Didn’t concede. We’re going to have to agree to disagree about your characterization of it as the “clinton-gore recession”

So, do you not see Bush’s failure to act upon the PDB as a failure of the PDB itself? You truly expect that dismissing the failure as due to lack of EXACTLY specific plans in the PDB? That is a patently silly point of view.
But as Bush said: “You’ve covered your ass.”

Why did UBL attack? In UBL’s own words:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/16/terror/main4102367.shtm l (remove space from between last two characters.

So sorry, but no. Not due to Clinton.

And the GOP “Contract On America”, by design, does exactly that on the “right” side of the aisle.

The way this Government is intended to function is through checks-and-balances and the healthy tension of making parties comprimise. The worst thing that can happen is a full sweep by one party or the other.

Ok, looks like you conceded on the Clinton-Gore recession.

Now, we all know that there is a presidential budget proposal. It goes to the congress who then adds and changes all kinds of things, and then debates it, and then votes on it. It is then sent to the President for his signautre. Again, he can either accept ita all or rejct it all. If he accepts it, it is now the US budget - not the presidents. Nice try, but your logic fails. Oh, and if he did reject it, you would dig up some little piece of it that fed starving children and yelled “Bush doesn’t want to feed starving children”.

Next, the bulletin notes that there were UNCORROBORATED SENSATIONAL THREAT reports that OBL may want to try a hijacking to free the blind sheik. This is not ” takeover 4 plans and fly them into buildings”. Again, you did not bring the facts needed to answere the question I posed. Strike Three - you are out.

PS - Oh, and why did OSL want to attack the US? Because of failed policies of Clinton-Gore….from your same report….
”
After U.S. missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, bin Laden told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a —  — service.”

Had to fight wars? He certainly didn’t have to fight the Iraq war.

And, I have read the PDB of August 2001. It was fairly clear about locations and methods.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/10/august6.memo/

“such as that from a —  — service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.”

The Presdient can suggest, cajole, and browbeat, and then he can only sit back and veto the whole package, not item by item. If the Prez had the line item veto, then maybe you could call it the President’s budget.

Negative GDP growth occurred in 3Q 2000 and 1Q 2001, both under Clinton Gore policies. 3Q 2001 was also negative, due to Clinton Gore policies, and the 9/11 attacks. (and if you say that Bush knew of a specific plan then I will lump you in with the truthers and ignore anything else you say). A recession in some circles is 2 consectuve quarters of negative GDP growth, and in others, a mix of slowing or negative indicators.

Based on the above, fair, reasonable and educated people would call it the Clinton Gore recession. Only partisans and media hacks would argue otherwise.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/projects/2008/05/budget_hero/

My question to conservatives who are against raising taxes is where are you going to find sufficient cuts to decrease the deficit? As Obama pointed out last night eliminating $16 Billion in pork/earmarks won’t make much difference in a 3 trillion dollar budget.