[HawaiianGecko]

Throwing numbers around doesn't make sense with out context.  As you can see our debt to gross domestic product hovers in the low to mid 60% range over time. It is also noticeable that 2000-2002 were significantly lower, indicating the results of the former dot-com boom and the effects of 9/11.  But the real thing to notice is that Bush's highest ratio is 65% and it only occurred one time while Clinton, my, my, my, had 66-68% for six of his eight years in office. 

Links to government sites where I got this information:

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/mspd.htm

http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp#Mid

 

 

[Lord_Calvinus]

The debt to GDP ration is simply indicative that it should have been much easier for Bush to balance a budget or (gasp) have a surplus than Clinton. It is also a reflection of how Clinton did it: by stifling the economy with taxes.

Bush did the RIGHT thing by following Reagan: lower taxes. However, he did the wrong thing by not controlling spending.