This is nonsense because historically, the Republicans have spent more than
the Democrats. Look at the monster deficits Reagan ran up -- and he would
have spent more if the Democrats in Congress hadn't stopped him.
If Gore were president, we probably would have had much what we had under
Clinton -- smaller government, less spending, better economy.
You can't argue with success and under Clinton, we had the first president
since Ike who didn't deficit spend -- we had government jobs cut for the
first time since Ike -- we had real wages rise (when adjusted for inflation)
for the first time since Ike. And Gore is more naturally conservative
fiscally than Clinton.
And I don't see nobody handing me thousands of dollars, etc.
H.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 8:47 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Bushwacked again
That's complete nonsense. The guy hands you thousands of dollars, possibly
tens of thousands or more (add another 0, over ten years) if you factor in
what would have happened with Gore as president; money that would have been
pissed into a hole and you and the Democrats find ways to criticize it.
Amazing but true. The Democrats are mad because reduced spending equals
reduced power for them. They don't get to dole out more of your money, you
do. What a novel concept.
Lee
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
