I don't disagree with that at all. Any true Conservative knows that our spending has gone out of control. Bush is no conservative and our Congress isn't and hasn't been.
It's time to get some true conservatives into office before the people who are 'representing' us now, spend us into oblivion.
2007-10-05 09:57:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
you are able to't count type. seem on the debt strengthen under Bush, formerly the Democrats took administration of Congress. additionally, you fairly can't carry the seven-hundred billion dollar bailout against the Democrats. Bush's Treasury Secretary Paulson grew to become into on his knees to Nancy Pelosi begging her to push it by way of. as nicely, the crumple of the financial gadget left the Democrats little selection yet to purpose to stimulate the financial gadget to jolt it out of the great Recession. additionally, maximum Democrats in Congress voted against the Iraq conflict decision. Iraq has been an notably high priced and completely pointless conflict. on an identical time as you are able to contend that the Democrats don't have authorized any conflict spending, whilst they threatened to withhold approval they have been accused of abandoning the troops. Be user-friendly approximately what incredibly got here approximately and you will locate it incredibly confusing to place the blame on the Democratic Congress. Edit: additionally, you do understand do not you that, by skill of regulation, the President is had to consistent with annum present day a complete federal budget to Congress for approval. it incredibly is the reason presidents are held to blame for the cost variety and spending. Clinton, working example, raised taxes in 1993, without single Republican vote in Congress. Clinton's efforts produced budget surpluses. Bush squandered those surpluses.
2016-10-21 03:58:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by furne 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Um yeah we're over spending. The Emperor has new clothes but he got them from Democrats Five & Dime. (aka the last administration) And they got it from the one before, and they got it from the one before, and they told two friends, and they told two friends, and so on, and so on.......
Same story different administration.
It may not be the ol' tax and spend two step but its definitely been the "run it into the ground and only help your buddies" concept.
This old trick goes way back many a congress'.
You show me one administration that didnt do this in the past 100 years and I'll show someone who is making up a story out of thin air.
Fiscal irresponsibility is the single most irritating thing about our government in my opinion.
When HAVENT we had it?? Thats the question.
2007-10-05 10:04:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Kyle M 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You don't say who made the statement. The Republicans, prior to 2006, were guilty of spending too much, and it came back to haunt them.
However, Democrats who defeated incumbent Republicans, won because they ran as if they were more conservative than the Republicans they replaced. One major problem, all of the new Dems fell in line behind Nancy Peloci. Now none of them are talking conservative talk.
2007-10-05 09:51:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by regerugged 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The statement is only partially true. The Republican support for the war in Iraq (which the majority of Americans are sick of), and the many Repub politicians who were caught in corruption scandals were also major reasons for the Dimocrat victory in 2006.
2007-10-05 09:51:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Shane 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually the 109th Congress was about twice as bad at spending.
2007-10-05 09:50:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
the Republicans have been far worse than Democrats when it comes to deficit spending.
Reagan and both Bushes have seen the largest deficits and largest increases in debt in the history of this nation.
2007-10-05 09:49:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
bush is spending the lives and limbs of our youth over in iraq, over a lie.
2007-10-05 09:47:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