I Want Your Money (2010) User Reviews

Interesting Slant way to take a Gray area and make it Black & White

[mdpollack · 5/10 · 19 October 2010]

The Movie shows only the highlights of the Reagan administration and ignored the Surplus Clinton left. It neglected to mention the fact that Regan actually raised taxes once it realized that it was necessary. The movie makes fun of Nixon and ignores all of Reagans failings such as the Olie North debacle and Savings and Loan collapse. The is always more then one way to govern and in an extremely complex world there are no simple answers and until the two major parties work together all will can look forward to is years of bickering and failure.

The movie is a perfect recruiting tool for the Tea party but the one sided view of a complicated issue does nothing to enhance the dialog but just adds to the already splinted electorate.

Read My Lips: No New Taxes

[Sylviastel · 5/10 · 4 October 2018]

If you hate Michael Moore and his films, this pseudo documentary is ideal for the anti-Moore fan. It's part documentary with interviews and stock footage but there is an entertaining animation with the presidents and other politicians. That's the best part of the film. Unfortunately, it's not going to change a liberal to a conservative or vice versa. The film was produced by Andrew Breitbart who is interviewed along with many conservative faces like Mike Huckabee and Newt Gingrich among them. There is mention of comparing President Reagan to President Obama. The film is very tough on Obama and against socialism. Look there is socialism and communism. Socialism includes health care for all which doesn't seem terrible since we provide education for all in the public schools. Medicare and social security are earned by its recipients. There is medicaid too. Other western countries including the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Canada have socialized medicine for all and do fine with it, In the United States, many corporations have left because they don't want to finance their employees rising health care. If the United States had a national health care, companies might return without worrying about the cost. My biggest fear is losing my health insurance before I reach medicare age at 65 or 67. I have paid for my health insurance for 8 years on my own with some assistance from Obama's health care plan but it's no more. This film makes me fondly look back at the other presidents. What I wouldn't give for another President Bush in the White House right now? Eight years later, it's a different ball game with President Trump.

Acceptable Criticism That Misses the Point

[smastison · 6/10 · 3 November 2011]

This is blatant Republican propaganda; heavily edited chops of Reagan and animated satire included.

We get it: spending and dishonest government is a problem. What the film seems to miss, is that there's essentially no difference between the Republican and Democratic party. The last 20 years have taught us that the Republicans and Democrats are both willing to madly invade other countries, engage in irresponsible deficit spending, and impinge upon the civil liberties of the American people The criticism is good enough; but solutions are lacking in this film.

The animation is entertaining, the narrator is borderline obnoxious, and the facts are obviously skewed to promote a questionable political agenda. Of course, this is what the political landscape of the United States looks like to a tee; stare long and hard America--these are your "representatives."

Typical propaganda disguised as "conversation"

[angelslave69 · 11 October 2010]

This movie is very convincing, in that it doesn't come out swinging. It slips in your back door, tries to make you feel at home, says "don't you remember the 80's? Yeah, those were good times..." It uses the words of two presidents, while utterly ignoring the fact that words and actions are usually worlds apart in politics. It makes Reagan seem like a free market godsend while ignoring the fact the government grew under his control, or that the deficit grew under his control. It ignores the fact that the current economic downturn is rooted in Reaganomics, and that any government attempt to influence this downturn requires money, that any businessman will tell you "you have to spend money to make money." It fails to mention the republicans that have come after Reagan, who have also expanded federal government size and spending. It paints one side as right, and the other as utterly wrong; it turns a gray, nuanced problem into a typical "black or white, you're with us or against us" argument. It's pure propaganda, financed by someone who wants your money. It fails to mention that free market is a ruler of sorts, that companies want your money just as badly as the government does. It fails to mention America's history of abuse at the hands of corporations, the bleak world of "free market" in the 19th and early 20th century, a time before weekends, vacation, raises, or benefits of any kind. Rather than explore what each side means, it expects you to sit down and agree. And some people will, which is sad. Rather than explore any actual solutions, it suggests that you just kind of agree with the message. And while you're not looking, it helps itself to that money in your cookie jar. And that makes it better than what it argues against?

