^What you see is a significant upward tick in 2008, and then an explosion in 2009. Now, what might have happened between 2007 and 2008, and then 2009?^

Well, there was that $245 billion paid out to US banks in 2008.

I find it hard to see what the point of all of this is? It and you start saying that without war and security spending, the budget would have been close to being balanced. Isn't that the point of the critics? I think everyone knows stimulus spending has greatly overshadowed war spending. Could it be more obvious.

Is it about trying to make the Bush years look fiscally better than Obama’s current performance? Is it about trivializing the costs of the wars?

I just don’t get it.