"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...

What I posited is not a hard and fast rule - it merely an inclination.

One which we haven't seen demonstrated in our lifetime you mean.

But I do know that the debt increase under Reagan was largely responsible
for the demise of the Soviet Union.

Equal credit to Carter for luring the Soviets into Afghanistan.

The debt increase under Bush was in some significant measure caused by
9-11, two wars, and Katrina. Both increases, however, were projected to be
manageable given the growth of the economy.

Two wars of choice, it's not like Afghanistan or Iraq was behind 9/11. I
figure Bush was entitled to go into Afghanistan after Bin Laden and AQ, but
considering they didn't finish that job and immediately started planning for
the invasion of Iraq there is no way he gets to write off that expense. As
for Katrina, pfffft, $110 billion--petty cash compared to Iraq.

Now we have an administration that ran up more debt in its first MONTH
than Bush did during eight years. In fact, so far, Obama has incurred more
debt than FDR did during WWII!

Bush added five trillion to the debt over his administration (that's why
they had to vote to raise the debt ceiling seven times while he was in
office)--do you want to go with the claim that Obama spend five trillion in
his first month? Seriously?