[RawAlex]

JR, this "ferner" did a little investigating, and found that since the 97th congress, the republicans have been in charge of congress more than the democrats... that is the history of the last 20 years, where the real rubber meets the road (again, a very Rush Limbaugh answer is to use 100+ year old history to support a current arguement, even if it isn't relevant). Furthermore, the president has veto power, and budgets would rarely have enough support to overwhelm the veto. The direction of the budget comes from the President in power and the leaders of Congress... which are both republican last time I looked.

While it is true that the President cannot unilaterally raise or lower taxes, please remember that this works both ways - you cannot blame a democrat for raising taxes and then say the republican wasn't responsible for lowering them. Either the President leads, or the President is a figurehead, you can't have it both ways.

In reality, the President sets the tone for his party, and the members of his party in the house and senate attempt to make his goals into reality.

As for Torone's "zero sum", just remember that the government cannot spend money until someone is taxed. Worse now, the government is borrowing to pay for programs, because taxes are lower than expenditures. This will be fine for the moment, but soon enough, the bill will become due and some poor democratic president will be forced to raise taxes to pay for the bill. Oh, wait, I forgot, the President doesn't control taxes. So it must be the janitor playing with the tax rates.

Come on. "FACT" of the matter is that, faced with difficult circumstances, the current US president has both lowered taxes and raised expenditures. Doesn't basic math tell you something about that?

Alex