The debt charts Nancy Pelosi doesn’t want you to see
For some reason, some people decided to resuscitate a chart created by Nancy Pelosi’s office about presidential responsibility for increases in the national debt. I say “for some reason,” because fact-checkers at PolitiFact had already given Pelosi a “pants on fire” rating for the chart because it massaged the underlying data and assigned it incorrectly.
It didn’t take long for the chart to be slapped down again when it resurfaced last week. But its brief revival did make me wonder how such a chart would look if it were drawn to assign responsibility for the debt to speakers of the House. There’s good reason to look at it from a congressional perspective, since Congress must pass budget legislation before the president can sign it. And it’s simpler to look at it from the House perspective, because the balance between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate changed mid-session a few times during the early 2000s.
Using the same data sources and parameters PolitiFact used to debunk Pelosi’s presidential-debt chart and declare President Obama “the undisputed debt king of the last five presidents,” here’s what I found:
Source: Office of Management and Budget, "Table 7.1—Federal Debt at the End of Year: 1940–2016"
No wonder Pelosi is so eager to look at things from a presidential perspective. (Two technical notes: Aside from PolitiFact’s parameters, I did the following: I gave responsibility for the 1990 budget to Tom Foley, rather than his predecessor, Jim Wright, who resigned in June 1989, for simplicity’s sake. And I left out John Boehner, because we don’t have full-year GDP data for 2011.)
It doesn’t get any better for her if we look at increases on an annual basis — which arguably is the fairer way to look at them, given that Pelosi presided over the House for less time than Foley, Tip O’Neill or Dennis Hastert. Here’s the chart on an annual basis:
Source: Office of Management and Budget, "Table 7.1—Federal Debt at the End of Year: 1940–2016"
Again, not good at all for Pelosi.
But what about the effects of the Great Recession? Well, I ran the numbers a third time, dividing Pelosi’s tenure into “Pelosi I” from January 2007 to January 2009, and “Pelosi II” from January 2009 to January 2011. Here are the results, again on an annualized basis:
Source: Office of Management and Budget, "Table 7.1—Federal Debt at the End of Year: 1940–2016"
Her first two years were still the worst we had seen in three decades.
It’s true that debt as a percentage of GDP grew during the 108th Congress — the third of four when Hastert was speaker — but it didn’t grow as fast then as during Pelosi’s first two years. And the ratio fell during the other three periods under Hastert.
Why do Democrats, who kept her as their House leader even after the debacle in the midterm elections last year, still think she’s the best person for the job?
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
87 comments Add your comment
Jefferson
October 3rd, 2011
12:35 pm
Blame games solve no problems, but the GOP keep causing them.
pressgang
October 3rd, 2011
12:44 pm
How about you overlay the sources of debt such as 2 wars, unfunded drug prescriptions etc and which president was in office at the time.
Jimmy62
October 3rd, 2011
12:47 pm
If only her bar was twice or three times higher than it is. According to Paul Krugman all our problems would be solved.
Jimmy62
October 3rd, 2011
12:48 pm
Pressgang: The interesting thing about the prescription drug thing is that 1. Most conservatives including myself opposed it at the time, and 2. It’s one of the very few large government programs that hasn’t busted it’s budget but actually stayed in line with estimates.
hsn
October 3rd, 2011
12:49 pm
I thought deficit and debt don’t matter especially in times of war!
Or, do they only matter when the White House occupant is a Democrat?
ragnar danneskjold
October 3rd, 2011
12:52 pm
Bravo.
Don't Tread
October 3rd, 2011
12:52 pm
“…PolitiFact had already given Pelosi a “pants on fire” rating for the chart because it massaged the underlying data and assigned it incorrectly”
When politicians resort to outright lying and manipulating the numbers to support those lies, what do you expect?
“Why do Democrats, who kept her as their House leader even after the debacle in the midterm elections last year, still think she’s the best person for the job?”
Because it’s real easy to fool 53% of the population some of the time, and 40% of it all the time.
A Conservative Voice
October 3rd, 2011
12:58 pm
Why do Democrats, who kept her as their House leader even after the debacle in the midterm elections last year, still think she’s the best person for the job?
