>>>>>Taking a long nap around the 2nd week of September in 2001 is about the only excuse for a statement like that.
>>>>>
>>>>>We're talking about a multi-trillion dollar debt apparently representing generational theft, not the risk of terrorism.
>>>>
>>>>What I do not understand what are those 10 trillions people are blaming Obama of, didn't Bush indebted the US in more than 10 trillion dollars? http://www.nationmaster.com/time.php?stat=eco_deb_ext&country=us
>>>
>>>Those numbers are either not accurate or the news reports and public reports over the years were not.
>>>Enter a beginning date (1/1/2000) and an ending date (6/5/2009):
>>>http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway
>>
>>It keeps showing me the current debt, I'll try later for home. To make the long history short, what was the growth (or shrink) of the debt during GW Bush terms?
>
>January 20, 2001: 5,728,195,796,181.57 Bush takes office
>September 10, 2001: 5,773,172,068,291.89 9-11
>January 20, 2009: 10,626,877,048,913.08 Obama takes office
>June 4, 2009: 11,388,997,387,553.01 this week
>
>Afghanistan and Iraq shot it into the hemisphere.
>
>I think what people are so upset about is his 2008 campaign promise for a net spending cut after using the deficit as part of his campaign and non-stop complaining about it during the campaign and basically calling the Bush administration run away spenders. There are many who disagreed with spending on bailouts, Tarp or the Stimulus. Don't forget that the deficit doesn't reflect all of the stimulus plan. It will increase by trillions each year according to the money spent and to be spent yet on the plan.
>
>But this wasn't my discussion so someone else will have to join in here. I just noticed your numbers didn't look right so I posted a link to a different site for you.

Are you sure that it was arithmetical and/or website problem?