United we stand...

[wintermancer · 1/10 · 15 May 2011]

I remember a time when we as a people trusted in each other and upheld the notion of a person's character until proved otherwise. We trusted our government perhaps naively because we assumed others were like ourselves. We saw ourselves and others as decent and moral beings.

We don't do that much anymore. Look to this little piece of propaganda to understand why. Watch it to understand the politics of division and manipulation.

To get to the truth, do as the film suggests and follow the money. The characters in this cast have done pretty well for themselves by attacking and dividing, by slander and derision, and by inciting others to attack the foundations of our democracy. We were not always like that. We once had a good country, a wholesome spirit, and we believed in each other.

So watch this film. Ask what the makers of this film want from you. Do they want to build or destroy? Build trust or destroy it? Build a better nation or destroy it? Benefit you or benefit them? An examination of the message and intent of this film does indeed reveal that you cannot trust anybody anymore. Thus they succeed no matter what you believe.

Bad Accounting

[b_brank · 2/10 · 2 April 2012]

Really bad accounting about half way through the movie where they try to dispel the fact that most of the 2009 deficit was inherited from Bush policies. For instance they try shift a $410 billion omnibus spending bill to Obama. Folks, an omnibus spending bill is no more than an congressional appropriation for funding the departments of government that have been approved under a budget -- that 2009 budget was Bush's.** They add another $60 billion to Obama for the auto bail out. The auto bail monies were funded by Bush's TARP before Obama ever walked in the door. I'm surprised they didn't try to shift the cost responsibility of the wars to Obama. After all he was the Commander in Chief when they made this so called documentary.

** (Yes there was about $8 Bil in earmarks tacked on for Rep & Dems -- but let's ask Bush about how many earmarks he approved during his tenure)

propaganda

[rwa-12 · 1/10 · 17 June 2011]

This is pure propaganda and not the entertaining kind either. As in all propaganda the statements that are presented as fact are half truths. The fact that Nixon, Regan and G. W. Bush's administrations were responsible for the biggest budget deficits in history was not even mentioned. This is pure fascist propaganda brought to you by the same people that have been pushing religion and any other mid evil practices they can come up with. There is no question that a small amount of money and time was spent on this project. If the premise was really fair and unbalanced then it could have been a good piece instead it is heavily biased and while the bias is subtle at first it becomes evident as the film wears on.

But it's MY money

[StevePulaski · 8/10 · 23 June 2011]

A Conservative documentary in the world of film today is an extreme rarity. The fact that this movie was theatrical is amazing as well. Usually, this is the type of documentary Fox News puts out. Boasting a 0% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and being either a love it/hate it documentary, I Want Your Money isn't groundbreaking, but does bring good points to light and is fairly easy for a person lacking government knowledge, like myself, to get into.

The argument is simple; the people want maximum freedom and minimum government. Filmmaker Ray Griggs is very likable with his calm and laidback tone throughout the film. He proves to the Left that you can be a Republican and be softspoken. People like Rush Limbaugh aren't typical Republicans. A lot of them can be very opinionated, but others, like Griggs, can be mature and direct about the whole issue.

I Want Your Money contrasts Reagan's government policies with Obama's government policies dubbed 'Reaganomics" and "Obamanomics." One is pro-Capitalism the other is pro-Socialism. Both have completely different views of the perfect America.

Several people like Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Lila Rose, Gary Bauer, and others give their insight on the topics presented like The Stimulus Plan and how it was one of the shadiest plans ever passed and multiple other topics. Ray Griggs narrates the film and is quiet but stern saying "hey, it's your money they're spending." This has been called a piece of propaganda, but isn't every political documentary in a way? One could call Fahrenheit 9/11 a piece of Democratic propaganda. The definition of propaganda is biased and sometimes misleading information used in a political event. Fahrenheit 9/11 doesn't tell the whole truth and neither does this.

While Reagan, a cut throat but successful president, did force many Americans off of Welfare, he also is responsible for increasing taxes at points of his presidency and making the government very large which is one of the biggest problems in this nation. I Want Your Money neglects to mention every detail.

