CHARGE BUSH WITH TREASON!
Here's the horrifying graph! Be sure to pass this around to get people angry about Bush's "legacy" of almost 50 billion in debt!
Don't worry about that scribble on the right, that's nothing, and has nothing to do with Bush, pay no attention.
From Ravenwood
3 comments:
So - let me get this right... because a liberal democrat spent more money, that justifies a supposedly conservative Bush's wasteful spending and deficit expansion?
Hell no! You'll find no argument from me regarding Bush's fiscal "responsibility." I daresay I wore out the phrase "like drunken sailors" during his second term.
But Bush didn't run on a platform that challenged Clinton's deficit spending. Nor did he gallop in on a white horse, flying a banner of HOPE and CHANGE. Bush didn't attack Clinton for playing politics with the future of this nation, or promise that he would be the one to break the cycle of our broken political system. Bush didn’t promise to be the polar opposite of Clinton, nor (honestly) did most people expect him to be. (Bush DID promise to spend more money expanding programs during his campaign, no matter how many conservatives mentally blocked that message out) Bush didn’t claim to be more than a politician.
Bush didn’t do all those things. But Obama did, and he did it while he smiled and waved, and acted as though everyone expected him to do exactly what he is doing right now.
Though you’ll have to excuse me for poking fun at the liberal democrats who spouted similarly bombastic hatred of Bush during his presidency. I can’t help that they fellated Obama as the agent of change during the election, then quickly took up a defensive role as soon as he was elected, and revealed himself to be something other than the incomparable man they had either made him out to be, or he had made himself out to be.
And just so we're clear; a liberal democrat didn't just spend "more money" than Bush. He spent almost four times as much money as an already spend-happy republican.
Ah, Ok. I wasn't sure who you were attacking there and I was a mite confused. Guess I'm just too used to being blasted by party line republicans for daring to question Bush's policies, and the bush/obama posts were starting to wear a little thin in that perspective.
I'm glad I bothered to ask first where exactly they were coming from.
Post a Comment