|
Then they'll go on to say this worst recession ever was followed by millions of lost jobs. If you point out the low unemployment they make up some nonsense about earnings being lower. They're higher; and it's not just nominal earnings, it's even earnings corrected for inflation that are higher.
Almond, you may be just repeating what everyone's saying, but it's hard for me to take this talk about Bush's deficits with a straight face. When it comes to deficits, Bush-bashers suddenly won't talk about inflation because when you talk real money and the real economy you find that federal taxes, spending, and debt are all down.
There's no way around it. The national debt started out for Washington (the guy not the town) at $87 million. Now-a-days we like to think of that kind of dough as chump change (Bill Gates' mad money). Back then it was so huge Uncle Sam was very seriously considering default.
Right now nobody --not even a BB like Kerry or Buchanan-- is talking about the US gov't defaulting. The reason is that $7 trillion with today's economy is a lot more manageable than $87 million was back then.
Then again, logic is wasted on a Bush-basher.
Perhaps but if you look at debt over 4 years it grew far faster with Bush in terms of real dollars.. no doubt about that. At any rate I'm not a Bush basher. Many of the dollars had to be spent. What I do question is passing the Medicaid bill to name one that didn't help matters. In fact I agree with just about everything Bush has done except for the borders. And I don't think anyone is happy with what is being done on that point.
There were two reasons why the Clinton Budget wasn't in the red:
1. The republican controlled congress.
2. He and his fellow rats were making our military like Canada.
I still remember his bilge and Da$hole's re why we couldn't and shouldn't have a balanced budget. Then they took credit for it after the balanced budgets were jammed down their throats.