well i have a copy of the federal deficit or surplus form 1989 thur 2009......and guess what from 1998 thur 2001 there was a surplus of over 200 and some billion....then at the end of big george there was a deficit of $1.086 trillion eficit.. i am just a dumb old cracker.....but i can smell that.... check it out for your self...have a nice day
I believe it's now pushing 12,349,324,464,284.28 Good thing Obama fixed all of Bush's crazy spending habits! 😆
You should look up economics of a free market and read up on how the American political system functions before you condemn one man.
I'm not saying he was the best thing that happened to us, just that most people don't even understand that the 435 people in the House of Representatives and the 100 Senators in Congress are just as responsible for the bills passing/being stopped as the President is. It's just the President's job to sell it to us. They're really nothing more than a bobble-head and a face for other nations to hate. Nor do people understand long-term economics, and how it's totally irrational to lay the debt of spend-happy consumerist America on the shoulders of one man.
Didn't like his policies? Fine, dislike him for that and have a rational argument against him. Don't hate a man because he took a huge pay cut, the most stressful job in the world, and then got verbally and textually lashed by the entire nation when things didn't go just perfect during his time in service. He faced an attack on our nation, multiple natural disasters, and a economy coming off a large, continuous increase (the bubble has to burst sometime).
What did Clinton have to deal with? He screwed up Somalia....he got to bask in stable economic increase (due to past Administration's economic plans, mind you), and the worst stress he had during his time was when he got busted getting a blowjob.
Our political system is broken, at best, and until the two party system is dismantled, we aren't going to make much progress as a nation.
well i have a copy of the federal deficit or surplus form 1989 thur 2009......and guess what from 1998 thur 2001 there was a surplus of over 200 and some billion....then at the end of big george there was a deficit of $1.086 trillion eficit.. i am just a dumb old cracker.....but i can smell that.... check it out for your self...have a nice day
What you have is a handful of :crap: . Clinton NEVER left a surplus. Get some real numbers, like those shown in this article where they use the Treasury Department website that shows the national debt on a daily basis:
http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16
Here's an excerpt:
The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B + $123B + $230B = $422B, not $360B).
While not defending the increase of the federal debt under President Bush, it's curious to see Clinton's record promoted as having generated a surplus. It never happened. There was never a surplus and the facts support that position. In fact, far from a $360 billion reduction in the national debt in FY1998-FY2000, there was an increase of $281 billion.
Verifying this is as simple as accessing the U.S. Treasury (see note about this link below) website where the national debt is updated daily and a history of the debt since January 1993 can be obtained. Considering the government's fiscal year ends on the last day of September each year, and considering Clinton's budget proposal in 1993 took effect in October 1993 and concluded September 1994 (FY1994), here's the national debt at the end of each year of Clinton Budgets:
Fiscal Year......Year Ending...........National Debt.................Deficit
FY1993...........09/30/1993...........$4.411488 trillion
FY1994...........09/30/1994...........$4.692749 trillion...........$281.26 billion
FY1995...........09/29/1995...........$4.973982 trillion...........$281.23 billion
FY1996...........09/30/1996...........$5.224810 trillion...........$250.83 billion
FY1997...........09/30/1997...........$5.413146 trillion...........$188.34 billion
FY1998...........09/30/1998...........$5.526193 trillion...........$113.05 billion
FY1999...........09/30/1999...........$5.656270 trillion...........$130.08 billion
FY2000...........09/29/2000...........$5.674178 trillion...........$17.91 billion
FY2001...........09/28/2001...........$5.807463 trillion...........$133.29 billionAs can clearly be seen, in no year did the national debt go down, nor did Clinton leave President Bush with a surplus that Bush subsequently turned into a deficit. Yes, the deficit was almost eliminated in FY2000 (ending in September 2000 with a deficit of "only" $17.9 billion), but it never reached zero--let alone a positive surplus number. And Clinton's last budget proposal for FY2001, which ended in September 2001, generated a $133.29 billion deficit. The growing deficits started in the year of the last Clinton budget, not in the first year of the Bush administration.
Keep in mind that President Bush took office in January 2001 and his first budget took effect October 1, 2001 for the year ending September 30, 2002 (FY2002). So the $133.29 billion deficit in the year ending September 2001 was Clinton's. Granted, Bush supported a tax refund where taxpayers received checks in 2001. However, the total amount refunded to taxpayers was only $38 billion . So even if we assume that $38 billion of the FY2001 deficit was due to Bush's tax refunds which were not part of Clinton's last budget, that still means that Clinton's last budget produced a deficit of 133.29 - 38 = $95.29 billion.
Clinton clearly did not achieve a surplus and he didn't leave President Bush with a surplus.
You should look up economics of a free market and read up on how the American political system functions before you condemn one man.
I'm not saying he was the best thing that happened to us, just that most people don't even understand that the 435 people in the House of Representatives and the 100 Senators in Congress are just as responsible for the bills passing/being stopped as the President is. It's just the President's job to sell it to us. They're really nothing more than a bobble-head and a face for other nations to hate. Nor do people understand long-term economics, and how it's totally irrational to lay the debt of spend-happy consumerist America on the shoulders of one man.
Didn't like his policies? Fine, dislike him for that and have a rational argument against him. Don't hate a man because he took a huge pay cut, the most stressful job in the world, and then got verbally and textually lashed by the entire nation when things didn't go just perfect during his time in service. He faced an attack on our nation, multiple natural disasters, and a economy coming off a large, continuous increase (the bubble has to burst sometime).
What did Clinton have to deal with? He screwed up Somalia....he got to bask in stable economic increase (due to past Administration's economic plans, mind you), and the worst stress he had during his time was when he got busted getting a blowjob.
Our political system is broken, at best, and until the two party system is dismantled, we aren't going to make much progress as a nation.
Yeah but Bush hated black people!