For a documentary, it is satirical and funny. It utilizes computer animated clips of Presidents like Obama, Reagan, Clinton, Nixon, both Bush Sr. and Jr., and various other non presidents like Hilary and Palin. The clips portray the presidents as big headed and all living in the present day describing the current America, and even being taught by Reagan in a classroom using the aspect of Socialism. The cartoons are cute and honest.

My political knowledge is very small, but I have a basic understanding of the current and recent Presidents. As for Obama, I don't love him, but I respect him for a few reasons. I don't agree with Socialism and believe it could lead to one of the biggest downfalls in American history. I will say Barack Obama is very knowledgeable and an excellent speaker. He has a strict voice saying "I'm going to do this," but it doesn't come off as a harsh.

When asking me my political preference I can't say I'd choose either. I lean towards Conservative, but I would say I'm a minor Liberatarian. Maximum Freedom, Minimum Government is the way to go these days. Like said in I Want Your Money, if the government is big enough to give you everything they want, then the government is big enough to take whatever they want.

I could go on forever describing every word of my view on politics, but I refuse and stop myself. Politics are a stupid thing to argue over. It isn't worth a flame war or a diminished friendship. It isn't worth it at all. It's worth having a preference, but it isn't worth a fight. I Want Your Money is a good documentary. It doesn't deserve hate or anything close to it. It knows itself and stays true to its roots.

Starring: Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Lila Rose, and Gary Bauer. Directed by: Ray Griggs.

Tissue paper thin

[jch2-31-327768 · 1/10 · 15 May 2011]

Much has already been said by other viewers that I need not repeat. This is a pointless waist of film, because the only viewers it will convince are the ones who already agree with the viewpoint before even watching it. But there's one additional factor that should be an obvious sign to anyone considering this film...

Look at the so-called external "reviews"; It's amazing what garbage ends up on IMDb. I can only assume those critics (NOT) have their own agenda in hyping this piece of tripe. I know thoughtful and intelligent republicans who are my neighbors and friends. Nothing from them is in this film or those pandering reviews.

A good film that has a right leaning edge, still it shows the way that big government has become with spending.

[blanbrn · 9/10 · 15 October 2010]

The title of this film says it all "I Want Your Money" as whether your on the right or left one thing has become clear government clearly spends to much of our money! And this film tells it like it is about our current national debt as it continues to grow Washington continues to spend. And true this film made and mostly narrated by Ray Griggs is dominated by a conservative point of view as it's interviews are mostly with right wingers and republicans it tries to make a comparison between current president Barrack Obma and republican legend Ronald Reagan as the two were so different in their take on the federal government Obma more Reagan less.

So depending on what side of the spectrum your on you may or may not like it, still it's up to date with the current times of the debt, high unemployment and growing of the government with national health care passage. Clips are shown from historical speeches of presidents like Reagan, Carter, Clinton, Bush, and Obma and critics give their take on how each one's policies shaped the economy and lives of people. You will also see Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, and Steve Forbes along with Ken Blackwell and many others giving their opinions and educated talks on why big government doesn't work.

Also interesting and neat is how historical data, maps and polls are used to show how smaller government worked better under Ronald than Barack and it was fun and cute to see all of these presidents and political figures portrayed as cartoon and animation figures bickering among one another! I for one am not a fan of big government and spending , and I know those on the left see this picture as a campaign tool for republicans still I like it's message and the film was done in a unique and fun way as it provides educated thought and opinion along with historical data and graphics of facts to prove it points and thoughts so check it out.

