Well you did say, " "There was NO debt when Bush took over. None, nada,
zilch. A balanced budget." and then you said " If you have debt,
the budget isn't balanced.
You keep for getting THAT key word, BALANCED"

Since you agree you did not make a mistake in your statement, I would be
very interested where you saw that the National Debt when Bush took office
was none, nada, zilch.

According to the US government the National Debt grew each year Clinton was
in office and was in excess of $5.6 trillion when Bush took office.

The table below shows the growth of the National Debt since Clinton took
office.

09/30/2000 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

Is it possible that you do not understand the difference between the words,
debt and deficit?




"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Taco Heaven" wrote in message
news:9_g2d.59837$D%.9892@attbi_s51...
Basskisser,
I am totally lost. Are you saying that when Bush became President, that
there was no National Debt, the fact that the budget was balanced is
proof
that Clinton had eliminated the national debt?

Apparently you ARE lost......you can't seem to comprehend plain
English. Go back and read it again...S L O W L Y, you just may get it!