Can McCain save America ?

Quote from ratboy88:

reagan was the beginning of hyper deficits. give me Ron Paul any day.

Check you facts. For ever $1 Reagan increased in def spending, the congress spent $1.04.
 
Well as evidenced by this thread quite well anyone can say anything at anytime....that doesn't mean it has any merit.

But as I've maintained Congress will NEVER sign off on a line item veto no matter which party controls it.

Quote from Yannis:

What I'm saying is that whenever this is discussed, the Constitution is never mentioned as a problem. They can do it if they agreed to it. But they don't, each side wants too much power to themselves.
 
Quote from ratboy88:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Gerald Ford's presidential term was as much marked by the economic forces of inflation as it was by the political fortunes of the time.

Ford, who was sworn in as president on Aug. 9, 1974, after the resignation of Richard Nixon, faced inflation that was already surging at a 10.9 percent annual rate in that month. It was thrust into overdrive by the OPEC oil embargo of 1974 and the elimination of wage/price controls instituted in the Nixon administration.

As energy constituted more of the nation's GDP in the early 1970s, soaring gas prices had an even more profound effect on the U.S. economy than recent gas price hikes have.

Rising energy prices also contributed to higher unemployment by slowing consumer demand for companies' products, according to Mark Ratkus, economics professor at LaSalle University in Philadelphia.

Ford's approach to controlling inflation, according to his White House biography, was through modest tax cuts and spending restraints. He also sought to "decontrol" energy prices in order to stimulate production......

http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/27/news/newsmakers/gerald_ford/

You just answered my question...Listen..it sucks to say this but i lived through it....you can google all you want but the economy imploded under JC...and gas REALLLY spiked when Iran took the hostages for a couple years...
 
Maybe you're right. Still, imo, it would be a good thing. Of course, I tend to favor a strong Presidency too. Oh well.
 
Quote from Arnie:

Check you facts. For ever $1 Reagan increased in def spending, the congress spent $1.04.

and the tax cuts? who did that? bottom line you can't increase spending and cut taxes.... unless you want to increase the deficit. thats what happened during the reagan era... it was just the beginning. the republicans have been extremely irresponsible fiscally. borrow borrow borrow... thats not conservative.. that is neoconservatism.

we are bankrupt.. this thing ends badly... hyperinflation.. more war. this is why Ron Paul put distance between himself and Reagan in the latter years.
 
Quote from Yannis:

Maybe you're right. Still, imo, it would be a good thing. Of course, I tend to favor a strong Presidency too. Oh well.

we'll cut you some slack because of your work in JOKES thread! LOL..:D :D how do you get all those jokes anyway???:confused:
 
Quote from TM_Direct:

You just answered my question...Listen..it sucks to say this but i lived through it....you can google all you want but the economy imploded under JC...and gas REALLLY spiked when Iran took the hostages for a couple years...


the important question is why there was an embargo in the first place. but don't pursue the answer... you won't like it.

and please dear God... don't hand me the globalist propaganda of the day.
 
I'm not right or wrong...we're just shootin' the shit here.

But the question is how does Congress at some point in the future if it wishes get back it's constitutional powers if it did actually forfeit its budgetary responsibilities through the line item to the Executive?

Quote from Yannis:

Maybe you're right. Still, imo, it would be a good thing. Of course, I tend to favor a strong Presidency too. Oh well.
 
Mark Twain had some good ones, like (if I remember it right)

"There was a crook, and a politician... but I repeat myself..."

:) :) :)
 
Back
Top