Hoover wanted to do all the things that Roosevelt eventually did, but Hoover was frightened by the huge budget deficits. He didn’t have Keynes around to tell him it would all turn out okay.

Hoover did have his own party in Congress pushing a protectionist trade policy. So does Obama, so there’s a similarity.

It is hard to find serious points of disagreement between Hoover and Roosevelt. Hoover probably never had a chance to enjoy being president, Roosevelt got to be president and certainly enjoyed the power and perks. But he was never the opposite of Hoover, he was just a variation on the same theme.

Hoover, Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter — these are the men whose mistakes Obama is determined to repeat.

All reasonable concerns well stated. Knowing the cause is essential to implementing the correct solutions, not to score political points in the parallel universe of left versus right.

Empirical data and previous experience teach us government spending (I’m with you on the poor targeting to date) is absolutely indispensable to growing our way of a potential great depression. We have the evidence and experience, there is no debate, at least in concept if not implementation.

This is the only way to deal with the deficit, caused by both parties; grow our way out and pay more taxes long term.

Short term two points: If the states hadn’t got any of the stimulus money we’d be looking at financial armageddon right now and these discussions would be moot. Second, if the government cuts taxes and spending like in 1937, we will go into a Great Depression II and these long term debt discussions are moot again.

I was “financially conservative” too, until the Republicans repeatedly stole the money and gave it to their rich, powerful friends.

Sorry, couldn’t resist. Like my dad always said, a Democrat will always do less damage by accident than a Republican will on purpose. You go to financial war with the Democratic Party you have, not the one you wish you had.

And a Republican Congress.

Divided government looking better and better every day.

That’s left vs. right again. Yes, Bush squandered Clinton surpluses. Yes “some” economists” stated Stimulus too small. But there are plenty of other economists stating too big and not the right targets.

Pres. Obama also enacted FY2009 Omnibus ($410 billion) as part of stimulus before he did $787 billion Recovery act

Doesn’t matter.

The debt is projected to nearly double to $20 trillion by 2015, but is expected to increase to nearly 100% of GDP by 2010 and remain at that level thereafter. These estimates assume real GDP growth (after inflation) ranging from 2.6% to 4.6% annually from 2010 through 2019.

The real issue is threat. You can pile up debt and obligations. Our enemies know this too. US getting close to not being able to fiscally react to another threat creating much pain.

Debt is threat. It’s a national security issue. It has to be paid off in some reasonable way for the US to be able to safely react to threats or future obligations. Meaning, Taxes will go up, for everyone.

Meaning less and less people will be able to react to their own family threats and financial security.

Family budget considerations are irrelevant and misleading when talking macroeconomics, not that you didn’t know that.

The first stimulus was too small in the judgement of actual economists, and 30% of it was a middle class tax cut that 90-95% are getting weekly in their paycheck; something unfortunately this administration decided not to brag about for whatever reason.

IOKIYAR rules once again. Cheney says deficits don’t matter and Republicans proceed to squander the Clinton surplus without a peep from the fiscal scolds crawling from underneath their rocks after a eight year hiatus, with irresponsible unneeded tax cuts for those who didn’t need them in the midst of two wars.

More stimulus is needed and deficits will matter someday if we make it that far.

Not true by the way. FY2010 owned by President Obama. It’s is his first budget year.

But I don’t care. You can put every year that Pres. Obama in office and his budget deficits into Bush’s fault category. It’s not going to get you very far, other than maybe feeling good you hated one politician and support another.

You talk left vs. right, conservative vs. liberal on spending and deficits. Maybe you don’t “see” the problem deficits are heading us toward.

Deficit is a deficit. When it comes to pay for deficits and debt, Government doesn’t ask you to pay more or less taxes if you’re an (R) or a (D). At least not yet.

Would you spend 1,000 times more than you earn each year on your own family budget fors years and years, then continue spending knowing it’s good for “you” because you believe your spending habits righteous? Knowing it’s “OK” because your extended family, maybe even your kids and grandchildren would just keep paying your bills for you?

I’ll also remind folks that candidate and then Senator Obama voted for the TARP bailout. Correctly so in my view.

I understand it must be frustrating for this administration to govern center right and be accused of Socialism and worse, but they need to do what empiral evidence tells them is needed and not worry about what the blithely ignorant American populace is manipulated into thinking they believe.

And by the way, I’ll point out again that approximately only 10% of the 1.35 trillion budget deficit is attributable to this administration – not that it’s germane to the Hooverite right wingers.

You “can’t be in a Hoover strategy with deficits that big. There’s spending going on. We need a bigger/better word for “spending” in these cases.

You just complimented Pres. Bush. You might want to be careful. Pres. Bush executed the TARP program to “save” the banking system. If you want to give credit to Pres. Obama fo saving banking system fine. But Pres. Bush initiated the legislation (and spent most TARP $).

And yes, candidate Obama supported TARP legislation

A bit disingenuous for Maddow to state Pres. Obama deploying Hoover strategy. Before the announced “spending freeze”, there has been a “drunken spending party”. Regardless of how we got into trouble, spending and lots of spending (more than ever before by far) has already been done.

There’s TALF (consumer/sm business based relief), extended TARP period for rolling out TARP funds, extended Auto bailouts (and bought) that Pres. Bush started.

Cash for clunckers, PPIP, stimulus recovery act, one of the biggest is Fannie/Freddie bailouts that Pres. Obama extended from Pres. Bush. (to name a few)

CBO this week predicted 1.35 trillion budget deficit this year and $1 trillion deficit next year. You can be in a Hoover strategy with deficits that big. There’s spending going on.

Instead of enacting a monstrosity of a bill, the President could have expanded Medicaid coverage to cover more poor Americans. Additionally, he could have tried to do things about allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines. Or better funded risk pools for the current sick. Or vochers.

Unfortunately, the President – who I didn’t vote for but sincerely support – allowed a huge bill to be created that would invevitably allow critics, both legitimate and illegitimate, to pick apart.

The President deserves credit for starting to address this debt problem that he inherited from both Democrats and Republicans. This move to the center is what the overwheming number of Americans want.

Sorry progressives, the electorate doesn’t want your statist approach to solving our problems. They just don’t.

And of all the points to counter you pick the least important?Speaks volumes.