English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

8 answers

Well they promised us revenues would rise with the tax cuts. 2000 revenues were not met again in real terms until 2006. Even if 2007 and 2008 turn out as planned we will be one trillion in the hole due over where we would be if revenues merely matched 2000 levels each year. Difficult to blame this on the Dems since they voted against the irresponsible tax cuts that led to this.
As for the spending being subject to congress - this is of course nonsense. The president proposes the budget and while congress can make changes reigning in a spendhappy president is not that easy. Even assuming it is - to blame the Dems in congress for Bush' second term considering they have a tiny majority and have only had it for less than a year demonstrates just how far from the truth people like Fathead will go.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/pdf/hist.pdf
(see p26)

2007-09-23 00:24:36 · answer #1 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 0 0

The Reps blame the Dems and Indies. The Dems blame the Reps and the Indies. The Indies blame everybody. George has kept everybody thinking the other guy is to blame, while 'he' is innocent of all blame. In my opinion, George has never had a coherent thought since he got out of diapers(and he probably still wears diapers today). In fact all government probably blame Pat Paulson for making people(at least the intelligent ones) think, not just follow the crowd and use conjecture and inuendo to make their points more valid. At least his (George's) brothers Marvin and Jeb can think, they are the guys who in 1987 came up with a plan that fits 9/11 to an exact 'T' to keep all or most of the people in their corner by causing a genuine disaster that looked like a terrorist attack and it was signed off by The Dick--Cheney.

2007-09-23 07:37:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Its largely as a consequence of Clintons economy tanking and the attacks on 911. Thankfully the tax cuts have stimulated the economy and brought in new revenue. Unfortunately rebuilding a military and intelligence operations takes money.

2007-09-23 07:41:23 · answer #3 · answered by Avatar_defender_of_the_light 6 · 0 0

9 trillion in today's dollars.
Of course they do not. They know that Bush is superman, he micromanages the war, he is plotting for martial law, he causes hurricanes, he is working against Darfur, he is plotting to take over Iran. He is working to get illegals in. This man never sleeps. Of course he is responsible for the debt. It falls totally on his shoulders.
I doubt you are sharp enough to understand sarcasm.

2007-09-23 15:48:21 · answer #4 · answered by Jim H 3 · 0 0

Always. They take no responsibility for anything--including Reagan and Rumsfeld selling Saddam WMDs in the first place. They certainly take no responsibility for the national debt. Look at the recent promise to veto health care for poor children. They say we cannot afford it, but somehow we can afford to pour lives and $$$ into the "war" in Iraq. And then they accuse Democrats of making it political!

2007-09-23 07:14:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

While it is OK to blame the first 4 years of GB on a republican congress, the key is that it is the congress that controls the purse strings, not the executive branch. Thus the latest round of overspending is squarely on the democrats shoulders.

2007-09-23 07:12:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

as fat head shows, yes they do. All it takes is a lack of understanding of how our government works and it's easy to blame the democrats for Bush's failings.

2007-09-23 07:14:14 · answer #7 · answered by crushinator01 5 · 2 1

absolutely...
uss cole
clinton no repsonse
african embassy bombings
clinton no response
wtc one
clinton no response
at least six chances to capture or kill bin laden in sudan
clinton no response
largest tax increase in us history
clinton
the tie breaking vote to tax social security breaking a fifty year promise to the nations elderly
clinton....
NOTICE A PATTERN HERE LIBERAL...IF HE KEPT IT ZIPPED UP AND DID HIS JOB...THE WAR DISCUSSION WOULD BE MOOT AND THE TAX BURDEN WOULD EASE....INSTEAD OF THAT WE GOT...

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court

fault...you got that right partner.

2007-09-23 07:53:58 · answer #8 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers