AspenValley wrote: Are you seriously suggesting that the entire debt problem was created by the Dems? Because that's just flat out batsh*t crazy.
Who wrote the bills for the last four year? Should Bush have signed some of them? NO! He should have vetoed the Tarps and others but he turned a bit Liberal there the last 2 years.
Bush started his term in office with a large surplus and ended it with a large deficit. During the majority of that time, there was a fairly large presence of Republicans in Congress.
The policies of that era also ended up tanking the economy, which further buried us in debt. The Democrats may bear some responsibility for failing to rein in some of that trend, but to act as though they need to "suffer" for it all alone while giving the Republicans a total pass for their part in this problem is....deluded.
AspenValley wrote: Are you seriously suggesting that the entire debt problem was created by the Dems? Because that's just flat out batsh*t crazy.
Are yuou saying the Dems did not have control of both houses for 4 of the most critical years in our history?
Exactly! Look at the charts of our debt through 2006. Then look what happened from 2007 - 2011 when the Dems had total control of congess and all bills and spending. Seriously. Look at the chart. Bush inherited a recesion (which he made one of the shallowest in history with the tax cuts), and 9/11 and the Worldcom and Enron mess that Clinton ignored and he was reducing the deficit until 2008. After the Dems bills and spending kicked in, it went all down hill at hyperspeed! The tax cuts and Republican policies even with 2 wars were working and cutting the deficit until the Dems took control of the spending. Now they had to make the chart bigger than ever in history just to fit all of their Red into it! And there is no end it sight and Obama is fighting for $2.3 trillion more??
AspenValley wrote: Bush started his term in office with a large surplus and ended it with a large deficit. During the majority of that time, there was a fairly large presence of Republicans in Congress.
The policies of that era also ended up tanking the economy, which further buried us in debt. The Democrats may bear some responsibility for failing to rein in some of that trend, but to act as though they need to "suffer" for it all alone while giving the Republicans a total pass for their part in this problem is....deluded.
Look at the chart I just posted. It was a small surplus and he started with Clinton's recession, remember (again, which if you look at the chart, after the tax cuts in 2003 the economy grew for almot 5 straight years with major job growth but it had a lot of catching up to do from 9/11 and Clinton's recession. And then 9/11 and everything else and the R's were turning it around when they were in control of congress. Their policies had us to less than $200 billion debt in 2007 then the dems spending kicked in and everythigng went to hell fast the end of 2007 and until now!
AspenValley wrote: Are you seriously suggesting that the entire debt problem was created by the Dems? Because that's just flat out batsh*t crazy.
Who wrote the bills for the last four year? Should Bush have signed some of them? NO! He should have vetoed the Tarps and others but he turned a bit Liberal there the last 2 years.
Agreed, thus the birth of the Tea Party nmovement.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
AspenValley wrote: Bush started his term in office with a large surplus and ended it with a large deficit. During the majority of that time, there was a fairly large presence of Republicans in Congress.
The policies of that era also ended up tanking the economy, which further buried us in debt. The Democrats may bear some responsibility for failing to rein in some of that trend, but to act as though they need to "suffer" for it all alone while giving the Republicans a total pass for their part in this problem is....deluded.
Look at the chart I just posted. It was a small surplus and he started with Clinton's recession, remember (again, which if you look at the chart, after the tax cuts in 2003 the economy grew for almot 5 straight years with major job growth but it had a lot of catching up to do from 9/11 and Clinton's recession. And then 9/11 and everything else and the R's were turning it around when they were in control of congress. Their policies had us to less than $200 billion debt in 2007 then the dems spending kicked in and everythigng went to hell fast the end of 2007 and until now!
Sorry, I'm just going to agree to disagree. You are running off so many fallacious and just downright wrong assumptions that I don't have time to correct them all, but I will say that the statement that the Bush economy created "major job growth" is kind of like saying it snows like crazy in Florida.
Obviously you get some kind of weird comfort from clinging to your partisan politics, so far be it from me to take away your security blankie.
It's obvious to anyone with eyes that this country is going to hell in a handbasket, and it's clear to those same people who aren't blinded by partisan fantaticism that neither party will or can do anything about it. They are all part of the problem, not the solution.
Ok then.... I found where all the action is....(Not in the Study in PC). To all who believe this debate is about the debt ceiling and R's and D's working together....NEWSFLASH....THIS is about the 2012 election and who can position their party for RE-ELECTION....it behoves the R's to sink Obama with the "economy Stupid" premise. THEREFORE, the R's with NOT allow this debt ceiling debate to be
success with HUGE compromises on the both sides....END OF STORY.....jmo :bash :blahblah: :hands: NOT!!!!
AspenValley wrote: Bush started his term in office with a large surplus and ended it with a large deficit. During the majority of that time, there was a fairly large presence of Republicans in Congress.
The policies of that era also ended up tanking the economy, which further buried us in debt. The Democrats may bear some responsibility for failing to rein in some of that trend, but to act as though they need to "suffer" for it all alone while giving the Republicans a total pass for their part in this problem is....deluded.
Look at the chart I just posted. It was a small surplus and he started with Clinton's recession, remember (again, which if you look at the chart, after the tax cuts in 2003 the economy grew for almot 5 straight years with major job growth but it had a lot of catching up to do from 9/11 and Clinton's recession. And then 9/11 and everything else and the R's were turning it around when they were in control of congress. Their policies had us to less than $200 billion debt in 2007 then the dems spending kicked in and everythigng went to hell fast the end of 2007 and until now!
Sorry, I'm just going to agree to disagree. You are running off so many fallacious and just downright wrong assumptions that I don't have time to correct them all, but I will say that the statement that the Bush economy created "major job growth" is kind of like saying it snows like crazy in Florida.
Obviously you get some kind of weird comfort from clinging to your partisan politics, so far be it from me to take away your security blankie.
It's obvious to anyone with eyes that this country is going to hell in a handbasket, and it's clear to those same people who aren't blinded by partisan fantaticism that neither party will or can do anything about it. They are all part of the problem, not the solution.
Have a nice day.
You can't SEE or READ the chart I posted? And 52 straight months of job growth from 2003-2007 doesn't lie.
Fact! And you can check it anywhere!..... After the Bush tax cuts, there were 52 months of continuous job creation, the largest such period in American history! Tax cuts worked! Then the Dems took over and spending and bailouts kicked in and that DOESN'T work!
Viking, I don't know how to break this to you, but job growth under your old pal G.W. SUCKED. It didn't even cover enough jobs to meet population growth. And when it comes to jobs that actually PAY A LIVING WAGE.....
Ah, never mind. You don't get it and you never will.
You actually think if only "your guy" (or gal) gets elected to the White House all will be well. And if it isn't, then you just rewrite history, ignore huge problems, and blame it on the other guy.
