[Jack Black]

For the last FREAKING TIME YOU LIBERAL IDIOTS AND LIARS: (directed to author of column not poster 'still hungover'

THERE WAS NO SURPLUS IN THE CLINTON YEARS !!!

As proof of my radically controversial statement I offer you the official U.S. Government listing of the PUBLIC DEBT, from their own web site.

To review the basics, if there had benn a "surplus" (i.e. more money taken in then spent) then for whatever year that occurred the debt would go DOWN. It did not. Thus the surplus was notional, a fraud, dependent on strange accounting rules. What it was not, even close, was an actual year that we ended up with more than we started with. Clinton did not pay down 1 penny of debt in his eight years. To say otherwise is to lie.

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66

[Jack Black]

Here is the URL:
http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm

Here is a hyperlink of the URL:
U.S.A. Debt through 2000

[Made In The USA]

Dean is a socialist, ever lovingly empathetic of the former USSR's model.

[Professional]

Thank you for posting that, had no idea! I guess it was a "cut" because the growth rate was lower? Wonder what the numbers look like for the last few years? I can only imagine them being far worse, with the recession, tax cuts, 9/11, and blowed up stock markets.