(telling us we weren't, when we were) for nigh on a year. How did their lying affect our ultimate economic fate? Is there something we could have done differently and perhaps forestalled at least some of those lost $trillions, had the Georgieans not lied to us?

For sure...I suppose the Georgiean's more ardent apologists might simper that they didn't lie - they just "dinnit know". Still..the question remains. HAD the Georgians not lied to us, or HAD the Georgieans known what the hell they were doing, how would that have changed the outcome?

It was well known, only refuted because the offical numbers had not been declared.

Between the credit crisis (CON-induced) and Bush Fast Tracking of every single business to offshore, outsource and down size our economy has suffered incredably...and the Bush WH was well aware of it.

I keep going back to Grovner Norquests statement about bankrupting the fed govt and then remaking the economy in the CON mold. (BTW this is another forgotten dirty little bit of the Neo-COn agenda).

By Geroge, I think they did it!

Yes that is real important question as we all agree Bush Sucks. You can be the one that figures that out. Cuz right now there many more things being currently said that maybe they just "dinnit know" whats going on and should be confirmed as well that could make Georgie's lost $$ look like ¢¢

decreasing GDP. Since the Bush administration released the facts about GDP losses, how is it even possible for you to say they lied about it?

KA

GDP gains in quarter after quarter, in quarters that've been subsequently shown to represent losses. Your response is less than useless.

-Hope that helps.

My question was simple. HAD we known that we were actually in recession, whilst George was telling us otherwise, how might we have affected the ultimate outcome?

and only see what those voices in your head tell you to see.

KA

why didn't you just say so.

They kept "readjusting" the unemployment figures as well...let us not forget.

see, sweetie pie, that is why they call the GDP assessment "preliminary" right after the quarter ends why they await all the data do come in.

KA

LOL at silly little irrational Bush haters.

There is nothing "little" and certainly nothing "irrational" about hating what Bush has done to America.

That is of course unless you are a brain dead ditto headed partisan hack.

We are screwed due to Bush and the Conservative (trickle down) agenda.

Of course he's either lying and/or oblivious when he suggests that the George Administration EVER copped to recession, until the bitter end - when they had no other choice.

But alkaline's dishonesty and/or obliviousness aside - whether George lied or his "preliminary estimates" were wrong, the question remains. How would we have reacted differently, if the Georgieans had told us the truth? And in hopes of getting an actual answer, I WILL stipulate that I'm using the word "truth" as in, "that which is true" as opposed to "the opposite of a lie".

we were in a recession as of December, 2007.

at least you're honest in your own little way.

KA

through the 3rd quarter of '08. And, as of the date they were reporting growth for that 3rd quarter, they had not yet revised any of their earlier "preliminary" estimates into negative territory.

by definition, the recession didn't start until the second quarter 2009, well after President Bush was out of office.

<link>

And they are called "preliminary estimates" for a reason, my scattered brained friend. If they were final results, they wouldn't be called "preliminary" nor "estimates."

I know, stubborn little facts that shoot your irrationals screeds down.

KA

I feel your pain, my friend.