From somebody with no political affiliation

[WhatNameCanIDo · 1/10 · 18 May 2011]

I'm sure most people who watch this film already agree with what this film is set out to do. It only takes somebody aware of actual facts to immediately see that this film is a propaganda piece. An exaggerated one sided view which is extremely selective with what it allows in it. Don't expect opposing viewpoints. Don't expect any questioning of what is said. This film will most likely work well on converting Americans who are easily manipulated, can't catch hypocrisy, and have limited knowledge of how events actually went down over the course of history. For those who DO have that ability, you will find yourself wanting to scream at your TV and tell these people how things really are. I could sit here and pick apart many things in this film and try to do my best and let people have a better grasp on reality, but why would I? The facts are already out there. All they have to do is search with an open mind. I'm not saying voting democrat is the answer. They have their own issues as well. I've seen many propaganda films in my time, but this one will get any knowledgeable person really frustrated to know there are people out there eating this stuff up.

The Tax and spends policies of the government revealed.

[johnny_reb-859-102725 · 10/10 · 14 October 2010]

This is a simple down to earth movie about the Tax and spends policies of the government and the Obama administration.

The movie looks back it time and explains why the government is not the cure to our economic problems we face today. THE GOVERNMENT IS THE PROBLEM.

Right wing (Tea party) people will like the movie. The Left wing (Obama zombies) will hate it, but that's the wonderful thing about America we all have a choice.

Everyone should see the movie. Take your children to see the movie. Let them make their own decision about the Tax and spends policies of the government.

right wing propaganda, but...

[bigj0420 · 7/10 · 16 May 2011]

this film try's to make Reagan look like Christ or something which anyone that remembers the 80's knows is NOT true, but I will agree with what they say about Obama's socialist ways and how he has and will continue to f__k this country up. No, I'm not a republican but let's face it this country going down the crapper and both Bush AND Obama are to blame, they are pretty much the same person anyway right or at least have the same agenda. War = $ not peace. Anyway I still liked it overall you just can't forget all the bad stuff that Reagan did and talk about the good stuff, which he did also I must admit. Obama ball lickers will hate this film but who cares what they think anyway.

Yawn

[infinite-entropy · 1/10 · 20 May 2011]

First, I would like to point out to those who are fans of this movie, or are just liberal bashers in general, THIS MOVIE DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. The entire premise is built around two things. Obama is a socialist who also somehow wants to expand government. I have a word for you to look up. It's oxymoron. Those two ideas do NOT go together. It's either ONE or the OTHER. You can't have it both ways unless you are a homophobic Republican tapping your foot in a public restroom stall.

The people giving this film high marks need to wake up and smell the stink. This movie is nothing but a smokescreen. Others have already brought up the points, so I won't kick a dead horse.

You and I are the ones being walked on and kicked to the gutter, while the fat cats are piling up more money than they could spend in 10 lifetimes. Yes, all politicians are in it ultimately for themselves, but the Dems at least have some better ideas that can benefit us. They are at least willing to try to make things better. The GOP platform is 'Race to the Bottom'. Push all of the burden on the middle and lower classes, start multiple wars without proper authorization and without providing funding, then cut programs that don't have anything to do with deficits (think SS and Medicare) -btw when they say Entitlement, think RIGHT, as in guaranteed. These programs are paid for by you and your employers, just like unemployment, to make sure you have something available for you if something happens and you can't work or afford medical help - OMG, SOCIALISM!!!

Obama hasn't done anything to increase the size of government, but he has tried to find a way to pay off the crap stack that was given to him. Too bad the 'other party' fights him at every turn, just because he isn't Republican (and possibly because he isn't white). If he said 'We need to lower taxes on the rich', the Republicans would say the opposite just because they would catch fire if they agreed. Newt is an excellent case.

Yay! A 42% Tax cut for the rich!

[bromsk · 21 October 2010]

Talking about spending and without discussing how so called conservatives slashed revenue tells only half the story. Aside from WW2, we paid our bills up until Reagan.

Lyndon Johnson (D) cut taxes for the top bracket from 90% to 70% in 1964.

***Reagan and Bush 41 cut taxes on the top bracket from 70% to 28% from 1980-1986. That's a 42% tax cut for the wealthiest Americans.***

Clinton (D)raised taxes on the top bracket from 28 to 39%. We ran a budget surplus from 1998-2001.

Bush 43 created Dept. Homeland Security (huge) installed the unfunded prescription drug benefit, $700 billion in debt by 2015, and cut taxes for the top bracket to 35% during two wars (?)

Obama (D) wants to raise taxes 4% on the top bracket. If that helps us pay our bills, fine. I'm upper middle class. I can handle 4% more taxes to live in a balanced budget USA.

For the millionaires and billionaires who don't want to do their part, there's always Dubai. 90% up to 1964 and 70% up to 1981 seems draconian, but 39% isn't anything to cry about. We have the fifth lowest taxes in the developed world.

Why anyone in the US middle class would be so horny for Reagan has always baffled me. He talked a good game while he screwed us.

If 'conservatives' are so into personal responsibility, how about paying for the roads, bridges, schools, social security, and national security we all use, rather than borrowing tax cuts from our two time 20th Century proxy war opponent?

Republican financially screwed up our county and now they're complaining!

[acinemafan · 1/10 · 23 May 2011]

Under Clinton, our debt clock was covered with an American flag, and under Bush, that very same clock had to be removed in order to replace it with one that had more zeroes. Enough said.

Those who love this movie simply want their existing opinion reaffirmed by those on the screen.

Oh, and the 'Tea Party'. It's a joke. It started as a protest of a Democrat in the White House (with racist signs sprinkled in the crowd). The press talked about the deficit and this lunatic fringe started complaining about that, pointing it's finger at the Democrat in the White House.

But, oops, the members then learned the deficit falls squarely on the shoulders of President Bush -- a Republican! What's an angry person to do?! Putting on the appearance of distancing yourself from the GOP, while still being very much Republican! Too funny.

Tweedle Dee fights Tweedle Dumb

[TimBush50 · 1/10 · 5 July 2011]

Just having read Through the Looking glass, I was reminded of the epochal battle between the two fat boys, who did not even continue fighting until tea time, as per agreement. Ronald Reagan was Wall Street's main spokesman throughout his lifetime,and won two elections based on this Wall Street propaganda. Today, another Great Communicator, and the current Wall Street selection, Barach Obama, has won the presidency based on pure demagoguery, just as did Reagan. Now, some billionaire (or cabal of billionaires)is going to put Newt Gingrich in office, based on under-estimating the intelligence of American voters. Abraham Lincoln said that you can fool some of the people all of the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. Thank God America is not Wonderland. Tea Party: go away! You really want to know what Americans think? Watch Barbara Kopple's American Dream. We will not be fooled again!

Smaller government....

[tstoryjr · 10/10 · 18 May 2011]

i cannot believe there are people in the united states believing socialism, anarchy or the belief that a handful of politicians, whom always take themselves out of the equation, know what is best for everyone else. this has never worker anywhere in the world and will not work here. when politicians realize they can vote themselves anything they want and buy votes with ss and medicare benefits which are suppose to be set aside for retirement after you have helped build it, the nation no longer exists as a free society. Bush spent too much, barry has put this on steroids along with his super majority he had entering the white house. facts are horrible when they are suffocating the very people with all the tax burden on their backs and then have idiots whom say it is only certain individuals fault. all videos depicting truths about the obama are always criticized by the very same morons.....

A Formula for Success

[mzobrosky · 9/10 · 15 October 2010]

In reviewing this movie many immediately make the charge that President Reagan and his free market policies, which this documentary espouse, ran deficits and the growth of government increased under his watch. Both statements are true if taken out of the context of History. When Reagan took office, the House of Representatives who hold the purse strings of the Nation were controlled by the opposing party and another worthy challenger, Speaker Tip Oneil. Reagan inherited double digit inflation, high unemployment and a government that was growing at an alarming rate. This doesn't even deal with the threat the Soviet Union was when Reagan took office. For two years he stood by his principles and even lost control of the senate due to his strong belied that giving Americans the opportunity to have more of their money to spend. Well, after two years we had the beginning of the largest peace time recovery in our Nations History. Reagan, with the help of an alliance with Pope John Paul and Margaret Thatcher, helped the Soviets to implode-without a bullet fired. As for government growth Reagan didn't stop governmental growth, but he was the first President since Calvin Coolidge to slow the rate of growth a substantial amount. All of this without the help of a friendly congress. Unemployment and inflation and huge interest rates dropped dramatically. President Obama I fear, as is shown in the film has created dozens of new commissions, czars, bought motor companies, financial services companies, etc,. In spite of spending deficits of over $1.5 Trillion we still have unemployment that hovers around 10% officially, but in real terms of adding only government jobs and part time jobs, brings us to a real rate of nearly 19%. President Obama needs to premier this movie at the White House!

Take the kids! Learn history to avoid repeating the same old mistakes.

[bagheera57 · 10/10 · 17 October 2010]

This was a thoughtful look back at the last 80 years, providing enough info along with entertainment value that kept the kids interested without being heavy handed. I enjoyed animated parts, but more so the interviews with various politicians, economists, and businessmen who succinctly made their points in measured manner. My favorite part was Milton Friedman "schooling" a slack-jawed Phil Donahue about how everyone operates out of self-interest or what he called "greed". Phil didn't seem to have an answer when asked to produce the self-less communist or socialist state that operated out of benevolence.

I told the girls that the first presidential election I could vote in was the Carter vs Reagen election. I voted for Carter because he "seemed like such a nice man" and Reagen seemed so old. When Reagen won, I was disappointed. However, it wasn't long before I grew up and began to pay attention to what politicians said and what their policies brought about. I saw us go from a national "malaise" under nice-but-weak Carter into a nation that once again felt pride, hope and self-sufficiency. I realized that despite my initial shunning of Reagen due to superficial things like his age, that I actually AGREED with him on most things - Amercian Exceptionalism, small gov-t, low taxes, strong national defense.

Now, working for years as a health care provider, I see what happens to whole generations who have been cocooned in the modern welfare state, expecting to be taken care of and never even attempting to stand on their own. This is the modern day "plantation" used to keep people down and dependent. While progressives believe they are more "compassionate" in that they want to "take care" of these people, few recognize the horrible burden they place these people under. They are told that not only should they be taken care of but that it is unreasonable of anyone to expect them to be self-sufficient. These people are robbed of the human dignity and self-respect one gains by taking care of oneself but even worse, the children who grow up in these homes very often grow up without any concept of any other way of life.

So, do we wish to hand over all of our decisions, our monies and our choices to a handful of "elites" who will create a Master Plan for us all or shall we get back to the messy business of running our own lives, preferably with less and less federal involvement?

No one is too big to fail. Vote Nov 2......or I don't want to hear you complaining.

Decent educational film on current Ideologies on government's role in the economy and society.

[gtcinc2 · 7/10 · 17 October 2010]

What the movie does well: The movie does a good point of laying out its argument about big nanny state government and its effects on the economy and debt. It does a good job of addressing the rosy colored view that most history paint the New Deal with and addresses the mounting debt that the US government has acquired over 70 years of overspending. It spends a considerable amount of time heralding its view of the problems in the Obama agenda.

What the movie does not do well: This movie had a few problems, first, it creates a straw man argument to represent the ideology of the left then proceeds to knock it over using humorous quotes and over simplified summations. While it is billed as a movie, it kind of sounds like a two hour commercial for the republican party. Secondly while the computer animation may have been effective at the beginning of the movie, there is a boxing match near the end that falls short of the point by point blow by blow comparison between the right and the left. In general it detracts from the argument.

Conclusion, This movie receives a 7 out of 10, not really for the entertainment value but as an edutainment film, it should probably be played back to back with Moore's "Capitalism: A Love Story" Things of Note: It should be noted that while the movie advocates for a smaller government and a free market system, it a no point advocates for no government. This is an important subtext in the movie; also worthy of mention, the movie hits on a key point that has been largely absent from the obamacare debate. The opposition has no plan for effective healthcare and economic overhaul. while an overwhelming majority as low as 60% in some polls and as high as 85% in others dislike the obamacare laws, nearly the same percentage say it needs to be addressed. Its clear that in absence of a good plan Washington can be trusted to pick a bad one, over and over and over again. A point that the movie tries get across. Hopefully this review will be of some value to someone. I probably won't see it again.

Left loves Moore but hates this ... figures ...

[stortzbj · 16 June 2011]

The major issue about this film is simple in that it panders to the demographic it was made for. The funny thing is that most conservatives will openly admit that (and to be honest it doesn't even try to hide the fact the documentarian is a conservative) but at the same time "progressives", I guess they can't be called liberals anymore, accept Michael Moore completely.

Both "documentaries" have a transparent agenda yet this will be bashed by liberals and accepted by conservatives just as it is reversed in almost any Moore film .. I mean, honestly, why do we still call Moore films documentaries when it has been proved time and time and time again they have no resemblance of one ...

Great movie if you are conservative; progressives will hate it. Simple as that.

Excellent movie

[screwballl-mike · 9/10 · 22 June 2011]

This movie shows the reality behind our Government spending and expansion. Unfortunately too many are simply uneducated as to the reality of the past century worth of government events. This is where this movie helps step up and help educate people, provided they are willing to learn.

If people did the research and learned about the real data and numbers, they would see this movie is spot on, albeit in an alternate method of displaying it. Reagan expanded government the LEAST out of any president since the 19th Century (less than 3%). Reagan (and Congress) helped return this country's budget to a long term and sustainable surplus provided the gov't after him continued his tax cut, cut spending methodology, which Clinton and his cronies helped destroy in a matter of a few months. 2 weeks before Bill left office, him and Congress had returned the budget to a quickly increasing deficit. Bush Jr inherited the quickly growing deficit and did what he could with a Democrat Congress, 9/11 and everything else he had to deal with to curtail it. By the end of 2006, he had helped curtail the deficit to within 1.14% of GDP (down from the 4% he inherited) until the extremist liberals took over at the start of 2007 when it went downhill again (expanded from 3.18% immediately after the first Democrat budgets took effect in 2008 to the current 10.91%, highest since the Great Depression).

Do the research, look at the data, the facts and reality are there. This movie just helps present it in a way that people willing to learn and understand can do so.

Nice Documentary!

[Right-Wing-Man · 10/10 · 18 May 2011]

Most of the ratings here are negative, but hey, what can you do? All of the major news media are Liberal, with the exception of Fox and a few select radio shows that are still on the air waves.

Socialism sucks and it doesn't work, it's been proved time and time again. This movie was made simple so the Lefties can even understand it. It illustrates the fundamental differences between the two sides. Hopefully, at some point President Hussein will stop pointing the finger at Bush and start taking responsibility for his own actions. It's comical really... what is our major problem... THE ECONOMY. What does President Hussein do? Virtually nothing except force feed us a healthcare system, so he can stamp his name on it. What a waste of time.

All of our current problems started with Jimmy Carter, and then Clinton and Bush. Now we have Carter Jr./Obama. What a lying joker this guy is.

Great show, and I appreciate the director of this gem. Thank you.

Great for at least three audiences

[smittye-873-510671 · 8/10 · 17 October 2010]

I give it eight out of ten.

I Want Your Money works for at least three audiences: --Conservatives will have a blast enjoying Reagan, McCotter, Gingrich and the rest serving up a healthy dose of common sense. --Independents will benefit from having a conservative layout of the current crisis, in stark opposition to the output of the Propaganda media. --Liberals may, if they've any consciousness, benefit from having the abject failure of the Progressive Utopia presented in this manner.

There is always going to be room for attacking a 90 minute flick for oversimplifying matters. Also, the 'politizoid' segments were entertaining, and will hold the general audience, but the Forgotten Man installment got too lost in being entertaining to drive the point home well. Or I was just getting tired by then. The boxing finale was fun, but didn't add much to the documentary as such. The chief criticism I have of the project is that my personal favorite zombie, the Federal Reserve, didn't receive the stream of shotgun shells necessary to reduce it to a former zombie. In other words, cutting taxes is like cutting the tops off of dandelions; the reform we require is about killing the roots, and this film doesn't broach that. Really, my criticism is meant as an excuse to give Griggs a budget for a sequel.