I really wish you'd do the tiniest bit of research before you post this sort of thing on a public forum, because it comes off as terribly ignorant.
Over the last half a dozen administrations or so, I think you would find that the Democratic administrations spent much of their time in office repairing the financial devastation left them by their predecessors, and some, like Clinton, actually came close to reducing the national debt completely.
Of course, you wouldn't know this if all you do is parrot the GOP line and/or the tea party drivel.
It's just like the GOP's constant harping on cutting social security, which is completely independent of the national budget. Privatizing the MOST successful government program in this nation's history won't put one thin dime into the national budget, just the pockets of the banks and institutions that would manage it into nonexistence.
Sorry, these are easily found facts, not opinions, but I'm sure you will have more unsubstantiated prattle with which you will refute them, anyway.
Clinton has a good politician, but Newt Gingerich was the real reason why the budget was balanced. After the Republicans took over Congress in 1994, Clinton was smart enough to work with the Republicans to cut spending. Clinton, of course, took all of the credit for the balanced budget, but he never would have even attempted doing this if Newt Gingerich hadn't been Speaker of the House.
But I do agree that Clinton was not a spendthrift. Jimmy Carter and Obama, on the other hand, spent every dollar they could and taxed the hell out of everyone!
I am not arguing with you in the least, but I love how when things go well the credit gets shared, but when things don't, it's all the president's fault.
Who would you vote for in 2016?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I really wish you'd do the tiniest bit of research before you post this sort of thing on a public forum, because it comes off as terribly ignorant.
Over the last half a dozen administrations or so, I think you would find that the Democratic administrations spent much of their time in office repairing the financial devastation left them by their predecessors, and some, like Clinton, actually came close to reducing the national debt completely.
Of course, you wouldn't know this if all you do is parrot the GOP line and/or the tea party drivel.
It's just like the GOP's constant harping on cutting social security, which is completely independent of the national budget. Privatizing the MOST successful government program in this nation's history won't put one thin dime into the national budget, just the pockets of the banks and institutions that would manage it into nonexistence.
Sorry, these are easily found facts, not opinions, but I'm sure you will have more unsubstantiated prattle with which you will refute them, anyway.
--
Rick_Bawls
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Clinton has a good politician, but Newt Gingerich was the real reason why the budget was balanced. After the Republicans took over Congress in 1994, Clinton was smart enough to work with the Republicans to cut spending. Clinton, of course, took all of the credit for the balanced budget, but he never would have even attempted doing this if Newt Gingerich hadn't been Speaker of the House.
But I do agree that Clinton was not a spendthrift. Jimmy Carter and Obama, on the other hand, spent every dollar they could and taxed the hell out of everyone!
--
thegypsysailor
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I am not arguing with you in the least, but I love how when things go well the credit gets shared, but when things don't, it's all the president's fault.