- Joined
- Dec 3, 2009
- Messages
- 52,009
- Reaction score
- 33,944
- Location
- The Golden State
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
If Clinton had a budget surplus and I believe it was all fuzzy math it was because of the Republican congress and New Gingrich and his contract with america......They made slick willie balance the budget which he did not want to do....
It's not really fuzzy math. The Congress of the US passed a budget in the last years of the Clinton Administration that, if one doesn't count the money stolen from Social Security, actually had a small surplus. Of course, the Democrats want to attribute that to Clinton, while the Republicans would rather claim it didn't happen, or claim "fuzzy math", or give credit where credit is due, to the Congress. Both parties want to ignore the money stolen from Social Security.
Not too many years later, the Congress of the US under a "conservative" i.e. Republican president, passed a budget that was some 300 billion out of whack even after the money stolen from Social Security was factored in. Of course, the Democrats will point to that as proof that Clinton balanced the budget, while Bush was a big spender. Republicans, looking at the same figures, suddenly remembered that it was the congress that spend the money. Of course now, the budget is so far out of balance that the country is likely going to be bankrupt very soon. Democrats want to attribute that unfortunate truth to Bush, while Republicans point to Obama. Of course, both presidents approved huge deficits, but it was, once again, the Congress of the US that spent money that the country doesn't have.
If pro is the opposite of con, what is the opposite of progress?
Oh yes, and neither party is the party of fiscal responsibility by any means.