27 Mar 2013 2:29 pm
Obama and Dems have been spending massively, yet this is the weakest recovery in 80 years, moonbat. On what planet? Nothing you quoted refuted my claim, moonbat. And your claim about Eisenhower is wrong, too. Obama Recovery Is Worst In Post WWII History By Jeffrey H. Anderson.... The 10 stronger recoveries involved Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush — in other words, every other postwar president.... Indeed, if we limit our comparison to the five longest recessions in the past 65 years (each of which lasted at least 11 months), we find the following: During the four pre-Obama recoveries from such recessions, average real GDP growth in the first three years was a whopping 5.9% — dwarfing the 2.2% figure under Obama. What's the difference between 5.9% and 2.2% growth? Over the past three years, our GDP has been, on average, about $15 trillion annually. A 3.7% shortfall, therefore, equals about $555 billion a year, or $1.6 trillion over three years. If you divide that evenly among the roughly 300 million Americans, it works out to a shortfall of more than $5,000 per person — or more than $20,000 for a family of four. http://news.investor...m#ixzz2OrwHFjri Did Obama's economic policies fail? You'll dodge the question, of course. Obama can't spend any money that Congress does not appropriate, and your party has been in control of the House for over two years, and in essence in control of the Senate as well, with their unprecedented use of the filibuster. Yet you absolve them of any and all guilt. As you full well know, liar, Harry Reid prevents even votes on House bills. So why are House Repubs to blame? They've passed many pro-growth bills, only to have Reid kill them.