Bush has already seen to it that the buck is passed, or more to the point 482 billion bucks. He started out with a surplus, and squandered his “political capital”.

What a horrible legacy he has left, a dog-poop laden footprint on America's tapestry.

I know we have an innocent until proven guilty system, but I honestly think anyone under indictment should give up their seat to focus on their criminal probes. How attentive could Stevens be to the business at hand in the Senate? Especially since he will automatically be kicked off the 3 committees he is a ranking member of.

It does look good for the Democrats, but I am no longer naive enough to believe that their victory will negate the influence-peddlers on Capitol Hill. The writers of “The Broken Branch” got it exactly right.

By the way, K, Ted Stevens just got indicted on federal corruption charges. It seems the GOP hasn't learned from the 2006 elections yet. Don Young also is being investigated, and it could end up with yet another Democratic Senator after November (Ted Stevens — Another One Biges the Dust). This could be a slaughter of the GOP this year.

“Hazelwood George?”

It's okay, so long as enough people believe he can. Yes, We Can!

* * *

“Why does no one mention the current account deficit?”

What about unfunded future liabilities?

* * *

“Senator Obama's other problem is that he will end up with a Congress that is dominated by Democrats. The Democrats have a long list of political allies to pay off. I doubt that Congress will let the budget get in the way.”

Of course not. Once the Dems are in charge it will be back to “Don't believe the scary talk about the deficit”; “Deficit as a reasonable proportion of GDP is perfectly fine and in fact beneficial”; “it's just right-wing hype over the deficit myth,” etc.

What is worrisome is if the Dems get conceited over a large set of victories this November and want to lurch far to the left. We saw warnings about some of this with that laundry list of Michelle Obama's on another thread, recycling a program of creating all kinds of new benefits at the taxpayers' and business community's expense. This would be insane.

That's basically what got Clinton elected (and just two years after Bush41's approval ratings were soaring as a result of the success of Gulf War 1). But people still weren't happy. So the GOP scored big gains two years later. In 2004 the GOP was talking about a “permanent majority”. Two years later they got their butts waxed. A lot can happen in two years. I'm not saying it will happen again, but it could. So if the Dems do sweep into power in 2008, they'd better be careful.

The new deficit numbers also do not account for any drains on the Chinese treasury that might result from further declines in the housing market.

Fixed.

If anyone cares, I wrote a blog post about this issue today.

given the demographic changes in the U.S., the idea that the Republicans are going to make a come back is laughable. Besides the Republicans are probably going to be redistricted out of at least 30 seats in the House by 2012.

George,

that is why the U.S. is going to become a one party state. the country only needs one big spending, big government party. Karl Rove and President Bush thought that it needed two and they were dead wrong.

It the Republicans are going to have 20% approval ratings, the least they could have done is balance the budget but the idiot President Bush was too stupid to think that way.

Why should I vote for another Republican?

Senator Obama's other problem is that he will end up with a Congress that is dominated by Democrats. The Democrats have a long list of political allies to pay off. I doubt that Congress will let the budget get in the way. Senator Obama will not have the advantage that Bill Clinton had of having a Republican Congress who would pass no new spending programs.