LET'S GET SOMETHING STRAIGHT

(Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. John Adams 1770)

ALL (without any exception that I have ever experienced) politicians are liars. Democrats and Republicans, Conservatives and Liberals. In fact, lying in politics is so pervasive that supporters of both parties knowingly buy in to the lies , perpetuate the lies, and support the lies and, I suspect, do so knowing they are lies. There are still plenty of people running around screaming “Death Panels” in response to so-called Obama Care. If you happen to be one of those keep your ignorant opinions to yourself and just go some where else.

While it's totally impossible to chronicle every lie and I get a real laugh when reading supposed “fact checker” sites there are some indisputable facts one needs to seriously consider before deciding to support a candidate. So I'm going to clarify a very salient fact … we have not had a balanced budget in over 50 years. The last time the national budget was “balanced” was in 1955 when the debt was $274,374,222,802.62 and dropped to $272,750,813,649.32 in 1956. That was followed by another drop to $270,527,171,896.43 in 1957. The following year the debt ballooned to $276,343,217,745.81 and has not seen a reduction since. Therefore, the last president to achieve a balanced budget was Dwight D. Eisenhower (a Republican if you think that really matters) back 1956. Plain, simple, and 100% indisputable.

In order to have a balanced budget regardless of the accounting tricks an administration may choose to use the proof is in the debt tally. One can simply not declare a balanced budget while the debt increases by billions of dollars on an annual basis. If you're spending less then you take in the debt will decrease. That is the only demonstration of a balanced budget. It has not happened in recent history.

Now I'm very much aware that many ignorant and/or lying supporters like to point to the Clinton administration as having achieved a balanced budget with some liars even declaring a surplus was generated but that clearly isn't true. During his administration the debt rose about 30% in eight years with no point that it actually decreased. Conclusion: Budget not balanced. By the way, that 30% translate to an increase of nearly $1,400,000,000,000 or an average growth of $175,000,000,000 a year. Hardly a budget anyone would call “balanced”. At least that's what an honest person would say.

I'm well aware of the more prominent accounting tricks and I'm sure there are multiple ways I'm not aware of to make it appear things are balanced but there is simply no way to avoid the hard fact that the debt is growing. It's pretty much like you pretending to have balanced your personal budget without taking in to account the ever growing balance on your credit cards. You haven't balanced your budget. Until you cover your expenses while paying down your debt, your budget is not balanced. Pretty simple.

I'm motivated to write this because, in particular, Newt Gingrich is running around taking credit for balancing the budget something like four years in a row while he was Speaker of the House. Since I'm pretty sure he didn't serve during the Eisenhower administration (though I haven't actually looked that up) he is lying and on more then one level. He's obviously appealing to the ignorant who believe the lie of Clinton's non-existent balanced budgets. Well, why not? If you believe one lie you're probably gullible enough to buy the other. But neither is true. The proof is right here.

Now, as I stated earlier, you can interpret (lie) about the budget in any number of ways but ultimately if you need to borrow almost two hundred billion dollars a year you haven't balanced anything. Credit where credit is due, he did reduce the rate of growth but did not balance the budget.

Of course there are multiple factors that occur every year during every administration that contribute to the deficit but that is what the job is all about. I've actually heard from more then one liar that Clinton was experiencing the benefits of Reaganomics which is a incredibly foolish thing to say. Clinton raised taxes. I'll leave the complete and utter failure of Reagan's voodoo economics for another time (like just in case some idiot is foolish enough to refer to it in some kind of positive manner).

Too many people will accept what ever drivel they get from their favorite source and cast their vote in a manner that will only encourage the lying. Most people really don't understand the debt, can't grasp the concept of a balanced budget, and will continue to weaken the country. Who has the answers? No one currently running for the job including the guy who now has it. But if you read this, at least you might be able to understand what kind of liars we're dealing with.