The fact is, W and his republican congress contributed approximately 5 Trillion dollars to the national debt in 6 years. Mr. Bush and the do-nothing democratic congress added another 1.5 trillion in his last two years, rubber-stamping his submitted budgets.
Talking to these guys is a total waste of time...
Bush wasn't responsible for 9-11, the terrorists were.
You want to get the facts straight. What does all of this deficit spending turn into to? Debt!
When Bush took office, the national debt was $5.73 trillion. When he left, it was $10.7 trillion.
This indicates that Bush inherited $5.73 in debt from Clinton and the previous administrations.
Now Obama is already indicating that it will be above $12 trillion before the end of the his first year and according to you he has not even tried to spend any money.
The funny thing about you libs is you always throw out the statement that Bush increased the debt / deficit but then act like it is OK for Obama to increase the same items.
I bet you can not find one conservative on this board that agreed with Bush's spending but just about all of you libs think Obama's spending is right on the money.
Talk to me in 3 more years when Obama is just about washed up and we are 15 trillion dollars in debt with and no decrease in deficit spending.
Secondly, I stated in my post that Obama will likely set records in regards to deficit spending. So us "libs" can self-critique. After seeing how Bush trashed our economy and respect around the world with his failed policies, I'm amused and a little scared to see the Coulter/Rush disciples defend him to the bone, and try to lay his puppy all in Obama's lap!
As for what Bush II inherited from Clinton, check the graph I posted. That is very telling, with both the whitehouse and congress depicted. So look at that and try to tell me (with a straight face) that the republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility! :confused:
You may not choose to believe it, and frankly I don't care, but I used to be a rather staunch republican. That is, until I saw how the new breed of corporate, hyper-rich, war-mongering neocons hijacked the traditional republican party, and pushed everyone from moderate to hard-right conservatives out, leaving only the extreme-radical Christian right in control. You may think I'm a crank for saying that, but there's a WHOLE lot of folks in the boat with me, ergo President Obama and a supermajority of democrats in congress. I'm quite sure the dems will screw it up, and the pendulum will swing back. I just hope it pauses long enough for some independents to fix things up before that happens.
Your right about one thing when people start throwing out the phrase christian right and being in control I think you are way out in left field.
Last I heard the far left was claiming the Bush admin was being run by "the jews / zionists.
I have always considered Bush 1 and 2 as moderates.
I guess Christians are real scary maybe thats why the Dems pandered so much to them this time around.
1) He knew how to be CIC, and define a mission prior to going to war.
2) He listened to his advisors and Generals (not just 'yes-men')
3) He knew the importance of building a coalition of real participants
4) He maybe understood the importance of 1-3 because he actually served his country in combat, and fought along fellow soldiers and airmen, and came home and built his companies successfully.
Bush I.....an honorable, respectable, moderate republican President.
Bush II...able to correctly pronounce big words some of the time:rolleyes: