Mike in Mystic responds:

comparing those two spending figures is ridiculous. Different situations
entirely. Clinton was lucky enough to be President during a boom in the
economy (which he had absolutely nothing to do with) and Bush is fighting
wars all over the world. I'll grant you that even as a staunch Republican
I'm a little tired of paying for freedom in far off lands, but you can't
blame spending increases like that solely on the President. After 9/11 you
can't have expected us to sit by and reduce spending.


Yeah, you could. He could have spent the money protecting the U.S.

I do love this bit though: Clinton had nothing to do with the good times on his
watch, but all the crap that's falling on Bush is Clinton's fault.

Old sick people seem to think they deserve medicine for free. They think
everyone is out to get them and that everything costs too much. At least
they'll vacate a lot of the workforce and we shouldn't have a job shortage.
Well, as long as NAFTA get's revoked vbeg hehe.

Not all old people are sick. Not all need free medicine. But it would help if
pharmaceutical companies didn't put the screws to consumers. As the boomers
vacate the workforce, something that will happen in a big rush starting very,
very soon, you won't have to worry about NAFTA or anything else taking jobs
away. There will be openings everywhere.

Charlie Self

"Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and
steady dedication of a lifetime. "
Adlai E. Stevenson