Quote:
|
Originally Posted by strandinthewind
Yes, and it indicates that though the poverty rate has risen a little under W, it is nowhere near the record levels under Clinton and I still submit that W's historic amount of money given has the potential to stay or even reduce the slow rise W has seen. Interestingly, Clinton's lowest numbers were in the boom times and W managed to maintain close to those in the recession.
Again, I think W is a bad President, but these facts are not that bad against him and I cannot see how Bush 2006 budget's allotment a record-shattering $368 billion for poverty entitlements, which was an historic 14.6 percent of the entire budget, is not a good attempt at staying or even reducing this 12.7% number.
Maybe the make up of the 14.6 % is bogus, but no one I could find is reporting that  |
ok lets take a look at my thread
again
here's another
article with graphs and stuff..
now: kindly show me where Clinton's numbers were worse than Bushwads.