Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Scythian
I know the chart is real, but hey, we had all positives and zero defecit under Clinton remember that?

That didn't happen until after the Republicans took over the House, in 1994, then Clinton was forced to accept Welfare reforms, and for the first few years, the Republicans toed the line on spending, which created the surplus. The 2001 budget was actually the last budget under the Clinton administration.

Sadly, their majority went to their heads, and Republicans got the earmark fever. That started their upward climb in spending, which only got worse after 9/11, and the downturn in the economy, which lowered revenues, but spending didn't go down to match the decreased revenues. Their profligacy was a major reason the Repubs. lost their majority in Congress. Scared by the election results in 2004, the Repubs slowed spending somewhat, and in 2005 and 2006, the deficits started going down, but when the Dems took over Congress, spending rose dramatically, so there is CLEARLY a difference between the parties!

103 posted on 08/04/2010 11:05:27 AM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: SuziQ
so there is CLEARLY a difference between the parties!

Agreed, Obama is playing for keeps, Bush, even though the majority of American's wanted a Border Fence had 8 years to do it and failed miserably, the republicans are wimps even when they have the American people behind them.

Word War II was fought in 6 years, Bush had 8, the enemy had struck at the very, very beginning of his first term, we knew then we were incredibly exposed and did nothing. What good is balanced budget when a nuke is going off in your face?
119 posted on 08/04/2010 1:15:11 PM PDT by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson