What you're saying here is that Bills passed during Bush's presidency that continued into Obama's Presidency unmolested should be attributed to Obama due to the fact that he never repealed or modified them. It's murky at best to say that that would be Obama's spending. Irregardless of that, The rate of spending throughout the graph is organized in the exact same manner and it clearly shows that Bush's previous term had similar spending. The point that I'm making with the graph isn't about the specific amount spent under each term as much as it's the comparison trend of spending. The point I'm refuting was that Obama has been spending "rampantly" (as in much more than necessary) and that just doesn't add up, unless you're going to say that he spent more in 2009 than in all other years combined, which I've yet to see any evidence of. That he was less of a glutton is exactly the point I'm making when the statement I'm refuting would be that because the friend hit his apex of 315 under Obama, that all his weight gain is Obama's fault.