Gene Frenkle Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 I find it hard to believe anyone who has read the Constitution can support either of these parties, though it'd be much easier for me to identify with the Republican platform were I able to ignore their contrary transgressions. I haven't lost my ideals at all. Quite the opposite. I'm simply a pragmatist who understands that government doesn't fix problems by playing Robin Hood with TRILLIONS of dollars of our money. If you can't understand that, I don't know what to tell you. I don't eat processed food. 120462[/snapback] I'm sure it's all just media bias, but it seems to me that while the national deficit shrank for 8 years under Clinton, it has grown exponentially under Bush. I know there are other factors to consider here, but the swing has been too large to attribute just to 9/11 and the war on terror. It seems to me that sitting on the fence puts you in a position to play either side when the mood suits you. That's a nice position to be in, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 I'm sure it's all just media bias, but it seems to me that while the national deficit shrank for 8 years under Clinton, it has grown exponentially under Bush. I know there are other factors to consider here, but the swing has been too large to attribute just to 9/11 and the war on terror. It seems to me that sitting on the fence puts you in a position to play either side when the mood suits you. That's a nice position to be in, I guess. 120473[/snapback] So you think he should pick one side or another and not see the way things are and think for himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 I'm sure it's all just media bias, but it seems to me that while the national deficit shrank for 8 years under Clinton, it has grown exponentially under Bush. I know there are other factors to consider here, but the swing has been too large to attribute just to 9/11 and the war on terror. It seems to me that sitting on the fence puts you in a position to play either side when the mood suits you. That's a nice position to be in, I guess. 120473[/snapback] Uh, no. It also has to do with the smoke and mirrors economy that was created under Clinton that imploded after the stock market Rosen of 2000, resulting in a recession the following year. Oh yeah, but Bush was President by then, so it's all HIS fault that thousands of dot com companies that were built on nothing but speculation disappeared overnight, tossing millions of out work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 I'm sure it's all just media bias, but it seems to me that the national deficit was shrinking for 8 years under Clinton, but has grown exponentially under Bush. I know there are other factors to consider here, but the swing has been too large to attribute just to 9/11 and the war on terror. It seems to me that sitting on the fence puts you in a position to play either side when the mood suits you. That's a nice position to be in, I guess. 120473[/snapback] If you want to buy that continued lie, go ahead. The deficit wasn't shrinking. They were simply stealing money from Social Security and living the high life off capital gains from a ridiculous stock market bubble that imploded because it had to. Continuing to give the Clinton Administration credit for the 90's economy doesn't make it so. The benefit of stabilized global energy prices, the broadband proliferation boom, a brand new generation of mutual fund/401K/IRA investors, and a divided federal government were the actual reasons. But we can pretend otherwise to fit our politics, if we must. Thankfully the Clinton Administration didn't "fix" health care or social security when there was money to do so, otherwise the deficit would be even worse than it is now. I'm not absolving the Bush Administration for their part in the equation, oh quite the contrary. They have been a fiscal disaster, along with Congress on both sides of the aisle. The answer isn't to continue giving them over $2,000,000,000,000.00 a year to play with. My position is called reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 You know the liberals don't get it. They keep killing themselves off in protest or denouncing their citizenship and moving to Canada there will be less left in 2008. Oh well, Jeb Bush here we come. 118575[/snapback] I dont think Bush will get the nomination- I think it will be John McCain over Hillary Clinton. I think McCain will be very good for the country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts