Rep Presidents are Killing our Country

WillCz · 10-12-2008, 01:20 PM

Here is the data on what the so called Republican President Conservatives have done to our country.

http://uspolitics.about.com/library/bl_gross_national_debt.htm

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm#_ftnref8

McSame tells the same stories as theses guys did...............

WillCz · 10-12-2008, 01:23 PM

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Don't forget that the Iraq war was started under false pretences and Haliburton got a ton of this money.

I guess trickle down just plain doesn't work.

REps just plain dont care and they laugh all the way to the bank.

Griswold · 10-12-2008, 01:27 PM

*Yawn*

This comes from someone who cannot draw a map of how Bush led us into this financial crisis, yet insists it is so.

WillCz · 10-12-2008, 01:32 PM

Are you diputing the facts.

Worse yet, the Reps just had control of everything for 6 years.

Bush did not lead us into the financial crisis. I truly believe the weak dollar created by our skyrocketing debt caused higher oil & food prices. Accompanied by the Rep philosophy of shipping all of our jobs overseas caused people to have less wealth than any time since the 1950's. Couldn't pay the bills, the gov't saw the problem, ignored it and here we are.

Not a map.

But what about the chart. How could you possibly Yawn at that.

James B · 10-12-2008, 01:35 PM

This statement is so dumb that it almost doesn't deserve and answer. The president regardless of party has almost no power top do anything without the cooperation of both houses. The congress has to approve all spending and nothing gets done without their approval. We have a president not a king or dictator. The congress signed off on this war and they are just as responsible as any other one person. The Dems could have stopped funding for this war and if they had, it would now be over. Seems like the promised their supporters before last election that if they got control, which they did, they would halt funding and stop the war. They lied, nothing new here.

Of the last five presidents, Bush ll is probably the least responsible for the current economic mess. This is 30+ years in the making. The Iraq war funding is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of illegal immigration. Ask CA.

WillCz · 10-12-2008, 01:39 PM

How could the dems stopped funding the war when they had no control until lately.

Bush could have stopped the defecit. A little state of the union address telling the American people that his fellow Republicans in Congress are bankrupting the country is all it would take. A responsible president would have done that rather than make a speach that all is good.

The war ifnot funded100% would have only contributed to 20% of the problem in the last 8 years. These charts are a little off since they don't take into account what is to come from the banking crisis.

Griswold · 10-12-2008, 01:48 PM

I'm not disputing the facts. Facts are black and white. But there's almost always more than one way to arrive at a fact. Strangely enough, the reasons are often approaches that are polar opposites (look no further than the financial crisis . . . the fact is what it is, but neither side can agree on whether deregulation or poorly conceived regulation got us to the point).

There are many reasons that cause the debt to increase or decrease. The economy, for instance. We had a very good economy during the '90s, hence the government had more revenue. You'll say that was due to Clinton's policies, which is a fine argument, but it's pretty well substantiated that the boom of the '90s and the recession of the '00s go hand-in-hand, so if Clinton was responsible for one, he had to be responsible for the other. I personally think he's directly responsible for neither, as is the case with most presidents and the economy. In the '00s, on the other hand, we've had some pretty turbulent times. Tax rebates to help the economy, rebuilding after disasters both natural and man-made, etc. And of course the wars have completely changed the budget. That chart is completely different over the past 10 years if 9/11 had not occurred. You'll argue that the war in Iraq was unnecessary, but that's totally subjective, not fact, and doesn't address the war in Afghanistan. And arguing that "shipping jobs overseas" is a result of Republican policy is an argument that is ignorant of political history.

Now I've said many times that the Republicans have ruined their reputation as the party of fiscal responsibility. However, when you say the Republicans had control of Washington for 6 years, that's a valid point. But you're not pointing out that Democrats have had control of Congress for nearly 2 complete year now, and the national debt has continued to increase. That invalidates your argument.

Arthur P · 10-12-2008, 01:58 PM

Quote:

But you're not pointing out that Democrats have had control of Congress for nearly 2 complete year now, and the national debt has continued to increase. That invalidates your argument.

You don't take into account that the Democrats have not had a filibuster proof majority, and the Republicans have taken great pains to use the filibuster and make sure the Dems weren't able to do anything of consequence. The argument remains valid, IMO.

WillCz · 10-12-2008, 02:12 PM

Argument is valid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is the #1 reason I switched to being a democrat.

Balanced budgets creating strength. Think about your own home. When things get out of whack, bad Sh&% happens. Although Cheney as ex ceo of Haliburton might disagree since Haliburton under Bush did better than at any other time in history.

Hmmmmmmmm

WillCz · 10-12-2008, 02:13 PM

I swithched because they are 1000% more fiscally responsible.

History and results are how I live my life and it is a simple decision to think that the Dems do the right stuff.

Family comes first.

Not like Sarah where career comes first. Look at that mess.