You can blame Bush all you want because no one is listening anymore and that is a non-argument. It's weak.
If you want to bust my argument, find something to blame about Ron Paul, the idea of a true Fed free Free market system versus progressive statist control, or libertarianism.

In general I don't care as I did not support either Bush. I support Ron Paul and Cato moderate libertarians.
So why don't you criticize Ron Paul instead. I dare you to use the truth AND drudge on him.

Carter - Need I say more right now? He also passed on economic malaise and a deficit to Reagan.
Reagan - Here is the truth about the Reagan deficits and deficits in general... deficits may increase as the GDP increases and the GDP in the 80s soared.
Reagan also by means of an arms and Space race, won the Cold War and Bankrupted the USSR. It was the tactics the Romans used to eventually defeat Hanibal; starve his limited forces out.
Bush I - no comments or defense really.
Clinton - Was reduced to a charisma in 1994 when Republicans took over the House and Senate. Republicans under Newt Gingrich put reigns on spending and created the oft glorified "Clinton" surplus.

Bush II was out of control increasing government. I am not defending that administration.

Let's argue logic and economics in principle. Let's imagine a Ron Paul VS Obama debate or a Ron Paul or Badnarik or Aaron Russo VS Pelosi/Clinton break.

My favorite? I would to see Ron Paul whip lying, conjectural Alan "Die Quickly" Grayson in a debate or maybe Ron Paul VS Obama with no teleprompters.

• Location: Novanglus
• it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests