Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TideGlider who wrote (15328)	7/14/2009 11:47:01 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 103300

You're very welcome.

To: TideGlider who wrote (15328)	7/14/2009 12:22:16 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

And Tide... I'm anticipating that you might come back and say something like "those links or the articles that guy wrote displays a clear anti-Republican bias", so, just to clear the air (in 'advance' as it were <g>), let me say that SURE, I can see that, (based on some of the language the guy used)... even though the facts about the amount of national debt left at the end of each President's term are still facts... plain and simple. PLUS, there are some clear and valid counter-arguments that can be made such as: 1) Presidents are sure not anything like '100%' responsible for the nation's budgets and spending and tax structures during their presidencies. (That is an absolutely valid point to make: CONGRESS shares equally, or maybe even more then equally, in all that responsibility). And, 2) There have been (and surely still are!) PLENTY of budget-busting, big-spending Democrat politicians out there... and there have been lot's of good, fiscally responsible Republican elected officials over the decades! Both points are absolutely true! Still... something went completely haywire with the federal debt that was run up during the Reagan/Bush 12 years, and (to a lesser but still really, bad extent), during the younger Bush's two Presidential terms. Something WAY out of the post WW II norms. If we take those 20 years out of the mix, those 5 Presidential terms for Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II... then EVERY SINGLE PRESIDENCY SINCE WW II (except for a tiny little minor statistical back-slide under Ford) has somehow succeeded in NET PAYING DOWN NATIONAL DEBT instead or running it up. It would seem to be important that we realize this fact, and try to figure out why it happened. (For example: in the second Bush's very first year in the Presidency, he empaneled at least three separate 'blue ribbon' tax panels to suggest rewrites/overhauls for the entire US tax codes.... and, if you look at the entirety of their reports, they collectively came up with several EXCELLENT proposed tax changes... practically none of which were ever enacted, nor ever supported by the new President. WHY reforms failed seems, to me anyway, to be a very important question to know the answer to....)