History does not lie: Democrat Congress = Reckless Spending

2021 UPDATE:

2017 UPDATE:

In 2008 voters unwisely gave the Democrat party control of the executive branch and the legislative branch of the federal government.  President Obama, Senate majority leader Harry Reid, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi  had uncontested  power over federal spending and taxation policy for 2 years (2009-2010).  They were able to pass Obamacare without any effort at bipartisanship (0 republican votes) and recklessly increase government spending.  The fiscal attitude during the George W. Bush years was hardly "austere", but even with the war on islamic fascism in Afghanistan and Iran the deficits were around $250 billion per year.  In 2007 the deficit was 1.1% of GDP.  When one-party Democrat rule took over, they engaged not so much in tax increases as they did in unfunded spending.  The deficit skyrocketed to $1.4 TRILLION in 2009, $1.3 trillion in 2010 and 2011, and $1 trillion in 2012.  Voters put republicans back in charge of the US House of Rep. in 2011 and right back down went the deficit, $680 billion in 2013, $485 billion in 2014, and $438 billion in 2015.  2016 saw a slight increase, however, as attention was diverted away from making difficult budget decisions.

UPDATE 2014:

The data is still conclusive, republican controlled congress (fiscal policy and budget) is more responsible than a democrat controlled congress in terms of not leading our country and younger generations into bankruptcy or oppressive taxation and reduced benefits for those in dire circumstances: (R: republican controlled congress, S: split congress, D: democrat controlled congress). 

A common theme by leftist (democrat, progressive, choose your adjective) pundits is that job growth has been higher under democrat presidents than with republican.  Fiscal policy, however, and the taxpayer federal budget are controlled by the US Congress, not the Oval Office.  It is a mistake to correlate executive branch control to the health of the employment condition, although the executive branch does generally control the regulatory burden placed on businesses.  A more meaningful correlation is between congressional control (budget, spending, taxation) and the employment condition.  Below is a chart from a leftist blog, i simply superimposed congressional control onto the data, and the findings for the modern economy (1960-2014) indicate republican control of congress has yielded a higher level of job growth:

March 2009:

Deficit spending does have negative consequences. You can ignore them over the short term, but the laws of economics cannot be violated over the long term. You can manipulate monetary policy, but eventually interest rates will go up to attract more foreign buyers of treasury bills, the value of the dollar will be perpetually bad, taxes will have to be increased to meet the federal govt obligations, and the average standard of living will go down as a result.

When republicans are in the majority in Congress, there is at least some fiscal discipline, but when Democrats have been in the majority, it has been 'our-kids-be-damned' and our future standard of living be damned. The graph provides the facts, make your own conclusions.