He looked, but he can't read.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:27:31 GMT, "The Carrolls"
wrote this crap:

Did you read what exactly you were looking at?

Of course.

That is the total yearly
statement amount, not the shortfall in income to pay it.

This is the debt, not the spending.



Here's the truth, dumbass.



09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/28/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/29/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00

SOURCE: BUREAU OF THE PUBLIC DEBT


Eat it, dumbass.





Ave Imperator Bush!
Bush Was Right! Four More Years!




Ave Imperator Bush!
Bush Was Right! Four More Years!