Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
So was there any debt during Clinton's administration? If not, why does the US government disagree with you. According to them, the debt increased every year during the 8 yrs Clinton was in office. It seems that not only do you goosestep to the democratic line, but you don't understand the democratic line. "basskisser" wrote in message om... "P.Fritz" wrote in message ... "Taco Heaven" wrote in message news:xYl2d.445335$%_6.93194@attbi_s01... 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? He also is too stupid to to know what 'budget' means Uh, no...it's just that YOU are too ****ing dumb to know what the word BALANCED means...... |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT Bush is certainly no Reagan | General | |||
OT--Not again! More Chinese money buying our politicians. | General | |||
O.T. A day at the airport. | General | |||
Can We STOP IT??? | ASA |