Cannonpointer » 01 May 2017 8:13 am » wrote:
That's an admission against interests, you stupid dick cheese. If Bush was taking less from the wealthy, he must have been taking more from workers. He was also - based on him DOUBLING THE NATIONAL DEBT - taking more from someone else: THE PRECIOUS, JESUS BELOVED UNBORN, you freak of nature.
If more people are working and earning more, revenues are higher.
And I never claimed the rich were paying less, so what are you babbling about?
The Clinton Recession, the 9/11 attack, the Iraq war and spending caused the higher debt,
not tax cuts.
And why didn't you answer this? Given that I didn't write
one single word about spending, how can I be incorrect, psycho?