Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 29 Dec 2016, 3:02 pm

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Fate asked:

Please, do explain how buildings = more Jews. Is that some kind of new reproduction method?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990s_Post-Soviet_aliyah

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/03/jewish-immigration-israel-jumps-this-year-ukrainians-russians-europe-paris-attacks

Where would you like all of your new found friends to live exactly Fate?


So, it creates ZERO new Jews? So, again, what's the problem?

Oh, yeah. You want the Jews to roll over and do whatever Obama says, their safety be damned.

As for Obama's legacy, he'll be remembered as one of our greatest presidents and here's why...

He's half black, and he saved our economy. In so doing, yes I'm going to say it Fate, hold your ears, Obama saved the world!


Start a new forum. Meanwhile, I'll say he'll be remembered as our first Black President. He'll also be remembered as a President who was a bungler of foreign policy and a strangler of the economy. Watch what Trump "does" to the economy. It's going to boom because he's going to remove Obama's regulatory claws from the American economy's throat.

Under the administration of brainless, the market crashed under its own unbridled greed. My President then inherited what was a worldwide catastrophe and got it turned around. How he did it wasn't pretty. But he did it. And that is his legacy. All the rest, including getting Bin Laden, is fluff.


That's a joke.

Oh but there's more Fate, stay with me, keep reading...


I now know what Harry Reid is doing in his retirement--lying on Redscape.

Like Lincoln, Obama's contribution to the country and world will not be appreciated until long after everyone here is dead.


He's more likely to be compared to Andrew Johnson.

Like Lincoln, the voices of detractors like Fate will eventually disappear. And all the econ eggheads will piecemeal together the multilayered moving parts of the crash and recovery to reveal that without Obama, world markets would have crashed.


Yes, I mean who could ever spend $8T more than he took in and produce a flat economy? Obama sucks in plain English. Even though we're due for an economic downturn, even Trump will do better than Obama. Get this: he is the ONLY President in history to not have ONE quarter of 3% growth. No other President has ever done that!

He's also such a poor leader that when he whined about his legacy being on the line, his candidate lost. Clinton ran on following him and she lost.

Try not to have a heart attack before you respond to this one Fate.


No heart attack. I can recognize drug-addled confusion for what it is.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 1543
Joined: 15 Oct 2002, 9:34 pm

Post 29 Dec 2016, 7:08 pm

So, it creates ZERO new Jews? So, again, what's the problem?


For the record, when a man and woman have unprotected sex they sometimes create new humans. Buildings are not capable of attaining a similar outcome yet. No, in fact, due to the ongoing influx of jews desiring to immigrant to Israel, Netanyahu and friends desire more space, thus, settlements in territory that does not belong to them.

Oh, yeah. You want the Jews to roll over and do whatever Obama says, their safety be damned.


I expect more from you. This is poor argumentation. Find where I said that. Don't go Ricky on me. Just stick to what is written. Don't imply and don't assume. I don't do that to you. Don't do it to me.

Watch what Trump "does" to the economy. It's going to boom because he's going to remove Obama's regulatory claws from the American economy's throat.


Care to make a wager on Trump's Brave New World?

Watch what Trump "does" to the economy. It's going to boom because he's going to remove Obama's regulatory claws from the American economy's throat.


I wasn't joking.

he is the ONLY President in history to not have ONE quarter of 3% growth


A fair shout for sure, but it won't be enough to damage his legacy 50 to 100 years out.

when he whined about his legacy being on the line, his candidate lost


Jesus, Moses and Muhammed could have stumped for the criminal and she would have lost. Her failure she earned.

I can recognize drug-addled confusion for what it is.


The only drug-addled confusion I see is your inability to ever admit anything positive about Obama.

By the way, you're not exactly right about this one either...

I'll say he'll be remembered as our first Black President


Wait a minute, aren't there Republican extremists out there who remind everyone that his mother is white? So I guess now you can even take his "blackness" away from his legacy as well. That ought to bring you some solace.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 29 Dec 2016, 8:07 pm

dag hammarsjkold wrote:For the record, when a man and woman have unprotected sex they sometimes create new humans. Buildings are not capable of attaining a similar outcome yet. No, in fact, due to the ongoing influx of jews desiring to immigrant to Israel, Netanyahu and friends desire more space, thus, settlements in territory that does not belong to them.


So, keep the Jews where they are and, well, too bad for them.

We are not going to agree here. Jews have been in Israel for thousands of years. The term "Palestinian" is a relatively new one, coined to make it seem like Arabs have just as valid a claim to the land. They don't.

I've been to Israel. I'm appalled . . . that they are so ridiculously kind to the Muslims who want to slaughter them. They permit the call to prayer to be broadcast so it can offend all non-Muslims at oh-dark-thirty hours.

The truth is if you have your way Israel will not be able to defend itself--meaning it will not have defensible borders. I'm not surprised the Israelis are not keen on this.

Oh, yeah. You want the Jews to roll over and do whatever Obama says, their safety be damned.


I expect more from you. This is poor argumentation. Find where I said that. Don't go Ricky on me. Just stick to what is written. Don't imply and don't assume. I don't do that to you. Don't do it to me.


It's inherent in what you say. The UN focuses on Israel like a laser and so do many non-conservatives. Aleppo? Hamas? Hezbollah? Ukraine? Iran? North Korea?

Peanuts.

The "real" scourge of the Earth is Israel. I'm sick of it and I don't really care what you or any other Israel-(disliking) person thinks.

Watch what Trump "does" to the economy. It's going to boom because he's going to remove Obama's regulatory claws from the American economy's throat.


Care to make a wager on Trump's Brave New World?


All he has to do is not use Obama's policies and things will improve. Obama couldn't run a hot dog stand, let alone make sound economic decisions. Even as his butt is getting hit by the door, he's trying to wreck the economy. Why not ban off-shore drilling? Shut down millions of acres of land in Utah? Whatever else he can think of to stick it to the working people of this country.

Obama is a bigger fool than Trump because he thinks he has some ability and has none. Trump thinks he has more than he has, but at least he doesn't presume to know about business without ever doing anything in that realm.

Watch what Trump "does" to the economy. It's going to boom because he's going to remove Obama's regulatory claws from the American economy's throat.


I wasn't joking.


I'm not either. He's a disaster--foreign policy, economic policy, and serial violator of the Constitution. Obama is the biggest tool to occupy the White House since Reconstruction.

he is the ONLY President in history to not have ONE quarter of 3% growth


A fair shout for sure, but it won't be enough to damage his legacy 50 to 100 years out.


Right. Sure.

Libya, Syria, Ukraine, China, Russia, Yemen, North Korea, and on it goes. Obama thought he could apologize his way to better relations. Oh, he did. We have better relations in the sense that no one fears or respects or listens to the United States. Well done, Barack Hussein Obama!

Michelle said she was proud of the country for the first time in her life when her husband won. Now that Trump beat "the most-qualified candidate in history" (according to Obama), Michelle Obama says our country has "no hope."

Arrogant is one word.

when he whined about his legacy being on the line, his candidate lost


Jesus, Moses and Muhammed could have stumped for the criminal and she would have lost. Her failure she earned.


Of the three, she only had a shot with Muhammed.

I can recognize drug-addled confusion for what it is.


The only drug-addled confusion I see is your inability to ever admit anything positive about Obama.


There is nothing. Zero. I've looked for 8 years.

Okay, he's not as terrible as I thought he would be. I thought he'd be a negative 50. Instead, he was about a negative 35.

That's as good as it gets.

Your best case: he "saved Detroit" and he "killed Bin Laden."

Neither is that simple. He hosed a lot of investors to "save Detroit." Plus, all he did was use taxpayer money to keep the companies afloat until the recovery started.

He reluctantly agreed to send the Seals in. They killed Bin Laden. He did nothing but say "yes."

Wait a minute, aren't there Republican extremists out there who remind everyone that his mother is white? So I guess now you can even take his "blackness" away from his legacy as well. That ought to bring you some solace.


I don't know. I don't swim in those cesspools.

Why not talk about Trump's cabinet instead of this nonsense? Start a "Obama is the Best ever" forum. Oh, because you know you can't get more than two sentences written about him without either lying or having to equivocate?

There are not 6 worse POTUS in history.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 7:45 am

fate
he is the ONLY President in history to not have ONE quarter of 3% growth


Herbert Hoover.... The economy shrank. Just as it did under Bush.....
Like FDR Obama had to dig the economy out of a crater, created by deregulated fianancial markets.
Mans inability to learn from previous mistakes ...meant a thrity year period ofderegulation and "freeing of the markets" till the markets naturally bust as they always did until they were well regulated.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 30 Dec 2016, 8:41 am

GW had three major calamities happen on his watch:

(1) 9-11
(2) Iraq invasion for non-existent WMDs
(3) Financial Crisis

As for a positive legacy, I can't think of any. If he is not the worst president ever tell me a president who put the country through worse.

That is his legacy. Obama? The economy has slowly gotten better. It ain't perfect but I think there are underlying factors like extreme wealth stratification that put a limit on economic growth. Most employable people have gotten jobs and that is good. Trump hopefully will not unleash the type of uncontrolled financial speculation that led to the Financial Crisis. But looking at his Cabinet that looks like that's what he will do. Corporate profits and Wall Street were just fine under Obama but no they even have to do even better. Easy money for them until it goes bust.

So anyway what happened on Obama's watch? Obamacare. At the very least a moral attempt to have all Americans covered under health coverage. The Iran agreement? Iran is not trying to develop nuclear weapons which is a very good thing because a nuclear Middle East could actually cause a nuclear war. If the agreement can keep Iran from going nuclear for 15 years then it will be a notable achievement. And who knows how things will look in 15 years. But Iran going nuclear would have been an unmitigated disaster. The fact that Iran can create more mischief because it has more money is the downside but pales in comparison to the nuclear issue.If Iran went nuclear then the Saudis would have gone nuclear. Time will tell but I think it is pretty easy to criticize the deal when it would have difficult to keep sanctions in place indefinitely while Iran got closer and closer to developing a bomb with Israel maybe hitting Iran's nuclear facilities causing a war. What else is there? Syria? Libya? Russia getting more aggressive? I am just not sure that Libya and Syria were solvable problems. ISIS seems to be somewhat contained for now. Russia is a concern but I don't see how our interests have been affected all that much. Benghazi? While tragic I don't think that has a significant impact on our interests. I'm not sure how Obama would be responsible for securing embassies, anyway.

I listed GW's three disasters which really caused misery and death for many, many people. Under Obama our economy has gotten better and you cannot point to any major disaster. Unfortunately, under Trump I doubt we will be able to say the same thing. Trump is the disaster.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 30 Dec 2016, 10:28 am

And I forgot GW blowing up the deficit. There was a reason JEB was a non-starter, even for Republicans.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 12:35 pm

rickyp wrote:fate
he is the ONLY President in history to not have ONE quarter of 3% growth


Herbert Hoover....


Great. He belongs right below Hoover on the list of "best Presidents." That would put him at what, maybe 39 or 40?

The economy shrank. Just as it did under Bush.....
Like FDR Obama had to dig the economy out of a crater, created by deregulated fianancial markets.


Oh, shut up. FDR squandered so much money and we only got out of the Depression because of massive war spending.

And, "deregulated?" Bull. It was barely regulated. Something would have to be "regulated" BEFORE it could be "deregulated." We were very much more of a libertarian society then.

Mans inability to learn from previous mistakes ...meant a thrity year period ofderegulation and "freeing of the markets" till the markets naturally bust as they always did until they were well regulated.


The irony of a paragraph about not learning from previous mistakes written by someone who has never figured out how to use spellchecking . . .
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 12:38 pm

freeman3 wrote:And I forgot GW blowing up the deficit. There was a reason JEB was a non-starter, even for Republicans.


Sorry, but for anyone who actually likes the US, GWB had more leadership, sense, and humility in his left pinkie than Obama has in his entire body.

Presidents get too much credit for economic success and too much blame when it fails. Obama has taken steps to hurt the economy, which will soon be obvious. In fact, it's hinted at by the way the stock market has performed since the election.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 30 Dec 2016, 12:59 pm

GW might have good reason to be humble...I do like his drawings though--the guy is talented...

Maybe Obama is arrogant and thinks he is the smartest guy in the room. So why do we care as long as nothing bad happens? 8 years is a long time. Economy has gotten better, no new wars, nothing is currently significantly threatening our national security. At some point, don't people who can't stand Obama need to point to objective facts where the US has taken a big hit during the 8 years. The fact of the matter is that 9-11, the Iraq War and the Financial Crisis were not inevitable. Neither was raising the deficit. Nothing similar happened during Obama's reign. It's impossible to prove that Obama prevented bad things from happening...because they didn't happen. I guess GW was just unlucky...

I'll take Pax Obama (with the arrogance) over Bush Humble Pie any day of the week. Not that he is humble, anyway. Any guy who gives pet names to everyone ain't a humble guy. And the smirk of course.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 1:37 pm

And I forgot GW blowing up the deficit. There was a reason JEB was a non-starter, even for Republicans.

fair enough, the deficit did blow up with GWB but to make this a point when comparing to Obama?
The Deficit was the absolute worst under Obama, how oh how can you complain about the deficit uider GWB and not have a problem with the savior's budget?

and "growth" is a positive for Obama? We finally saw some very modest growth after pumping in billions of dollars into the economy. With what was spent, it was a horrendous "recovery".

Last
The Iraq war was a JOINT decision that Democrats approved of as well. To blame Bush or Republicans is a joke at best!

The financial melt down had a LOT to do with Democrat priorities as well as things set in motion well before Bush took office

9/11 was not a partisan attack, to claim Obama did a wonderful job preventing further attacks is a bit of a laugh as well. After the attack there were no more under GWB's watch either, that was due to increased focus on such security and the programs that were put into effect under GWB (but again, were very much joint decisions). using your own "logic" there were no further attacks BECAUSE of GWB and Obama can thank him.

Time to get back to reality Freeman!
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 1:53 pm

Fate
And, "deregulated?" Bull. It was barely regulated. Something would have to be "regulated" BEFORE it could be "deregulated." We were very much more of a libertarian society then.

Barely regulated before or after FDR.

Here's what FDR did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1933_Banking_Act

Here's what caused the financial collapse in 2008. It starts with repealing much of FDR's work.

In the case of the US, we can point to a number of important acts of financial deregulation that were the direct causes of the crisis:
(1) Repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (1999)
In the US, the Glass-Steagall Act, initially created in the wake of the Stock Market Crash of 1929, prohibited banks from both accepting deposits and underwriting securities. This led to segregation of investment banks from commercial banks. Glass-Steagall was effectively repealed for many large financial institutions by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999.
Joseph Stigliz has argued that

“The most important consequence of the repeal of Glass-Steagall was indirect—it lay in the way repeal changed an entire culture. Commercial banks are not supposed to be high-risk ventures; they are supposed to manage other people’s money very conservatively. It is with this understanding that the government agrees to pick up the tab should they fail. Investment banks, on the other hand, have traditionally managed rich people’s money—people who can take bigger risks in order to get bigger returns” (Stiglitz 2009).

Deposit insurance does make sense when it protects a commercial banking sector prevented from making highly speculative and risky investments.

(2) Hiding Liabilities on Off-Balance Sheet Accounting
Banks used off-balance sheet operations called special purpose entities (SPEs) or special purpose vehicles (SPVs) to take on toxic asset-backed securities. This allowed banks to escape even the weak regulation of Basel I and II. It is estimated that the top 4 U.S. depository banks put around $5.2 trillion into SIVs.