Probably because they’re all “Idiots”, “Fools” and worst of all “Liberal Fools and Idiots”
buck@gon
October 3rd, 2011
1:04 pm
You mean Gingrich and Hastert both had a net reduction on the debt?
Wow!
Good stuff, Kyle. I hope that this is true. It’s another round in the chamber to fire at the liberal/progressive/communists.
JF McNamara
October 3rd, 2011
1:09 pm
I don’t doubt she’s a big spender, but this certainly doesn’t prove it.
1. Didn’t GDP fall because of the recession making her first bar higher?
2. Why didn’t you net out the crisis decision spending and do an Apples to Apples?
3. The fact that spending decreased as a percent of GDP under the two prior Repubs is two fold effect.
A. GDP was expanding rapidly making them look better
B. If they were not spending enough to purchase what we needed, simply raising to that level of spending would make Pelosi worse.
voiceofreason
October 3rd, 2011
1:13 pm
Of course, this chart is meaningless, since the cost of both wars was off the books for 5 years. Squaring up the accounting for the American people does not make it ‘your debt’.
The ‘Party of personal responsibility’ ought to show some.
JF McNamara
October 3rd, 2011
1:16 pm
buck@gon,
No, the chart is a very poor and confusing chart. It is not in real dollars. It is as a percent of GDP. If the economy is good, it makes the speaker at the time look good.
ragnar danneskjold
October 3rd, 2011
1:30 pm
Dear JF, if the speaker is good, it makes the economy look good.
justascientist
October 3rd, 2011
1:30 pm
Why is this in my in-box for Google News? It is not news it is just an opinion with some dubious statistics. As I understand it, the wars were not on the books for a while so comparing years and speakers is not the whole story. I don’t like it when politicians keep two sets of books. And Google News should do better. Perhaps they received some threats or something? Why is this here?
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
1:33 pm
pressgang: Remind everyone when the wars started and when Medicare Part D was passed. What did the debt-to-GDP ratio look like in the first few years afterward? Not defending those from a budgeting perspective, but their effect on the debt isn’t as great as your comment implies.
Cameron Roberts
October 3rd, 2011
1:33 pm
Um there is a denominator when you say as a % of GDP aka this chart has very little to do with the role of the speaker of house and a lot to do with the macroeconomy.
Cameron Roberts
October 3rd, 2011
1:35 pm
Are you saying Pelosi is at fault for the sputtering GDP figures? Because if you are not saying that, and you don’t back that claim up at all, then you’re not saying anything worth listening to.
Steve
October 3rd, 2011
1:35 pm
Meaningless data.
Jim Crowe
October 3rd, 2011
1:36 pm
Most of the debt in this country was created under two presidents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
Reagan and George W Bush.
Case Closed.
williebkind
October 3rd, 2011
1:37 pm
How can anyone defend Pelosi? How? You are so deep in your ideology that you try to use reason to defend your decision. Your ideology has no reason–just feelings.
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
1:38 pm
buck@gon: They had that effect on the debt *as compared to GDP*.
JF: The charts are not confusing; they’re labeled perfectly clearly. Now, is the debt-to-GDP ratio a perfect measurement? Nothing is perfect — one can always come up with a reason for picking a different metric — but it is a pretty useful measurement in terms of determining whether the debt is sustainable. The answer to why I chose it is that I simply went with what PolitiFact chose as the parameters. I thought that was the most neutral choice (as opposed to trying to arrange the numbers to produce a certain outcome, as PolitiFact demonstrated Pelosi’s office had done).
Jim Crowe
October 3rd, 2011
1:40 pm
Start two wars with absolutely no idea how to end them and giving huge tax cuts to the rich = Disaster
( When you send young men and women into harms way you better know how to get them out instead of just saying that you will be greeted with roses and chocolates )
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
1:43 pm
As for the questions in your 1:09, JF:
1. GDP didn’t fall on an annual basis until 2009.
2. See above answer about why I chose the parameters.
3. Certainly, GDP growth helps keep deficits in check, and therefore debt as well. That’s why I broke out Pelosi’s record into 2007-09 and 2009-11. I would not agree with the notion that we were “not spending enough to purchase what we needed.” You might disagree with what was purchased and what wasn’t, but spending in aggregate was plenty high during the 2000s.
