> I agree but to be fair, I think one of the big > reasons that Clinton > had that fiscal responsibility was because he had a > Republican > controlled Congress. <overgeneralization> They > wouldn't pass what > he wanted and he'd veto anything they wanted. > </overgeneralization> > Hence, spending was down. I'm not convinced things > would have been > the same had Clinton a friendly Congress.
This is reaching back to the hoary days my my High School (Clinton was elected when I was in the 9th or 10th grade), but wasn't his platform intially about balancing the budget? Understandably, what a candidate runs on isn't always what they can (or will) deliver, but I was under the impression that Clinton's "thing" was to pay down the national debt. Damon. ===== ------------------------------------------------------------ Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: Revell Germany's M60A3 ------------------------------------------------------------ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