(3) Commodities Futures Modernization Act (CFMA), 2000
This exempted financial derivatives, including credit default swaps, from regulation.

(4) The SEC’s Voluntary Regulation Regime for Investment Banks, 2004-2008
The SEC's Consolidated Supervised Entity (CSE) regime was introduced in 2004. It allowed investment banks to engage in their own net capital requirements in accordance with the standards of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. It was voluntarily administered, and the result was that investment banks pushed borrowing ratios to as high as 40 to 1, as in the case of Merrill Lynch.
One major confirmation of the effectiveness of financial regulation is the state of Canada’s banking system. In 2008, the World Economic Forum ranked Canada's banking system as the soundest in the world. The US system was ranked at number 40, and Germany and Britain ranked 39 and 44. Canada’s banks required no direct government bailouts.

Some commentators blame Basel I and II as a major cause of the financial collapse.
But if Basel I and II led inevitably to asset bubbles and financial collapse, then why has this not occurred in Canada?

The answer is fairly simple: Canada, unlike many other Western countries, still has tight and effective banking regulation.
http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogs ... in-of.html
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 2:04 pm

fate
The irony of a paragraph about not learning from previous mistakes written by someone who has never figured out how to use spellchecking
. .
I'm so busy fact checking your BS claims.

Tom
The Deficit was the absolute worst under Obama, how oh how can you complain about the deficit uider GWB and not have a problem with the savior's budget?


Worst in what way? (And careful, Fate will be after your spelling.)

Obama increased the debt by 68 percent.
Bush II increased the debt by 101 percent.
Neither are actually close to the debt increase leader by percentage.
Franklin D. Roosevelt - President Roosevelt increased the debt the most percentage-wise. Although he only added $236 billion, this was a 1,048 percent increase over the $23 billion debt level left by President Hoover's last budget. Of course, the Great Depression took an enormous bite out of revenues. The New Deal cost billions. But FDR's debt major contribution to the debt was World War II spending. He added $209 billion to the debt between 1942-1945. For more, see FDR Economic Policies.

Woodrow Wilson - President Wilson was the second largest contributor to the debt percentage-wise. Although he only added $21 billion, this was a 727 percent increase over the $2.9 billion debt level of his predecessor. Wilson had to pay for World War I. In fact, the Second Liberty Bond Act was enacted during his Presidency, giving Congress the right to adopt the national debt ceiling
.
Of course the difference was that Wilson and FDR increased the debt in order to fight wars and in FDR's case the Depression. . Bushes greatest increase came because he decided to have huge tax breaks for the wealthy. Then, kept them, despite starting two unfunded wars.
Obama's debt was largely caused by the Financial crisis and the necessity of the bail out.
Your incoming president also agrees with the necessity for "priming the pump" of the economy with his planned infrasture spending so he may set a new record as he also plans massive tax cuts for the wealthy.
https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-p ... nt-3306296
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 2:18 pm

freeman3 wrote:Maybe Obama is arrogant and thinks he is the smartest guy in the room.


"Maybe"???

:laugh:

So why do we care as long as nothing bad happens? 8 years is a long time.


Nothing bad? Nothing? Really? Do you want a list? Really?

I'll start with your list.

1. "Economy has gotten better."

So what? This is like saying a cardboard box is better than a smoldering crater. He took the worst economy and managed it into the lowest-growth of any recovery in American history.

He could have done so much better just by being more optimistic and less of the Lecturer-in-Chief. We don't live in a fascist nation, so there's only so much POTUS can do. And, what he did do was restrain growth and limit the middle class. If that's a win for you, well, I don't know what to say.

2. "No new wars."

Can you set the bar lower (again)?

We're still in Afghanistan--for no reason Obama ever articulated. We're still in Iraq, even though he bragged about getting us out. Libya is a failed state. He rolled the bones with Egypt, lost, and then got lucky. Yemen is a disaster. Syria is worse. There is no crisis point in the world where things have improved.

3. "Nothing is currently significantly threatening our national security."

