I wish to apologize for previous 9/24 comments wherein I mistakenly referred to the whole port/Daniel Island debacle in my comments on Bobby Harrell. That debacle belongs in the lap of another of our wonderkind in Columbia--Jim Merrill--wonder if his receipts are in order. Wonder about the finances on his fancy house.

That's why I'm voting this November for a write in candidate - Pooter, my 3 year old cat that thinks he's a dog. He has an IQ of about 12 so he should be qualified......

I noticed the nowhere in this article does it mention HARRELL IS A DEMOCRAT ! ! How convenient. Believe me, if he were a REP ... it would have been in the headlines. I think this state needs to get RID OF ALL THE GOOD OLE BOYS !! PERIOD ! ! Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts ABSOLUTELY !

Gretchen- Unfortunately, he is a member of the Republican Party. But he spends like a drunken Democrat.

re: '... But he spends like a drunken Democrat.'

Perhaps he spends like a drunken GOP…

FYI

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-22/commentary/31802270_1_spending-federal-budget-drunken-sailor

[CLIP]

...federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.

Even Herbert Hoover managed to increase spending more than Obama has.

the facts, according to the official government statistics:

the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO’s latest budget outlook.

Over Obama’s four budget years, federal spending is on track to rise from $3.52 trillion to $3.58 trillion, an annualized increase of just 0.4%.
[end clip]

Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It’s in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget...

just as some dont know GOPs from dem DEMs...

Stanley- Your stats and analysis that you basically plagiarized from the Wall Street Journal was debunked almost immediately by statisticians and mathematicians.

From Factcheck.org:

Spending under Obama remains at a level that is quite high by historical standards. Measured as a percentage of the nation’s economic production, it reached the highest level since World War II in fiscal 2009, and has declined only slightly since.

And there’s more spending to come: The health care law Obama signed in 2010 calls for a new wave starting in 2014, to subsidize coverage for millions who wouldn’t otherwise have it. That will be adding an estimated $110 billion to federal outlays in fiscal 2015, and more in later years.

Check out the whole statement from them. If not read the comments after the original article in the Wall Street Journal.

Yeah, Obama is not a big spender, Right. What flavor is the Obama Kool Aid Today?

re: 'you basically plagiarized from the Wall Street Journal'

CLIPs came from Marketwatch (MW) ref/link provided
http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-22/commentary/31802270_1_spending-federal-budget-drunken-sailor

dont believe it plagiarizing if source credited which i did...perhaps MW plagiarized WSJ...i dunno...if they did then WSJ used the same figs showing BO's spending was raising at a the slowest pace in decades...

Factcheck.org, referred to, does not show figs. one may differ with MW conclusions...but;
in your comments: quite high, highest level, estimated, more in later years, are opinion adjectives...obviously NOT figures...oh/and who are the debunking statisticians and mathematicians.
doubt MW figs can be disputed...the figs do indicate the point that BO's drunken spending is less than cold sober GOP spending (eg, 1.8% less than 17.9%)...and;
if plagiarized they must be the same as those in WSJ...so your point IS? ie; what have your nameless statisticians and mathematicians debunked???
butbutt, never too old to learn...please provide specific factcheck and WSJ links...i look forward to reading the debunked truth...assume there are actual figs not just opines...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-facts-about-the-growth-of-spending-under-obama/2012/05/24/gJQAIJh6nU_blog.html#pagebreak

Try this for a start.

re: Try this for a start.

THANKS

we know aboot lies, damn lies and statistics...but BO's drunken spending is just another GOP myth similar to their myth the economy does better under GOP administrations than DEM.

FYI
spending increase %:
RR 82-85; 8.7 MW
RR 86-89; 4.9.MW
B1 90-93; 5.4 MW
BC 94-97; 3.2 MW
BC 98-01; 3.9 MW
B2 02-05; 7.3 MW
B2 06-09; 8.1 MW
BO 10-13; 5.2 FC
MW is marketwatch. FC is factcheck

Ha! Mr. Taxpayer's own source shoots his argument in the foot - "The truth is that the nearly 18 percent spike in spending in fiscal 2009 — for which the president is sometimes blamed entirely — was mostly due to appropriations and policies that were already in place when Obama took office." http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/ And we've got Gretchen trying that old FAUX News trick of calling Repugs who get caught "democrats" - keep it real, gretchen

Agree.

They have TERM LIMITS already .... two years.... Every two years we can throw the BUMS OUT !

@Ambassador

re: How the heck

when baseless, misleading, attempts at humor, comments (eg BO spend like a drunken DEM) are made the facts should be disseminated...otherwise political myths become accepted...eg;

the lasting myth the economy does better under GOP...IT DOES NOT...and the current myth BO's spending exceeds GOP administration's spending.

link, please