To: Dane
I guess Rooster I guess would have to say he appreciates Clinton more than Bush because gov't was smaller under Clinton?
By the way does anyone have the growth numbers on gov't for the last fourty years, or at least the breakdown in spending under Bush in the last three?
91 posted on
01/17/2004 3:59:05 PM PST by
normy
(As for my people, children are their oppressors and women rule over them. Isaiah 3:12)
To: normy
Sounds like Nader is your cup of tea.
To: normy; RJCogburn
I guess Rooster I guess would have to say he appreciates Clinton more than Bush because gov't was smaller under Clinton? Most of the growth has come in Homeland Security, but IMO, RJ would rather have a demo President and a Pubbie Congress. The theory is called gridlock, but we are at war and it seems that RJ and his ilk could care less if a Dean or Clark is the Commander in Chief.
100 posted on
01/17/2004 4:03:14 PM PST by
Dane
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson