but to government that built the infrastructure without which you would have nothing.

Play it. Then ask: Is that the governing philosophy you want for this nation?

Mitt Romney’s preferred argument, however, is stewardship. Are you better off today than you were $5 trillion ago? Look at the wreckage around you. This presidency is a failure. I’m a successful businessman. I know how to fix things. Elect me, etc. etc.

Easy peasy, but highly risky.

An Abdication of Responsibility

Veronique de Rugy and Nick Gillespie:

What we’re actually witnessing — and have been for years now — is not gridlock, but the abdication of responsibility by Congress and the president for performing the most basic responsibilities of government. Despite the fiscal crisis that Washington knows will occur if it fails to deal with unsustainable spending and debt, it hasn’t managed to produce a federal budget in more than three years.

To their credit, House Republicans have drafted, voted on, and passed a budget, but they are busy now trying to worm their way out of the very spending cuts — the sequestration deal — they insisted on as a condition for raising the debt limit last summer.

One of the most egregious failures of the president’s budget was that it, as in his previous budgets, offered no serious plan to stabilize the largest entitlement programs. Instead, the president and congressional Democrats lambasted Republicans for actually addressing the problem in their budget.

That's why we need a Tea Party.

Liar-in-Chief

Hinderaker: 

Contrary to popular belief, politicians are not, as a rule, particularly dishonest people. But there are exceptions. On the current scene, it would be hard to find another politician as dishonest as Barack Obama. Currently, he is running an ad that says he has a plan to “pay down the debt in a balanced way.” He also tries to justify his call for a tax increase on the ground that the increased revenues will reduce the deficit.

But where, exactly, is Obama’s plan to “pay down the debt?” It is a figment of his imagination; or, rather, a convenient lie that he thinks will help him politically. The only plan Obama has authored is a budget so outrageous that no one–not one Republican, not one Democrat, in either the House or the Senate–will vote for it.

Obama Runs Campaign Like He Runs the Country

Obama campaign spends more in June than it takes in.

Only 1001?

1001 Reasons to Vote Against Barack Obama.  Feel free to add to the list.

Credit to Instapundit for the link (who in turn gives credit to Bill Whittle). 

How Much Has Debt Increased Per Taxpayer Under Obama?

By more than $64,000.  To put that into perspective, "the median household income in the United States in 2009, according to the Census Bureau, was $49,777. That means the median household would have needed to work all of one year and then the first 106 days of another year and then give all of their earnings from that time period to the federal government just to pay off the $64,219.88 in new federal debt per taxpayer piled up since Obama’s inauguration."

Plus, contributing every dollar that Americans have earned so far this year still would not cover the cost of government spending.  Cost of Government Day is not until tomorrow.

Remember When President Obama and the Democrats Promised That Obamacare Would Cost under $1 Trillion?

It was a blatant lie.

Flashback: Four Years Ago Today

Then-Senator Barack Obama blasted George W. Bush for adding $4 trillion to the national debt and spending from the “Bank of China” during Bush’s two terms in office, calling it “unpatriotic.” Obama repeatedly promised during that campaign to cut the deficits in half to slow down the rapid expansion of national debt.

  "The RNC certainly remembers this attack — and they’re featuring it in a new ad this week."

America on Track to Add Three Times More Debt Than Eurozone over 5 Years

Weekly Standard:

The eurozone might be cracking up, but as far as debt goes, America appears to be in worse shape than the entire eurozone in the long run. According to a new chart set to be released later today by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee, America is on track "to add three times more debt than [the] eurozone over [the next] 5 years."

Already, as the chart shows, America's debt exceeds the eurozone's, roughly $16.6 trillion to $13.3 trillion. (These numbers are based on what the debt is expected to be by the end of this year.) But by 2017, that gap is projected to widen, and America's debt is expected to be $22.3 trillion, while the eurozone's debt will be $15.2 trillion.

Of course, Obama and the Democrats don't have a plan to address our debt crisis.  They just oppose the Republican plans.
Hat tip to Weasel Zippers.

The CBO Is Going to Need a Bigger Chart

Zerohedge:  "[W]hen it comes to the most recent forecast of US public debt . . . the CBO has officially run out of charting space. As can be seen on the graphic below, sometime in 2042 the CBO will need a bigger chart to represent US public debt as per the Extended Alternative Fiscal Scenario, which the CBO itself admits "is more representative of the fiscal policies that are now (or have recently been) in effect than is the extended baseline scenario."



Of course, the entire system will collapse long before then, unless we dramatically change the current trajectory.  Doing so starts by changing the President in November.