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
1:44 pm
voiceofreason: Your comment (”off the books”) might apply to deficits. This is public debt, which accumulates and is measured regardless to budgeting tricks.
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
1:45 pm
justascientist: “Threats”? Are you serious??
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
1:47 pm
Cameron: The numerator counts, too, you know. All I did in this little exercise was take the same kind of look at speakers that Pelosi took at presidents, modified only to use the parameters PolitiFact used in giving Pelosi’s efforts a “pants on fire” ratings.
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
1:47 pm
Steve: It’s always “meaningless” when you don’t like the outcome.
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
1:48 pm
Jim: Yes, by all means, let’s just rely on Wikipedia for everything.
UGA 1999
October 3rd, 2011
1:53 pm
Shouldnt Pelosi be checking into an assisted living facility soon?
Rafe Hollister
October 3rd, 2011
1:54 pm
Kyle, great work, but I’m sure you know you will never settle the argument with the Liberals/guys like JF, who will always pull out some contradictory stat or question how yours were derived. They love to assign 2009 to Bush even though Obama signed the bill.
Jefferson, so why is blame bad when Kyle or a conservative does it, but Oblama has made it the cornerstone of his regime? I mean he even blamed the hurricane and earthquake for his economic failures. The bloggers on here still blame Bush for this recession even though Oblama said the recession was over some time ago and we were in recovery. Oops, another one is here and it is Bush’s fault as well, right.
UGA 1999
October 3rd, 2011
1:56 pm
Rafe….it is part of the culture that has been massaged on the left….they accept no responsiblity for anything. THis is why they are in the mess they are in today.
Jim Crowe
October 3rd, 2011
1:57 pm
Steve: It’s always “meaningless” when you don’t like the outcome.
Jim: Yes, by all means, let’s just rely on Wikipedia for everything.
Now who doesn’t like the outcome ???
Braves
October 3rd, 2011
1:59 pm
Enter your comments here
Lil' Barry the blowhard (but not as much a blowhard as lil' Barry bailout (revised downward, then upward, then in a circle)
October 3rd, 2011
2:02 pm
There are lies. Then damned lies. Then statistics. Then wingfield, he the great lying, obfuscating, ignorant, with a side of stupid, economic wunderkind.
Jim Crowe
October 3rd, 2011
2:04 pm
This was the National debt when W took office
Jan. 20, 2001: $5,727,776,738,304.64
This is what is was when he left
Jan. 20, 2009: $10,626,877,048,913.08
Funny how it wasn’t a problem back then. It only matters when a Democrat is in office and Republicans know they can pander to the base about it.
UGA 1999
October 3rd, 2011
2:04 pm
Lil barry……can you breathe now?
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
2:10 pm
Jim: PolitiFact used those very same numbers. And then offered a four-paragraph explanation of why they’re insufficient information to consider. Now, you are of course free to disagree with PolitiFact’s reasoning. But it’s not much of an argument to simply restate the raw numbers that, as PolitiFact explained, need further context.
UGA 1999
October 3rd, 2011
2:15 pm
Kyle….it is like I continue to say on every blog. The left refuses to discuss facts. They only refer to their propaganda machines that spew lies.
Darwin
October 3rd, 2011
2:18 pm
Because you don’t care about deficits when Republicans are running the country. And as a matter of fact, Regan’s deficit busting budget was actually reduced by a Democratic congress when he was president in the 80s.
UGA 1999
October 3rd, 2011
2:20 pm
Darwin….dare to compare spending while Obama has been in office?
The General Feeling
October 3rd, 2011
2:45 pm
Good work Kyle. Heads are exploding all over mid-town.
Lil' Barry the blowhard (but not as much a blowhard as lil' Barry bailout (revised downward, then upward, then in a circle)
October 3rd, 2011
3:22 pm
@uga 1999 and other konservative klowns – fighting fantasy with fantasy is all. Doesn’t do a lick of good in the real world, much like wingfields pointless pontificating that’s purely obfuscational
Plains peanut farmer
October 3rd, 2011
3:29 pm
I will apply all my diplomatic skill to bring the two camps into agreement, right after I finish negotiations to free our hostages in Iran. Rosalyn, can you bring me some cream for my hem…
HDB
October 3rd, 2011
4:00 pm
If we all realize that the wartime spending was kept OFF THE BUDGET, it would be evident that “spending and debt” would look lower under Dennis Hastert’s reign as Speaker. If the costs of Medicare/D and the wars were to be factored in, the chart would be quite different! Also note: the debt increased due to the REPUBLICAN Secretary of the TREASURY, Hank Paulson, needed $750B from the Government to SAVE the US Economy from imploding!!
