« | »

Networks Ignore Obama’s 4th $1 Trillion Deficit

From the Media Research Center:

Networks Silent on Obama’s Fourth Consecutive Trillion-Dollar Deficit

By Rich Noyes | Mon October 8, 2012

None of the Big Three broadcast networks noted the release Friday of the Congressional Budget Office’s final determination of the fiscal year 2012 federal budget deficit: $1.1 trillion, the fourth year in a row of trillion-dollar deficits. ABC, CBS and NBC’s Friday evening newscasts and Saturday morning news programs were silent about the statistic — even though Obama’s massive spending and broken 2008 promise of halving the deficit are central issues of this year’s presidential campaign.

A look back shows that the networks were also silent last year, when the deficit came in at $1.299 trillion for fiscal year 2011…

You have to go back to 2009 (which saw a record $1.4 trillion deficit) to find a year when the three broadcast networks treated the government’s severely unbalanced budget as real news — and, even then, it was given not much more than a passing mention on ABC and NBC (with Katie Couric’s CBS Evening News waiting a week to play catch-up)…

Apparently, the networks don’t report it because they want us to accept trillion dollar deficits as the ‘new norm.’

From The Weekly Standard:

Obama Underestimated 2012 Deficit by $500 Billion

By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON | Mon October 8, 2012

In May 2009, President Obama released his updated budget estimates, which projected that the federal deficit for fiscal year 2012 would be $557 billion. The Congressional Budget Office now says that the deficit for fiscal year 2012 (which ended on September 30) was about $1.1 trillion — or about twice what Obama said it would be. In other words, Obama’s estimate was off by more than half a trillion dollars.

And lest we forget, Obama promised that he would halve the deficit by the end of his second term.

To put this colossal error into perspective, at the time that Obama was elected, the United States had never once had a deficit as large as Obama’s error would prove to be. Our largest deficit as of November 4, 2008 (the day that Obama beat John McCain) had been $459 billion. Since 2008, we’ve now run up more than $1 trillion in deficit spending for four consecutive years, totaling more than $5 trillion.

Nitpickers!

Meanwhile, we have this from the Daily Caller:

How it costs taxpayers $1.4 billion a year to fund the White House

By Alex Pappas |Mon October 8, 2012

A book about presidential perks recently revealed that taxpayers spend about $1.4 billion paying for the staffing, housing, transportation and entertaining of President Barack Obama’s White House.

Now another author, John F. Groom, explains in “The 1.4 Billion Dollar Man: Costs of the Obama White House” exactly how researchers came up with that $1.4 billion estimate.

“One of the most important things to note about the $1.4 billion figure is that it specifically does NOT include the cost of running the White House’s policy operations – the $1.4 billion is money that is directly related to the president and his family,” Groom writes in the book.

Here’s the breakdown, according to Groom:

• President’s salary and allowance: $450,000
• White House building operating expenses: $14,658,000
• White House Grounds: $6,057,000
• Vacations: $20,000,000
• Health care for the first family, including traveling medical staff and equipment: $7,000,000
• Campaign expenses not reimbursed to government: $311,000,000
• White House staff: $7,985,420
• Office of Administration budget: $14,481,000
• Special missions including White House Communications Agency: $161,252,000
• Military salary costs: $153,441,360
• Salary costs for presidential airlift squadron: $75,000,000
• Presidential plane fleet: $44,000,000
• Presidential helicopter fleet: $300,000,000
• Ground transportation: $2,200,000
• Transportation total: $346,200,000
• Secret Service: $259,152,884

“We need to return to the idea of the president as first citizen – a very important person, but not a deity,” Groom says in the book. “He and his administration should run their lives as examples to the nation, with frugality and simplicity, at least until the huge institution they run, the United States government, returns to some degree of solvency.” …

Dream on.

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Tuesday, October 9th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “Networks Ignore Obama’s 4th $1 Trillion Deficit”

  1. dasher

    Now, while I’ve got no problem pegging this deficit number on the President, isn’t it Congress that actually is in control of the purse? And, with the House controlled by the Republicans, I’d like to see more of an argument that the reason this past FY ended with a deficit is because of the Democrat led Senate. Otherwise, not only will I peg this on the President, but I’ll also peg this on the whole of Congress, with Democrats and Republicans guilty.

    • GetBackJack

      Exactly.

      Like the yammerheads who complain about rich people not paying any Taxes, and blaming a President.

      It’s Congress sets tax policy you freaking buffoons. And it’s CONGRESS spent us into this hellish debt. And that includes a whole lot of Republicans.

  2. yadayada

    I don’t see the problem. all you have to do is take the existing article and rearrange the sentences to make Obiwan truthful.

    The Congressional Budget Office now says that the deficit for fiscal year 2012 (which ended on September 30) was about $1.1 trillion In May 2009, President Obama released his updated budget estimates, which projected that the federal deficit for fiscal year 2012 would be $557 billion, in line with his 2008 promise of halving the deficit.

    see? $557 billion is nearly half of $1.1 trillion.

    results never matter with dems, only the promises and estimates count.

  3. Mithrandir

    MEDIA’S $5 TRILLION LIE

    Another media trick. Obama deficit spending = $5 trillion+. So, project your weaknesses onto Republicans, as usual. Romney now, coincidentally, has a $5 trillion tax cut. You think that number is just arbitrary? It’s not true anyway, so why pick that exact number?
    Because if Romney brings up Obama’s deficit spending, (the Republicans think) it will remind people of the Romney tax-cut lie. So, they hope Romney will too afraid to even mention it. A $5 trillion deficit disaster is just as bad as a $5 trillion tax break for the wealthy, “eh, they are both at fault”, says John Q. Public. Winner?—no one on that issue.

    The Kennedy’s / Clinton / J. Jackson use women as playthings? –Republican “War on Women!”
    Union police beat black democrat voters, “Republicans hate black people!”
    Hispanic shoots Trayvon Martin, Al Sharpton says, “Kill Whitey!”
    Democrats passively allow AIDS to run rampant in the gay community, “Reagan hated gays!”

    It’s all a predictable trick.

  4. dasher

    @ GetBackJack – thank you for your opinion, I thought maybe I was “swimming upstream” for a bit.

    @ yadayada – I appreciate your very first sentence, you don’t see the problem. While I think you and I both agree that the current President is a disaster, I really try to make well-reasoned arguments against him. I do my best to try and turn things around and say “what if Obama were a Republican?”. Well then, I would certainly blame Congress and not the President. I know, Obama would never be a Republican, but that’s beside the point.

    @ Mithrandir – good points made, I hope you donate to S & L.

    Have a great day everyone, I’m pretty confident (about 60%) that Romney is going to win this election, but I’d be able to stomach a Romney loss if the Republicans kept the House and gained ground in the Senate.

    Dan

  5. wirenut

    Well, just like the wife and I do, we go out to the moneytree, an just pluck. Pick’n an a grin’n, if you will. You see, Ma’ and I don’t care if biggov spends. We got a moneytree! Haw! It’s harvest time. Oop’s, gott’a go out back. Somebody named Barry just fired up a chainsaw.




« Front Page | To Top
« | »