This is the one that really frosts me. The top 10% of income earners paid 66% of the federal income taxes in 2005. The lowest 40% paid no income taxes. Indeed, those making less than $20,000/year actually had negative tax rates. How does the Left get away with statements saying that the "rich don't pay their fair share"...the hallmark of both Hillary's and Obama's campaigns? The GOP has done a HORRIBLE job educating the public about who pays what.
In my mind, the biggest reason Bush is viewed as a failure is because he didn't use his veto power enough. He totally lost control of spending, even while he controlled both houses. The GOP is now the Left with a different shade of lipstick. If I don't see evidence of change before November, they will lose my support. No big deal, perhaps, but I know I'm not alone in my feeling about this...
January 2005 to January 2007 are the only 2 years President Bush "enjoyed" both houses of CONgre$$.
What did they do for the President?
1. Unconstitutionally thwarted President Bush in appointing judges, (led by JM) ambassadors and other appointments that belong solely to the executive branch.
2. Began, or at the very least joined the rats, denouncing the war in Iraq by passing the Terrorists Bill of Rights and Kiss the Terrorist bill, whining about "torture" and closing Gitmo and began the constant pounding on Rummy. All led by none other than JSM!
3. They set the President up with veto proof majority on McCain/Feingold/Thompson, which no one ever mentions when they bash the President for signing it. Although, all the hostility about CFR has gone by the wayside since the lead name on that atrocity has been anointed.
There is much more, but this is making me nauseous so I'll stop for now.
As well it should. It also assumes that taxes are a good thing and history has never shown that.
What this article shows us, though, is that these "historians" are left-wing turds.