MarkV
October 3rd, 2011
4:01 pm
Kyle’s charts are a simplistic, silly political argument. They do not show anything we did not know, they prove nothing. What else is new?
b6542
October 3rd, 2011
4:06 pm
I was amazed to find this article in the AJC. How about a comment from C. Tucker !
carlosgvv
October 3rd, 2011
4:08 pm
So, Kyle, I guess we should just not increase the debt and let the US go into full financial default. Even though this would cause a financial worldwide disaster, it would be the proper conservative thing to do. Right?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: Thee Magnificent!!! mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
October 3rd, 2011
4:11 pm
When faced with reality, liberals sputter and whine, uh, like MarkV for instance.
Kyle Wingfield
October 3rd, 2011
4:19 pm
HDB: Debt is debt. There’s no “off the books” with debt.
MarkV
October 3rd, 2011
4:21 pm
When they have nothing rational to say, some people just show they have nothing to rational to say, like I Report (-: You Whine )-: Thee Magnificent!!! mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin…for instance.
Gary
October 3rd, 2011
4:22 pm
NEWT 2012, Contract with America 2012…. People want the 90s success again, vote for it.
Darwin
October 3rd, 2011
4:24 pm
@UGA 1999: The first $750 billion came from George Bush. Next time, don’t drive the car off the cliff. OK?
Jim Doogan
October 3rd, 2011
4:35 pm
Nancy Pelosi’s a cancer. What we need is someone who is an innovator when it comes to debt reduction…..akin to the innovation Levi Strauss brought forth for jeans.
RGB
October 3rd, 2011
4:43 pm
Kyle,
Please send Bookhead a copy of your work.
And you may want to help him understand the bar charts as he tends to become anti-analytical on a selective basis.
Bart Abel
October 3rd, 2011
5:01 pm
It’s true, the debt grew while Pelosi was speaker, but for reasons that had little to do with Pelosi…the Bush tax cuts, two wars, the Medicare prescription debacle, and the economic collapse cause by lack of oversight by the Bush Administration, the Fed, and the SEC. The day Obama stepped into office, the CBO and economists were predicting trillion dollar deficits for years into the future.
With due respect, this is a cheap attempt to blame Pelosi for debt that she did little to create and was in a position to help mitigate only after a Democratic president took office, which by the way, she did.
Banned Poster
October 3rd, 2011
5:05 pm
I love it. Liberals who don’t like facts being pointed out to them continue to shout the same thing: “But the wars were not budgeted for 5 years”, except they don’t understand that the national debt overlooks the budget gimmicks played by both parties and includes the costs of the two wars.
Then when it is shown that their messiah and the worst Speaker in history turn out to spend more than the boogeyman of the previous 8 years, they resort to this:
“Jim Crowe
October 3rd, 2011
1:36 pm
Most of the debt in this country was created under two presidents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
Reagan and George W Bush.
Case Closed.”
Wikipedia…..where arguments go to die. Hey Jim, give me about 30 minutes and I can go make that wiki page say exactly what I want it to. But hey, you keep telling yourself that it is the most reliable thing on the internets these days.
Joe Rossetti
October 3rd, 2011
5:12 pm
Congress had no choice but to raise the debt to pay for unfunded wars or there would have been a government default. Anyone can make stats show whatever they wan’t, don’t be an idiot.
Proud to say I am an educated independent and this crap from left and right lying to people is crazy.
Banned Poster
October 3rd, 2011
5:14 pm
Bart – those nasty Bush tax cuts were enacted when Hastert was still Speaker and the debt to percentage of GDP, while it did grow, did not grow to astronomical level that it did when Pelosi was Speaker. You can blame Bush all you want, but Pelosi was Speaker of the House when TARP was passed and when the Obama stimulus was passed. The two wars and the Medicare drug benefit was still being counted on the debt, even if they were not being budgeted properly, and still the %s of debt to GDP were nowhere near as bad as they were under Pelosi.
