Your WHITE HOUSE WAR CRIMINAL started his failed "administration(s)"
with tax gifts to his wealthy buddies. And, unsurprisingly, his last
year in office will be remembered for his TRILLION-DOLLAR "budget"
submission that does the same thing!

We can only hope, but with little confidence, that the Congress will
line-out much of your Nincompoop-In-Chief's laughable-if-it-weren't-
sad request for -- what else? -- more tax-cut and favoritistic monies
for the nation's wealthiest ONE-PERCENT!

Does this make you happy -- or seethe?

------------------------------------
"Budget Mess"

"President Bush's last spending plan only adds to a disastrous fiscal
legacy."

Editorial
The Washington Post
Tuesday, February 5, 2008; A18

SEVEN LONG years ago, a new president submitted his first budget -- an
optimistic document now relevant only as a chastening artifact of a
bygone era. In that "Blueprint for New Beginnings," George W. Bush
grappled with the supposed challenge of dealing with a projected
surplus of $5.6 trillion over the next decade. The president proposed
to pay down the debt by $2 trillion during that time, which, he said,
was as much as could be responsibly redeemed. He offered lavish tax
cuts. And he vowed to "confront great challenges from which Government
has too long flinched," putting Social Security and Medicare on solid
financial footing.

The final budget of Mr. Bush's presidency arrived yesterday, and the
contrast between then and now could hardly be more sobering. Instead
of being paid down, the national debt has grown by $2 trillion. The
$725 billion surplus once projected for the coming fiscal year (2009)
has evaporated. In its place is a $407 billion deficit -- an
unrealistically rosy number that omits billions in likely war spending
and is artificially reduced by including the $200 billion Social
Security surplus. The explosion in entitlement costs has been left
unaddressed and is therefore even more daunting. Indeed, on
entitlements, Mr. Bush's legacy will be to have added to the long-term
tab with the addition of an expensive Medicare prescription drug
benefit.

Some of this transformation, as the administration would be the first
to point out, is not Mr. Bush's fault. Even as he submitted that
initial budget, the economy was slowing. The attacks of Sept. 11,
2001, further rattled the economy and imposed huge unanticipated costs
for homeland security and military operations overseas. Mr. Bush tried
to launch the necessary debate on Social Security, and, although the
president can be faulted for having poisoned the well with a
relentlessly partisan legislative strategy, congressional Democrats
chose to respond with more partisanship.

But the fact remains that the purported surplus on which Mr. Bush
based his tax-cutting agenda was always something of a mirage, and the
president has never been willing to adjust his agenda to the grim new
fiscal reality. Yesterday's promise of a small surplus by 2012 is once
again premised on omitting likely costs (zero is budgeted for
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan) and by assuming cuts to domestic
spending that are unachievable politically and, in large part, unwise
as a matter of policy.

As always, Mr. Bush pledges to press ahead with his tax-cutting
agenda: another $2.4 trillion over the next decade, $3.7 trillion if
relief from the alternative minimum tax is included. The president
argues that failing to extend his previous tax cuts would result in an
average tax increase of $1,800. But Mr. Bush neglects to point out
that the overwhelming share of the tax cuts go to the wealthiest
Americans. The top 1 percent of households -- those with incomes of
more than $450,000 -- would get 31 percent of the benefits, with tax
cuts averaging $67,000 by 2012. And Mr. Bush does not even propose
fully paying for these cuts: The budget he submitted yesterday
envisions another $397 billion in deficit spending over the next five
years because it would devote more money to tax cuts than it would cut
in spending.

Mr. Bush inherited a potential windfall -- and squandered it. The next
president will inherit his mess.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02-04/AR200...