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.  

Let's See How They Lie Their Way Out Of This

Just some plain, simple facts:

As the 2012 Presidential season begins to heat up so does the lying. One of the main issues should be (in a rational world) the economy. While I can understand why both parties will lamely try to dodge the issue, it will eventually come up and the lies will start pouring out. Unfortunately facts are facts and I finally found the time to compile the facts. The numbers are taken from www.treasurydirect.gov which may explain why dates are all September 30 instead of December 31. I also added the Presidents and their term with the Debt they inherited and the Debt they left. I separated the terms by using bold print. Since most people don't own a calculator (or don't know how to use one) I did a little math for you.

I put this together because I'm tired of hearing “unbiased” analysis and the results of “impartial” committees. I've been interested in this particular aspect of government ever since I heard that the National Debt had passed the $1,000,000,000,000 (Aside: I always write out those big dollar amounts. “One trillion dollars” doesn't nearly make the point a 1 followed by 12 zeroes makes) mark.

So here's the raw data with a few facts concerning the Presidential administrations associated with the Debt. Sorry I didn't lay it out neater but I lack the computer skill to format it any better without putting in a lot of time and I just don't want to bother. Besides, fancy graphs and colorful charts are designed to influence your perception.

And last, and most important, I am not unbiased. I've gone over these numbers many times in the past and things look pretty clear to me. I'll save that for the end.

09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79

09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75

09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49

09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48

09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23

09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62

09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06

09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86

09/30/1999	5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998	5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997	5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996	5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995	4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994	4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993	4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992	4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991	3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990	3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989	2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988	2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987	2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986	2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985	* 1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984	* 1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983	* 1,377,210,000,000.00
09/30/1982	* 1,142,034,000,000.00
09/30/1981	* 997,855,000,000.00
09/30/1980	* 907,701,000,000.00
09/30/1979	* 826,519,000,000.00
09/30/1978	* 771,544,000,000.00
09/30/1977	* 698,840,000,000.00
06/30/1976	* 620,433,000,000.00
06/30/1975	* 533,189,000,000.00

Gerald Ford 1974-1977 $533,189.000.000 to $698,840,000,000 = $165,651,000,000 or an increase of almost 25%. That comes out to about $3,100 for every man, woman and child in the US.

Jimmy Carter 1977-1981 $698,840,000,000.00 to $997,855,000,000.00 = $299015000000 or an increase of about 30%. That comes out to about $4348 per person.

Ronald Reagan 1981-1989 $997,855,000,000.00 to $2,857,430,960,187.32 = $1,859,575,960,187.32 or an increase of slightly less then 100%. That comes out to about $11,577 per person.

George H.W. Bush 1989-1993 $2,857,430,960,187.32 to $4,411,488,883,139.38 = $1,554,057,922,952 or an increase of about 46%. That's about $17,115 per person.

Bill Clinton 1993-2001 $4,411,488,883,139.38 to $5,807,463,412,200.06 = $1,395,974,529,061 or an increase of about 30%. That's about $20,636 per person.

George W. Bush 2001-2009 $5,807,463,412,200.06 to $11,909,829,003,511.75 = $6,102,365,591,311 or increase over 100%. That's about $39,000 per person.

Barack Obama 2009- present $11,909,829,003,511.75 to $15,503,030,151,312 = $3,593,201,147,801 or an increase of about 32%. It's currently $49,631 per person.

So, what to do with the facts? If your a politician you can do one of two things: You can take the most common route and lie about the historical data or, being used to lying, you can embellish the facts with outrageous claims since a basic rule in politics is that you never let the facts speak for themselves.

It should go without saying that the raw data needs to be viewed in context with the events at the time. Of course I have already done that. That's one of the reasons I compiled this list. In future posts I'll be referencing it to prove various points. In the meantime, here are some facts that are clear and concise and can easily be verified by the above:

1. From the above data it is very clear that in the years listed above, we have never had a balanced budget. NEVER! When constructing a budget you can lie in any number of ways with any kind of accounting method you choose but the Debt is a nasty thing. It's the money we borrowed to cover expenses we don't have the income to meet. Consequently, at some point the debt shouldn't increase. At some point, the Debt should actually decrease. Never happened.
2. Every President on the above list inherited massive Debt from the previous administration. And you can go a lot further back in history and say the same about almost any President. At one point in time (1919) the Debt began to drop from $27,390,970,113.12 to $16,185,309,831.43 (1930). After the Great Depression the Debt rose 250% from 1931( 16,801,281,491) to 1940 ($42,967,531,037). Did we spend our way out of the Depression?
3. It's easy to distort the truth based on being selective. For instance, Ronald Reagan entered office with a Debt slightly under $1,000,000,000,000 and left office with the economy almost $3,000,000,000,000 in the red. After eight years in office the Reagan administration added twice as much money to the Debt as the country had run up to that point. Based on the numbers, that is absolute, 100% true and totally indisputable. What that means can be interrupted by any number of people in any number of ways. Currently the Obama administration has upped the ante by raising the Debt almost $3,600,000,000,000 in half the time. What's that say?

Two things are readily apparent to me and that's just one of the reasons I put this together. As I noted in #1, Bill Clinton never balanced the budget but he did manage the Debt to a degree. Under the current trend that is commendable. But why lie about?

But since the myth of Clinton's Balanced Budget exists why shouldn't the opposition grab it's coattails? Newt is claiming he was the driving force behind 10 balanced budgets. That may be true if he was a member of Congress over 40 years ago. He may look it, but I doubt Newt is over 100 years old.

Now, you see, if you didn't know the facts you may well be suckered in to buying in to one or both of the above lies. Now I know full well a lot of people will be quick to point out it depends on circumstances and definitions. Maybe so, but if you tell me you balanced the budget, the budget better well be balanced. And by that I mean you better not be spending more then you take in. If it has some other meaning then you better clearly define it so we actually know what you're doing.

Sorry folks, but facts are facts and over the years we've all been suckered in to believing garbage just because somebody makes a statement with authority. Personally I find them all to be liars. Factually, the above proves it beyond any doubt, reasonable or otherwise.