Rove's Deficit Myth a real Whopper. But for Conservatives, deceit is all That Matters, not Facts.

I'm in constant debate with my conservative friend over who ran up the debt meter. He's determined to discount all numbers that don't compare favorably with the conservative Heritage Foundation's figures, which blame Obama for everything. But facts are stubborn things.

According to Politifact.com:

On Jan. 10, 2009, former Bush administration adviser Karl Rove wrote in the Washington Post that Democrats "will run up more debt by October than Bush did in eight years. (We checked his claim here.) David Axelrod, chief adviser to President Barack Obama, fired back on Jan. 15 in Post that Rove had it all wrong and that Bush had been the big spender.

"The day the Bush administration took over from President Bill Clinton in 2001, America enjoyed a $236 billion budget surplus -- with a projected 10-year surplus of $5.6 trillion," Axelrod wrote. "When the Bush administration left office, it handed President Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit -- and projected shortfalls of $8 trillion for the next decade."

The ... 2002 report from the Congressional Budget Office, an independent agency ... reported the 2000 federal budget ended with a $236 billion surplus. So Axelrod was right on that point.

The report provides an interesting trip down memory lane, when budget estimates were downright cheery: "The outlook for the federal budget over the next decade continues to be bright," the report said. "Assuming that current tax and spending policies are maintained, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that mounting federal revenues will continue to outstrip spending and produce growing budget surpluses for the next 10 years."

That meant big surpluses -- estimated to total about $5.6 trillion by 2011. So Axelrod was right on that, too.

Another cheery line: "Under current policies, total surpluses would accumulate to an estimated $2 trillion over the next five years and $5.6 trillion over the coming decade, and would be sufficient by 2006 to pay off all publicly held debt that is available for redemption." Specifically, Axelrod is right about the surplus Bush began with, and the projected surplus at that point. Axelrod is very close on the deficit at the end of Bush's presidency, but there are two different ways to measure the 10-year projection when Bush left office.

The CBO's estimate is $5 trillion lower than the White House numbers, though economists don't quibble with the White House methodology (they projected a continuation of the Bush tax cuts). So given that discussion, we'll take Axelrod down a notch to Mostly True.

I hope this will end debate once and for all. Facts are facts.