Reply to Uncle T's 'You're nothing but a political hack'

Uncle T,
You can call me a "hack" all you want.  I respond to concrete arguments.  And I do criticize Obama, so you must not be reading what I write.  Let's talk facts and figures:

• $15.5 trillion in lost wealth during the Great Recession;
• $8 trillion in wealth created -- and lost -- during the housing bubble;
• 8.8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession, more than the previous four U.S. recessions combined;
• 24 percent of homes underwater on their mortgages to the tune of $690 billion;
• $1 trillion in student loan debt;
• $1.2 trillion deficit projected for FY 2009 before Obama even took office;
• Growth in government spending under Obama is lower than at any time since President Eisenhower (adjusted for inflation);
• Interest paid on the federal debt as a percentage of annual federal spending is lower under Obama – 6.4 % in 2011 – that at any time since the 1970s;
• Interest paid on federal debt as a percentage of GDP is at its lowest since WWII.
• Under Obama, the national debt has increased $2.88 trillion, or 24 %, over 3 years.
• Under Bush, from 2002 to 2009, the national debt increased $5.88 trillion, or 91 %.
• Only 17 percent of the increase in government debt in 2009 and 2010 was because of discretionary spending of any kind, including the stimulus bill. 
• The U.S. collects less corporate tax relative to the overall economy than almost any other country in the world:  about 1.3 % of GDP in 2010, compared to 5 % in the 1950s.
• Corporate federal taxes paid fell to 12.1 % of profits earned from activities within the U.S. in fiscal 2011, the lowest % since 1972.
• In 2009, the same year the Tea (Taxed Enough Already) Party was born, Americans paid the lowest average federal tax rate (17.4 %) in 30 years.

Talking about what happened under Bush is not about making excuses, it's about showing the HUGE problems that Obama inherited, and putting them in historical perspective, and then asking whether he, or any President, could have done much about these problems.  

Furthermore, one has to ask whether the alternative -- Romney and the GOP -- offers anything concretely, factually better than Obama.  The answer is an easy "No."  Romney wants to cut taxes and increase the deficit $4.8 trillion and increase military spending by $2.1 trillion, but he won't say how he's going to pay for it. Romney wants to repeal Obamacare... except all the popular parts like covering pre-existing conditions (but not really) and letting parents keep their kids on their plans until age 26.  And Romney's formula for economic growth is to drill, mine, pollute and deregulate our way to prosperity, even though the EPA and OHSA didn't get us into our current mess, not by a long shot.  

Obama is not perfect.  In fact, he's not nearly liberal enough.  But compared to the awful alternative, it's an easy choice.  Romney would blow up the deficit and mire millions more people -- including seniors and children -- in poverty.  And he would probably start new wars with Syria and Iran, while committing more troops to Afghanistan and Iraq, with a price tag we cannot even estimate at this time.  The choice then is a no-brainer.

So let me echo Uncle T circa 2008, and ask not why you're against Obama, but why you're for Romney?  Make the case.  Please cite facts, figures and points from Romney's proposals.  Here's a handy link to Romney's site so you can research his positions, because I'm betting you haven't bothered to read them, you're just going to pull the lever GOP, like you always do.

You can call me a political hack, but I come with more facts and research than anybody you know or read, period.  Please reply with facts and not "It's all Obama's fault."  Thank you.