Jefferson
October 3rd, 2011
5:29 pm
Shill.
@@
October 3rd, 2011
6:06 pm
WHOAH! Nancy’s is HUGE!!!!
“I wish I had a magic wand and could make this all happen on my own. There are times where—until Nancy Pelosi is speaker again—I’d like to work my way around Congress,” he (Barack Obama) said to applause.
So what…Obama’s suffering from debt envy?
schnirt
@@
October 3rd, 2011
6:08 pm
HEY! Should I sign on as “Banned Poster II” or too?
Lil' Barry the blowhard (but not as much a blowhard as lil' Barry bailout (revised downward, then upward, then in a circle)
October 3rd, 2011
6:11 pm
@ @@ – how about “lil’ barrys uga got blown up banned posters wingfield in 1999″?
@@
October 3rd, 2011
6:21 pm
Howz’bout “Bothered by Barry”. It’s w-a-a-a-ay shorter.
@@
October 3rd, 2011
6:24 pm
Obama says he’s ‘still working’ on view of gay marriage
Peeping Tom.
@@
October 3rd, 2011
6:28 pm
Calling himself an “underdog,” President Obama today said the faltering economy is a drag on his presidency and seriously impairing his chances of winning again in 2012.
Why does it always have to be about him and his re-election?
From Wonder Dawg to Underdog.
BooHoo!
@@
October 3rd, 2011
6:32 pm
President Obama told ABC News Monday that he does not regret touting the solar company Solyndra as a model of his jobs program, or loaning $535 million in taxpayer money to the company before it declared bankruptcy.
“Hindsight is always 20/20,” Obama told “Good Morning America” anchor George Stephanopoulos in an interview broadcast online Monday. “It went through the regular review process and people felt that it was a good bet.”
Only when gas is at $7.00 a gallon.
Hindsight alone is not wisdom. And second guessing is not a strategy.
Lil' Barry the blowhard (but not as much a blowhard as lil' Barry bailout (revised downward, then upward, then in a circle)
October 3rd, 2011
6:43 pm
@ @@ – howzabout “bothered by Kyle”? If so, you gotta deal.
Jack
October 3rd, 2011
6:45 pm
I think you hit a liberal nerve, Mr. Wingfield.
@@
October 3rd, 2011
6:47 pm
Howz’bout you just stick with your original name…whatever it was. Show a little fortitude, why don’tcha?
Sheesh!
MarkV
October 3rd, 2011
6:48 pm
The 2008 Bush recession of 2008 has been called the worst since the Great Depression. The largest increase in the debt/GDP ratio on an annual basis in the former was 21% increase from 2008 to 2009. It was 51% from 1931 to 1932. So what is new? Even in 1982, 1983 and 1986 there was around 10% increase from each of the previous years.
Dusty
October 3rd, 2011
6:57 pm
Hi @@,
Glad to see you going good!! Keep it up!
As to Pelosi, the less we see of her the better. Looks like she’s pretty “expensive” too. Kyle’s chart shows that. I guess she is accustomed to spending money as she is a very wealthy woman.
@@
October 3rd, 2011
7:05 pm
Dusty:
Keep it up!
Not sure I can…I’m exhausted. More cardio and weight training should fix me right up. I forgot how physically demanding my job was. My body wasn’t prepared.
@@
October 3rd, 2011
7:07 pm
Ron Paul wants Obama impeached!!??!! He’s a quirky little fella.
Republicans have cut off aid to Palestine. It’ll be interesting to see how that turns out.
Lil' Barry the blowhard (but not as much a blowhard as lil' Barry bailout (revised downward, then upward, then in a circle)
October 3rd, 2011
7:10 pm
@ jack – yes, wingnut hit a nerve, as he usually does. See, liberals have an extremely low tolerance for stupidity, especially the abject kind. And abject stupidity is wingnuts’ and most other contemporary conservatives’ raison d’être. It is, literally and figuratively, killing the country.
Randy
October 3rd, 2011
7:12 pm
Funny how it’s the Republicans starting all the blame when the biggest finger pointing is coming from the White House, the only part of the government the Democrats still control.
