Are you better off than you were four years ago?

Uh... You're pretty much the first person I've met who provided a link that refutes *his own* comments. According to your cited source, the cost of the wars cost $794,700,000,000 (794.7 billion) dollars. Note that there was an additional $496.8 billion dollars spent under the obama administration, that would not have been spent if we didn't go to war.

You're also dramatically skewing the debt increase. Factcheck.org has information on the matter, supporting your position that Obama has made some major increases in the deficit, but also countering your conclusion that democrats are the primary factor in the current deficit situation.

http://factcheck.org/2012/09/obamas-deficit-dodge/ [factcheck.org]

CBO’s assumptions did not factor in two recessions (2001, 2008), two wars and a slew of legislative changes from the Bush tax cuts to the Obama stimulus.

The difference between the projected surpluses and the actual deficits is $11.9 trillion over that 10-year period. Treasury concluded that Bush policies were to blame for 59 percent and Obama’s policies 12 percent. The rest — 29 percent — were what CBO calls “economic and technical changes,” mostly having to do with changing economic forecasts because of the recessions.

Treasury’s analysis was done by reviewing 36 CBO reports issued over the last 12 years: the biannual Budget and Economic Outlook and the CBO’s annual analysis of the president’s budget. Treasury accounted for the changes in CBO’s revenue and outlay projections during that time period to determine how far the original 2001 CBO projections had deviated and where the deviations had occurred.