http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...UG9K99OQ11.DTL

Highlights:

"The Bush administration finds itself unable to operate within the boundaries of the highest debt ceiling in U.S. history, so its solution is to get by on other people's money until it can secure approval to run up even more debt. "

According to the Treasury Department, Bush has had his Treasury secretary dip into the G-Fund every year for the past three years as government spending wildly exceeded revenues.

During this same period, Bush has pushed through a series of tax cuts while pursuing ambitious domestic and foreign-policy agendas, including two wars and an overhaul of the Medicare system.

"I don't know how seriously we can take Bush's attitude toward fiscal responsibility," said Alan Auerbach, an economist at UC Berkeley. "He has very little credibility on this issue."

Does this sound very sane? This article completely undermines Bush in terms Friday's debate.

To be fair, both Dems and Reps have done this, but I feel that Bush was not been upfront about our current fiscal crises at the debate. This is an example of sweeping a problem under the rug.

 

According to Forbes, the top three economic performing presidents are:

1. Bill Clinton
2. Lyndon Johnson
3. John F. Kennedy

All Democrats.

The bottom three economic performing presidents are:

1. Richard Nixon
2. Dwight Eisenhower
3. George H. W. Bush

All Republicans.

For some reason, George W. Bush was not included in the list.

http://www.forbes.com/commerce/2004/...entstable.html

 

...Johnson and Kenedy are tied for 1st with Clinton behind them I think...

 

And the bottom three are Carter then Eisenhower then Bush Sr...and Reagen is 4th overall...so I'm not sure your argument holds water, even though I would like it to...

 

Where are your sources?

 

...I'm using the same Forbes thing...they're listed out of order for some reason...look at the average ranks on the right side, the order is:

1) Johnson, Kenedy ave 3.0
3) Clinton ave 3.7
4) Reagen ave 4.5
5) Ford ave 5.2
6) Truman, Nixon ave 6.5
8) Carter ave 7.0
9) Eisenhower ave 7.2
10) Bush Sr. ave 8.5

 

...maybe the order they're listed in takes into account the time they were in office or something...but they don't explain the list really, so I'm just going by the average ranks because those are derived from numbers

 

You're just looking at Gross Domestic Product though. You have to look at the whole thing.

I'm sorry, I guess I wasn't clear enough. I was referring to the document as a whole and not trying to rank them as much as just say the top and bottom three performers.

Here's a good article that explains the whole thing, albeit with a leftist slant.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0927-03.htm

 

...the average ranks are the same for all the categories, not just GNP...that's why they're average ranks...don't get me wrong, though, I believe democrats are better for our economy and the Forbes thing shows that, but it's not as cut and dry as it appears...