Which gives me a leg up on Faux right there.

I'm not entirely convinced this is "runaway" spending; true deficit spending is more of an investment and widely recognized by economists from across the spectrum as legitimate under some circumstances. You can't allow the economy to come to a screeching halt, even if you are willing to let millions of newly unemployed people (and their kids; remember SCHIP?) starve. Whether that's what Obama is doing, and how well, is also a legitimate argument, but Faux "News" has no business raising it after beating the drum for spending trillions on a pointless quagmire for five years.

EDIT: Oh, and lest you bring it up, that's not an ad hominem: I'm not attacking the argument because it comes from Faux "News" (in fact I've conceded it's a legitimate debate and that trzaskas position on it has been consistent) I'm attacking Faux "News" based on their large and long record of inconsistent, self serving and hypocritical arguments. And while I try not judge people, I have no problem judging an organization beneath contempt.