When lawyers feel the need to use so many qualifiers, there's a reason. Obama likes to brag about no significant, foreign-ordered terror attacks in the US. That's as qualified, and weak, as your own statement.

The truth is he has weakened our stature around the world and the status of our armed forces. These are matters the President directly has control of. He has reduced our readiness and has done nothing with the military but play social experiments upon it.

Every time there is a terror attack, Obama shrugs. He won't call it an Islamist terror attack because these terror incidents are, apparently, not related to each other. It's weird how they all shout the same thing, proclaim the same thing online, and pledge allegiance to the same people, and yet are completely "random."

It's not me who needs to be objective. It's his fans who need cold water in their faces. I can objectively look at what he's done. You have to qualify it

The fact of the matter is that 9-11, the Iraq War and the Financial Crisis were not inevitable.


The only one of those three what can be laid directly to Bush is Iraq. And, there were reasons for it which I don't care to re-litigate for the 300th time.

The financial meltdown was not Bush's doing. Could someone have seen it and stopped it? Yes, but the political price would have been incalculable. There is no way to have handled the housing mess that would have not costs hundreds of billions AND forced changes in the ways loans were made. Democrats and Republicans would have been up in arms.

Again, it's easy to praise Presidents and to blame them. However, they are not gods--no matter how much Obama and Trump may fancy that they are (note: their egos are amazingly similar).

Neither was raising the deficit. Nothing similar happened during Obama's reign.


Oh, good night! How big is the deficit this year? Answer: bigger than any year under Bush until the Crash. Obama did zero to cut spending.

It's impossible to prove that Obama prevented bad things from happening...because they didn't happen. I guess GW was just unlucky...


Oh come on. Obama had PLENTY of bad things. He just didn't have ONE event of the scale of 9/11. But, he's such a dishonest sack that he even tried to blame Ft Hood on "workplace violence." Do you want a list of terror attacks in the US during Obama's watch? Don't believe the propaganda his White House puts out.

I'll take Pax Obama (with the arrogance) over Bush Humble Pie any day of the week. Not that he is humble, anyway. Any guy who gives pet names to everyone ain't a humble guy. And the smirk of course.


Right. When Bush left office, he didn't complain about Obama--even as Obama scapegoated Bush for everything except his smoking.

Obama has no class. That will be evident as he leaves office and starts a government-in-exile in DC.

It's not "Pax Obama" anyway. That would mean he was ensuring peace. He has ensured war, instability, and chaos. China is advancing. Russia is advancing. ISIS has branches all over the place. And, there was never, in all of modern history, an official terror nation until your so-called "Pax Obama." The group he called "the jayvee team" ran wild until Russia and Iran entered the fray.

His legacy is one of letting the rogue nations of the world run wild.

Good riddance.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 2:19 pm

https://www.thebalance.com/deficit-by-p ... de-3306151
President Obama has the largest deficits. By the end of his final budget (FY 2017), his deficits will total $6.616 trillion.


You want to complain about percentage increase and that could be fair but how can you claim Obama increasing 68% ON TOP of Bush's 101% is in any way acceptable? Bush was bad (fair enough) but instead of taking something so incredibly bad, you grow it an additional 68% ...no, Obama is worse and the numbers show exactly that.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 30 Dec 2016, 2:46 pm

tom
You want to complain about percentage increase and that could be fair but how can you claim Obama increasing 68% ON TOP of Bush's 101% is in any way acceptable?

The reasons for the deficit make it acceptable.
Investment spending to prime the economy, and relief of the financial institutions that was necessary to forestall another Great Depression. And it worked.

Bush, had he continued with tax rates that he inherited would have wiped out the deifict and begun eliminating accumulated debt. But he chose to give wealthy people a huge tax break. Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) exacerabated income inequality and increased the debt enormously. If he were a true conservative he would have continued the tax rates and started to chip away at accumulated debt. Especially since the tax breaks didn't help the economy.

Here's a chart which explains why his debt was so irresponsible...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... 18225ac96d