Strange with you Democrats. If a Democrat says it, they’re just stating facts. Republicans do it, it’s blame
Dusty
October 3rd, 2011
7:14 pm
@@
After all that gardening and canning you did this summer, I thought you’d be lean & mean!!!
But keep on posting. Too many far lefties on the prowl. They are not in a good mood with Obama sinking fast in election forecasts. Makes ‘em kinda feisty.
Lil' Barry the blowhard (but not as much a blowhard as lil' Barry bailout (revised downward, then upward, then in a circle)
October 3rd, 2011
7:16 pm
Nm
Waheema
October 3rd, 2011
8:49 pm
I wonder what the progressives say about Bookman’s much more decieving, more simplistic charts.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
October 3rd, 2011
9:26 pm
Jim Crowe: Most of the debt in this country was created under two presidents.
—————————–
And your Idiot Messiah is on track to top both of them combined, in just one term.
Obozo: Epic fail.
Geo
October 3rd, 2011
10:31 pm
Hey Jim Crowe and Jefferson/getalife:
Did you notice that things started going up when Pelosi took over? Yep – all Bush’s fault. if you don’t like statistics, the stick to Schlitz.
Geo
October 3rd, 2011
10:33 pm
@@ – send Palestine a check.
@@
October 4th, 2011
7:00 am
@@ – send Palestine a check.
Only when Hamas is no more.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
October 4th, 2011
8:29 pm
Lil’ Barry the blowhard (but not blah blah…): There are lies. Then damned lies. Then statistics. Then wingfield, he the great lying, obfuscating, ignorant, with a side of stupid, economic wunderkind.
——————————
Translation: you have nothing.
DJ
October 5th, 2011
6:16 am
The charts are totally relevant as to who actually increased our debt, like it or not whiners. Another fact that goes along with this is that for GWB’s 1st 6 years his deficits ran avg. 500B. Pelosi and Company along with 2 yrs of Obama. jacked the yearly deficits to 1.5T, tripling them. That is a fact none of the mathematically challenged Liberals in here can deny. As far as the “Add the cost of the wars crowd” and here are a few facts about that nonsensical rhetoric. Dems had House/Senate Rule for 4 straight years, why haven’t they stopped the wars? Instead they started an illegal war against Libya in which we supplied the majority of the money. Forget about Obama’s wars ( all 4 of them) there children?
Wait until 2011’s totals come in from the debt-ceiling debacle in which democrats tried to shut down the gov’t instead of actually paying for the increase of 2.5T in debt. Remember Pelosi’s “Pay as you GO” pledge to the nation? How about that big fat lie she told there, Libbies?
The facts in the article speak to common sense people not interested in political scapegoating and childish rhetoric. It says this: As in your own household budget, you spend less then what you take in, in order to avoid bankruptcy.PERIOD. In prosperous times you can spend more, and in tight times you have to cut back in order to pay for your obligations in life. In the Liberal la-la land economics, in tight times you get 10 more credit cards, borrow 3 times what you did in the past, even though your paycheck is shrinking or staying the same. Add to that the fact, that politicians are spending other people’s money and you arrive at… $14.7 trillion dollars of debt- and childish Liberals refusing to accept their huge part in it during the past 5 years- which happen to be the biggest debt explosion period in US history and saw our credit rating downgraded. HOORAYYYYY, let’s here it for the Liberals! HOORAYY for the San Fran Nanny Queen!
DJ
October 5th, 2011
6:21 am
Randy? In reply to: Funny how it’s the Republicans starting all the blame when the biggest finger pointing is coming from the White House, the only part of the government the Democrats still control.
Harry Reid is a LIBERAL Democrat and is the U S Senate Majority leader today. Self-important people who spew crud like that simply can’t be taken seriously.
ODD OWL
October 5th, 2011
10:42 pm
Strike fear in the hearts of the Wall street cutthroat capitalists,, the Koch Bros. type corporate bosses and their lap dog Republican politicians… Join a Union… Share the wealth, TAX THE RICH, pay down the debt…
ODD OWL
October 5th, 2011
10:54 pm
Ronald Reagan said TAX THE RICH… Then he proceded to cut taxes on the rich and raise taxes on the middle class and lower class… Reagan gave credence to that old adage; “Ignore what they say and watch what they do.” Republican hypocrisy is unrivaled in the annuals of human history.