XPost: talk.politics.crypto, alt.politics.howard-dean, alt.flame.rednecks   
   From: ProgressivesLie@Invalid.org   
      
   On 3 Dec 2010 02:21:45 +0100, Alan Brown    
   wrote:   
      
   >Barry Bruyea wrote   
   >   
   >> On Thu, 2 Dec 2010 13:05:36 -0500, "M.I. Wakefield"   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>"Phil"  wrote in message   
   >>>news:efd1f94e-fb4e-4f1e-b05f-a44f4981ad20@f21g2000prn.googlegroups.com...   
   >>>   
   >>>Since gasoline is currently about 30 cents per litre more expensive in   
   >>>Canada than in the US, I'd say that a more reasonable explanation for   
   >>>high gas prices is the level of taxation required to keep octagenarian   
   >>>retired teachers with three indexed government backed pensions drunk   
   >>>enough to post this crap on a continual basis.   
   >>   
   >> Funny how both Bush and Obama have not touched a new federal gas tax   
   >> to help get the hell out of the financial mess they're in.  Shows that   
   >> American politicians are a hell of a lot more afraid of the taxpayer   
   >> than are Canadian politicians.   
   >   
   >If we all paid 20 cents a gallon like they do in Venezueala, things would be   
   >great.   The government, not the invisible hand of the market, is responsible   
   >for high gas prices.   
   >   
   >And the government, not the invisible hand of the market, is why corporations   
   >are sitting on $10 trillion in cash assets, demonstrating fiscal growth, but   
   >not hiring Americans.   
   >   
   >Did you see how good unemployment was in the USA under Bush between 2000 and   
   >2004 when he bloated the civil service payroll by 35% over the Clinton's last   
   >term?    Too bad the unemployment rate under Bush during those hallowed years   
   >was still higher than it was in the last 4 years of Clinton.   I still need   
   >to understand why the Republicans in the house managed to create such a great   
   >fiscal surplus under Clinton, and suddenly blew it into a massive deficit   
   >when Bush became President.   
      
   Probably because there never was a fiscal surplus.  It was always a   
   "predicted" surplus.  The national debt and the deficit increased   
   every year while Clinton was in office just as it has every president   
   for many decades prior.   
      
   >   
   >I blame the Dems.    They may not have had any power during the Bush years,   
   >but Bush was weak and stupid, agreeing to everything they wanted.   
      
   They had enough power to prevent any overhaul of Fannie Mae/Freddie   
   Mac.  And they had enough power to ram the first stimulous bill   
   through.  And for the last two years or so of the Bush administration   
   they indeed did have a majority in congress.  Which happens to be   
   around the same time that the country economically began its downturn.   
   >   
   >One thing for sure, you can't blame the Republicans for anything, it just   
   >isn't proper.   
      
   They certainly can be blamed for what bullshit they went along with   
   such as the first 800 billion dollars in bank bailouts.   
   The correct statement is "you can't blame the Republicans for   
   everything".  Those in congress in 07 and 08 most certainly share some   
   of the blame with their democratic counterparts.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)