RE: [DMCForum] Refusal, denial, conspiricy, repression and reality
From: "timnagin" <timnagin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 16:52:02 -0500
This has already been touched on. Clinton had to be forced to do this with
the Contract With America, or whatever it was called. I think it would be
more correct to say that Newt Gingrich was responsible for this. But then
he was summarily forced out of office.
Without Iraq, how much would it cost to protect the US and make all of the
necessary changes? You are right, this is speculation as there is no way to
know. If too much was spent and nothing happened then he would be
criticized, just as if too little was spent and something happened. I don't
think there is any happy medium.
Greg
-----Original Message-----
From: Parrot Head Radio [mailto:jackstiefel@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 4:52 PM
To: dmcforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [DMCForum] Refusal, denial, conspiricy, repression and
reality
To a degree I am sure, and that would be expected. However, as was
seen during the Clinton Admin, not only was he able to balance the
budget, pay back the defecit, but also create a surplus. Now if he
could do that, why couldn't Bush at least break even considering the
extra spending needed for the attacks?
This is all speculation of course, there is no real basis of fact lol.
Jack
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 16:35:35 -0500, timnagin <timnagin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Parrot Head Radio [mailto:jackstiefel@xxxxxxxxx]
> >
> >No one could ever blame Bush for the WTC. it was his watch, but not
> >everything can be caught and stopped. WHat can be blamed on him is
> >the war, defecit, and yes even the killing of the Easter Bunny.
>
>
> Even if we never went to Iraq, the deficit still would have gone up due to
> necessary spending resulting from the attacks. This would be regardless
of
> who was in office.
>
> Greg
Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN