Can you point out which periods of "history" you are using when you come to this position? Because I'd advise you to look at who ran Congress during those periods. Like, say, during Bill Clinton.
The first two are totally asinine ideas. The infrastructure would be an excellent one. And the $750 silliness I won't comment on. We've each stated our position on that. Don't like it, close the loopholes.
I suspect that there may be more than loopholes involved. But that will come out in the fullness of time. Regardless, a guy who pays so little in federal taxes probably shouldn't make too big a show of grabbing the flag by the pussy. (It gives him away.)
And it should. I'm not sure I understand how this - in any way - is juxtaposed to the idea that both parties spend like drunken sailors.
Why does this stop at Bush? Can you remind me who developed and passed the budget during the Clinton years?