ccrunner609 wrote: Well with the 2009 increase and the 2010 increase the Dem congress has done this 6 times since they took control in 2006?

The pubs congress only did it 3 times since 2000.


Either way, both are crooks. I read somewhere that at least the rebublicans did this out in the open and didnt try to hide it in a bigger bill


http://citizensforrationaldiscourse.blogspot.com/

umm...like emergency supplementals to fund wars not included in annual budget #'s???

ccrunner609 wrote: wars that this administration is taking credit for ending

Fixed it.

ccrunner609 wrote: wars that this administration is taking credit for?

Yep, just like Ike and Nixon.

^^^Kennedy sent us to Viet Nam, Johnson escalated it, and Nixon got us out.

believer wrote: ^^^Kennedy sent us to Viet Nam, Johnson escalated it, and Nixon got us out.

Ike got it started after 1954 and the French pulled out, but yes the others did escalate with Nixon finishing it.

In Ike, I was referring to Korea.

ccrunner609 wrote: Well with the 2009 increase and the 2010 increase the Dem congress has done this 6 times since they took control in 2006?

The pubs congress only did it 3 times since 2000.


Either way, both are crooks. I read somewhere that at least the Republicans did this out in the open and didn't try to hide it in a bigger bill


http://citizensforrationaldiscourse.blogspot.com/

Actually, by my count the GWB administration asked for an increase 5 times from 01 to 05. The pubs hands are anything but clean.
The contract with America pubs along with the Clinton administration created a surplus that would have Retired the public debt by 2014 if left untouched.

Declining revenues, increased spending , and tax cuts all contributed to the financial position that we all face.

IMO the idiots that are asking for the Ceo's heads are guilty of doing the same thing that they themselves did by raising the debt ceiling with out offsetting spending increases with budget cuts. It's like yelling who farted when they themselves have shit thier pants.

read it here

ptown_trojans_1 wrote:Ike got it started after 1954 and the French pulled out, but yes the others did escalate with Nixon finishing it.

In Ike, I was referring to Korea.

I understand that point and had no argument with it.

Ike's decision to send - for all intents and purposes - a few agents and some military "advisers" to Viet Nam pales in comparison to what Kennedy to a slightly larger degree and Johnson to a much larger degree did to escalate America's political war in Southeast Asia.

believer wrote:

ptown_trojans_1 wrote:Ike got it started after 1954 and the French pulled out, but yes the others did escalate with Nixon finishing it.

In Ike, I was referring to Korea.

I understand that point and had no argument with it.

Ike's decision to send - for all intents and purposes - a few agents and some military "advisers" to Viet Nam pales in comparison to what Kennedy to a slightly larger degree and Johnson to a much larger degree did to escalate America's political war in Southeast Asia.

So what's the point being made here?

Who are you trying to give the most (least) credit for Vietnam? I'd think it should be Nixon since he pulled us out of that stupidity.

I Wear Pants wrote: June 28, 2002
116 Stat. 734 Increased the debt limit to 6,400.0

May 27, 2003
117 Stat. 710 Increased the debt limit to 7,384.0

November 19, 2004
118 Stat. 2337 Increased the debt limit to 8,184.0

March 20, 2006
120 Stat. 289 Increased the debt limit to 8,965.0

September 29, 2007
121 Stat. 988 Increased the debt limit to 9,815.0

July 30, 2008
122 Stat. 2908 Increased the debt limit to 10,615.0

October 3, 2008
122 Stat. 3790 Increased the debt limit to 11,315.0

We get it, GW sucked. We know. Obama was brought in to "change" what GW did, instead he's only continued it. That's what people are pissed about. It's time for us to stop bitching about how bad GW did and focus on the present and fix the problems at hand. No one wins when you point fingers, other than pointless political wins.