Bush is a heck of a guy, why does even Greenspan know this but not libs?

Question

The combined effects of recession and national emergency could have been devastating for America's economy. Yet President Bush's tax cuts--following through on a promise he had made to the voters--resulted in a shallower recession, a faster recovery, and a platform for growth that remains sturdy to this day. The fact is that in a time of unprecedented challenge, the United States has experienced nearly six years of uninterrupted economic growth and added more than eight million new jobs since August 2003--more than all other major industrialized nations combined.

The economic growth encouraged by the president's tax cuts is now producing sharply increased federal tax receipts--up by nearly 15% in fiscal year 2005 alone, nearly 12% in fiscal year 2006, and projected to rise nearly 7% in the fiscal year that will end this month. That is the highest growth in tax receipts in consecutive years since 1981.

Answer 1

Yes.
JFK, Reagan, & Bush have all cared about the Working People, and gave them Tax Cuts.
(That's why the Democrat Party still hates JFK: for giving the Working People Tax Cuts.)

Answer 2

that is incredible, isn't it? yet no longer likely. what's easily happening is that Bush is doing so badly that conservatives are desirous to distance themselves from him. If Greenspan incredibly needed to criticize a president for working up debt as though deficits merely did no longer rely, he might have jumped on Reagan 25 years in the past. He had no concern with Reagan because of the fact Reagan grow to be so customary (nevertheless those days that is complicated to discover every physique sufficiently old to have voted for him who will admit to it). If Bush's acceptance rankings have been interior the 60s, Greenspan might hail him as a genius! Likewise with the Iraq conflict. We 'libs' have been against the conflict from the commencing up because of the fact it grow to be in keeping with lies, Saddam had no longer something to do with terrorism, no WMDs, etc. etc. Now conservatives are commencing to criticize the conflict, yet in user-friendly terms because of the fact Bush would not look winning it. If we had killed a pair million human beings and gotten administration of the oil, conservatives might think of it grow to be a super conflict. undergo in strategies whilst they advised us it would force down the cost of gasoline? 8^)

Answer 3

Yea boy, bush is a heck of a guy. All the rhetoric about supporting the troops he has threatened to veto a bill that would allow our military, after spending 15 months in Iraq, to come home for a longer period of time. That is REALLY supporting the troops. The hell it is!!!! This guy doesn't give a dam about our military as long as he completes his agenda for the procurement of Iraqi oil.

Answer 4

You are obviously repeating some ignorant stuff you heard somewhere. It only took an investment of more than 500 billions, over 3000 American lives and over way over 50000 Iraqis, to turn it around. That's a farse, if you owe the money there is no revenue.

Answer 5

Bush supports the troops huh? Why then did he reduce the death benefits payed to family members of military personal?

Answer 6

greenspan stated flatly that clinton was one of the two smartest presidents he ever worked with.

why does greenspan know this but not a single radical con?

Answer 7

FYI: Greenspan said that the Iraq mess is all about the oil.

Answer 8

In Greenspans new book he bashes bush for the idiot he is.

Answer 9

And after 1981, it all went downhill (no thanks to who? Oh yes, that's when Reagan became president - and everyone has been trying to clean up his mess since).

Answer 10

the recession has not even started yet.