Deficit.
 

You undermine his canniness by explicating it.

Who is the well-liked veteran poster handling the press?

Deficit.
 

I'm using it...innocently. I'm all about that.

Deficit.
 

Double Tsunami!

Deficit.
 

The point of that comment was that no matter what Bush does (or for that matter doesn' do) the liberals will find some nefarious purpose in it. It did not actually occur to me that you would support my argument. The Bush administration, during the recession consistently underestimated the deficit. Now in the recoevery it has underestimated the recovery. Pretty much, as Slave pointed out, has been going on for the last forty years. But you are saying Bush hid the budget numbers from the war so that the budget estimates would not look so terrible but at the same time overestimated the deficit so the number would look better when the true numnbers came out. Is it just me or wouldn't these two nefarious plans cancel eachother out.

That is like saying that when I sell you this car I won't quote the price with the tax so it looks cheaper but at the same time I am going to quote a much higher price than the true price so when you find out the real price you will be pleasently surpried.

But of course Bush has only been doing this amazing double deception during the recovery. Before, when he underestimated the deficit, he was doing that to deceive also.

For a guy that you don't think is so intelligent he sure can predict the future well and use those prediction to his political advantage.

Deficit.
 

plus, if you start a war for oil profits, shouldn't you be straight about it, and let peple know that you will otherwise tank the economy? that way people will invest in oil stock.
cha-CHING$$$$$

Deficit.
 

Maybe if Ty stopped reading all of those shite-filled liberal blogs and picked up a good book:

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/04...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

He would understand this:

http://www.gagreport.com/images/time1.jpg

Deficit.
 

The dynamic you describe could be attributed to political fighting over spending priorities -- there is a natural tendency of the two parties to check each other's most profligate urges when they share power. So the better comparison between Democrats and Republicans is between Clinton's first term, when he had a Democratic Congress, and Bush's tenure with a GOP Congress. Of course, we all know that under Clinton and the Democrats, the government's fiscal discipline improved -- over GOP opposition -- while under GOP control, the government lately has bled money like an anemic in the shower with a bunch of cats strapped to him.

Score another one for the PC police
 

Merde! The two-hour rule! Quel horreur! I would ask what this rule is, but you probably won't read this post either. This is completely unfair for those of us who actually have to work. I demand a government subsidy.

Deficit.
 

In a relativistic world where both parties are the same and we didn't have the record, that might be the case. But both partys are different - are they not? Clinton said that Gingrich was cutting to much. Gingrich said he was not. That is not in question (except in your mind). Actually Gingrich was just trying to slow the growth in medicare and other such programs. Clinton called them cuts. Whatever the case was, Gingrich was trying to reduce the deficit. Clinton was not. That is just a cold hard fact that you are going to have to live with.



Under Clinton and the Democratic congress fiscal discipline improved - no we all don't know that. That just exist in you wishful thinking mind. The economy was growing. Clinton increased taxes and still the deficit grew. And Clinton didn't even increase spending as much as most of the members of his party wanted him to. And the health care proposal didn't pass either which would have increased spending even more. So Clinton inherits a strong economy, raised taxes and still increases the deficit.

Bush, on the other hand, inherits a contracting economy, a war and cuts taxes and you are going to tell me this is a fair comparison? In order to smooth out the business cycle you are supposed to grow the deficits and in a contracting economy and you are supposed to reduce the deficits in an expanding economy.

So lets review. In a growing economy, Clinton and a Democrat congress raise taxes and still increase the deficit. In this same growing economy the Republicans take control of Congress and the budget gets balanced. However, Clinton does everything in his power to prevent such a balance from occurruing. Bush inherits a recession, so he and the Congress cut taxes, increase spending, and now we are out of the recession.

Alan Greespan critised Clinton and the Democrats spending plan, after the Republicans take over critisizes Clinton for his obstructionism and praises the Republicans for their discipline. And what does Clinton do to this man who so clearly doesn't understand what is really happening; he renomoniates him for the most powerful economic post in the world.

I think that pretty much sums up the reality of the situaton.

Deficit.
 

Ty. He lost a bet with Mephistoles.

Deficit.
 

Hey, don't take away from my nice burn of Hank.

I say this, of course, innocently.

Deficit.
 

Oh, pardon me. Carry on, then.

Deficit.
 

Quite all right. I'm done for the moment.

Deficit.
 

Your never-ending ability to dismiss facts you don't like by trashing the motives of those who report them never ceases to amaze me.

Deficit.
 

Anyone Penske or Hank cites is a yutz.

Through Hank's method, sheer dint of repetition of this phrase will discredit anything you guys say. Woo hoo!