The entire country was doing great under the so-called "Clinton recession." It wasn't doing so great however around Winter/Spring/Summer/Fall of 2002, which I would guess is known as the Bush recession.

That recession began pre-Bush, certainly pre-Bush Nov 2001 budget.

LMFAO

Ok Mul....you keep telling yourself there was this horrible Clinton "recession" and everything in 2002/2003 was all Clinton's fault.

OMG you crack me up. You're hopeless. It's rather sad actually.

At least the budget was fairly balanced that first year under Bush. What happened to that? Oh yeah, massive deficit spending the subsequent years.

Can someone up in Washington state check on my friend Jason B., (Mullholland), for me? I think he may be smoking crack.

According the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the unofficial arbiter of business cycles, the recession began in March 2001 and ended in November 2001. NBER analyzes four data series from the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Federal Reserve Board, and other government sources. While previously NBER indicated the recession started in March 2001 (it has not formally revised that date), official revisions of the data indicate that the recession started earlier than that.

CrackPipe

Just because the media ignored it did not mean it wasnt true.

FYI...Bush's budget began in November of 2001.http://www.nationalreview.com/images...kin_5-5-04.gif

So what are Democrats/liberals/bush opponents to do? From their perspective, no-one (especially themselves) could make a bigger mess than already is there. Imagine the Democrats frustration that there is no accountability?

So the criticism keeps coming to try and get that accountability...


Reasons include:

- cost
- US deaths
- no false WMD link
- cost
- cost
- cost

I could probably add "cost" to that list too. $200m a day is pretty hard to stomach.

total media (overwhelmingly/monopolistically left)

No.

Folks here in Whatcom County tend to be tweakers and not crack-heads. Still leads to delusional mindstate so it may be worth a drive-by.

Dying to know what a tweaker is ... maybe I need to try it!

"tweaker" = a person whom uses methamphetamine (aka: crystal meth, crank, amp)

oh, think I'll pass

What W defenders won't mention, of course, is that 2/3 of the economy is based on consumer spending, and a very large proportion of the popuation saw Bush as a guy they'd barely trust with a barbecue grille, let alone the US economy.

In the Summer of '01, while dodging a lot of important work, W decided to 'give back' the surplus, $300 at a time (if you made over $44K). He was hoping the economy would perk up. Instead, it slid further as people realized it wasn't exactly a rebate, but more like a taxable advance on that years IRS refund.

If you look at what happened from W's inauguration through September 10 of '01, things were pretty ugly.