If one wanted to castigate cologal for pointing bringing up Bush and the profligate GOP spending, you really have to be fair because it's not hard to notice that Donna2's post prompted it by only mentioning the "Dems" as of "2006".

Get the partisanship out of the discussion and it's easy to say that our financial direction has been headed south since 9/11 - that's when we reacted with the Patriot Act (hello DHS and other new expensive agencies in an economic downturn), buying the votes of seniors with more medicaid (apparently some think it's ok to buy senior votes with medicaid dollars but not ok to buy poor people's votes with other spending programs), going into 2 wars (one justified, being goaded into the other), did NOTHING to prevent the 2008 housing/financial collapse, and have continued on our merry spending ways under this administration.

We're coming to a point, however, where things are increasingly being able to be laid at Obama's feet. The *immediate* crisis appears to be over. Things are starting to get better - not everywhere, but it's happening. Will Obama take this opportunity anytime soon to get the budget balanced? I don't think so. He'll talk about reducing the deficit, but it remains to be seen how hard he'll push. Personally I think he'll push harder than, say, Pelosi but certainly not as hard as the Tea Party.

When I stop to think about it, I think I agree with his "wait until after the commission report after the election" attitude becuase then it won't be part of the campaign. the *theory* goes that it's only AFTER an election where you can make unpopular decisions that are, in effect, for the better in the long-term.