Friday, February 27, 2009

How is this explained?



I thought Republicans were the more fiscally responsible of the two parties.

4 comments:

Mike Nerone said...

Bahahaha! Who told you that?!? Man, you slay me.

Mark said...

Hmm - are you under the impression that the president has anything to do with the budget other than sign it into law? Wouldn't the interesting graph plot the party in control of congress?

Now if the president had a line-item veto, the graph would mean something.

Besides, as crappy as the Repub's have been on the budget (and they HAVE been) - $8,000,000,000 sort of dwarfs anything thus-far in history.

Nels said...

http://www.congressol.com/party-strength-house.html

The information on that page was useful when I tried to draw a connection between Dave Ramsey and fiscally non-conservative Republicans in my blog post here:
http://nelsnelson.blogspot.com/2009/01/second-opinion-on-dave-ramsey.html

While not exactly a graph, the chart in my post shows that the graphic in Greg's blog post does indeed roughly correlate with the party with congressional control as well as the party of the President as Greg was sarcastically pointing out. (With Republicans being the least fiscally conservative.)

Mark, didn't Clinton have the line-item veto? Or am I confusing him with W?

Matt said...

@Nels: TLDNR