Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
All the usual talking points from the left. If it's good, it's all Dem accomplishments, if it's bad, it was the evil Republican's fault.
Seriously, we need to stop the blame and elect the people that can fix this without partisanship. Obama can't, he doesn't know how, and his administrative appointments are complete failures!!
I'm going to give Romney a chance, if he can't do it, I'll vote him out. I refuse to allow the talking heads in DC to tell me it's about Party, it's about who can fix this dam* mess instead of making it worse.
I'm thoroughly disgusted with Washington, if they're not doing the job, vote them out no matter how long they've been there.
Slick Willie's long tiring speech was full of BS as per usual....
He's a liar as much as Obama is....remember Clinton promised he would NOT raise taxes....and then raised them almost immediately once elected....? Obama will do the same thing....
Any successes Clinton had were related to his Republican Congress. NAFTA was his baby along with the beginning of what led to the housing bubble.
NAFTA was Republican supported. No Republicans voted for Clinton's 1993 budget.
Haaaa heros, yeah you made a whole pot load of money being heros.
I confuse nothing, what was predicted then happened.
As for you claim of an increase in exports, there was no boom. 1992 is as far as this site went back.
Cut out the whole post did ya?
Arguing with an empty chair..
Good on you.
I didn't think it needed repeated that is all. I addressed you larger point. Let's KISS. Do you disagree that it was predicted the results of what we are seeing today? I was there and yes it was. Maybe somehow you are going to tell me that what we see isn't what was predicted but that is what you need to do.
The hero shot, don't you think that hero is just a bit narcissistic? Savior, i might accept, tireless worker, dedicated soldier in the fight against what didn't happen at Y2K, but hero, no that does not fit. Just a poor choice of a word.
Clinton's speech was a rambling 48 minutes of how he did such a good job he should be reelected.
During his speech I must admit I agreed with him when he said that in 1996 the country was in the MIDDLE of the biggest peacetime expansion of the economy in history. If we consider that the expansion ended in 2008 that means it started, according to Clinton, somewhere around 1986 and we know who was president then. Clinton was able to ride out the expansion but his failed policies lead to what we are seeing today. It was predicted and it occurred. When Clinton pushed for the "free" trade agreements like no president before him it was predicted that there would be a great sucking sound of jobs leaving the country, and that is exactly what is happening. Doesn't matter if the Republicans wanted the agreements or not they would not have passed with out Clinton strong arming his own party. Then we have have the dotcom crash in 2001, the wind down from the unfounded scare over Y2K and the result of Clinton's limb wristed dealings with terrorists resulting in 9/11. Of all the Presidents I have known I doubt any did more damage to the American people then did W.J. Clinton. And this is said without bring up his LYING UNDER OATH.
Any successes Clinton had were related to his Republican Congress. NAFTA was his baby along with the beginning of what led to the housing bubble.
NAFTA was Republican supported. No Republicans voted for Clinton's 1993 budget.
Hell NO
What else is new...Clinton raised taxes and began a vibrant economy. Republicans will never again advocate new taxes because they hate anybody who doesn't have money in the bank.
In the 1950's under Dwight D. Eisenhower...anyone who earned more than $300,000 per year had to pay 91% of the excess to the government. That's back when everybody paid their fair share. The bunch of assholes with control of billion dollar political campaigns will never pay their share again if they have anything to say about it.
During his speech I must admit I agreed with him when he said that in 1996 the country was in the MIDDLE of the biggest peacetime expansion of the economy in history. If we consider that the expansion ended in 2008 that means it started, according to Clinton, somewhere around 1986 and we know who was president then. Clinton was able to ride out the expansion but his failed policies lead to what we are seeing today. It was predicted and it occurred. When Clinton pushed for the "free" trade agreements like no president before him it was predicted that there would be a great sucking sound of jobs leaving the country, and that is exactly what is happening. Doesn't matter if the Republicans wanted the agreements or not they would not have passed with out Clinton strong arming his own party. Then we have have the dotcom crash in 2001, the wind down from the unfounded scare over Y2K and the result of Clinton's limb wristed dealings with terrorists resulting in 9/11. Of all the Presidents I have known I doubt any did more damage to the American people then did W.J. Clinton. And this is said without bring up his LYING UNDER OATH.
You're stupid and so is your avie. Where in the heck did you dig up these archaic talking points, Rossperot.com?
Any successes Clinton had were related to his Republican Congress. NAFTA was his baby along with the beginning of what led to the housing bubble.
NAFTA was Republican supported. No Republicans voted for Clinton's 1993 budget.
NAFTA was intiated by George HW Bush. Clinton took it over and added a retraining component..
It was WILDLY successful.
During his speech I must admit I agreed with him when he said that in 1996 the country was in the MIDDLE of the biggest peacetime expansion of the economy in history. If we consider that the expansion ended in 2008 that means it started, according to Clinton, somewhere around 1986 and we know who was president then. Clinton was able to ride out the expansion but his failed policies lead to what we are seeing today. It was predicted and it occurred. When Clinton pushed for the "free" trade agreements like no president before him it was predicted that there would be a great sucking sound of jobs leaving the country, and that is exactly what is happening. Doesn't matter if the Republicans wanted the agreements or not they would not have passed with out Clinton strong arming his own party. Then we have have the dotcom crash in 2001, the wind down from the unfounded scare over Y2K and the result of Clinton's limb wristed dealings with terrorists resulting in 9/11. Of all the Presidents I have known I doubt any did more damage to the American people then did W.J. Clinton. And this is said without bring up his LYING UNDER OATH.
Well to your "points":
With NAFTA you are comparing apples and oranges. NAFTA moved manufacturing low skill low paying jobs out of the country. But Clinton's version of NAFTA included funding for the retraining those effected by the bill. This led to a great many people discovering technology and getting hired at better jobs with better salaries. Additionally imports and exports exploded which added shipping jobs to that expansion. The amount of people newly employed under the Clinton administration is record breaking.
The "Dotcom" crash was the result of a new industry no one had any idea what to do with. Prior to the Clinton administration, the internet was basicaly a rich man's or geek's hobby. After the Clinton administration it became a market place. The paradigm shift during the Clinton administration was a "work in progress". Most people are aren't savvy enough to understand this call it a "bust". It wasn't.
The "unfounded" Y2K scare was a very real problem. Thanks to the efforts of people, like myself, who worked countless hours to get legacy software and hardware in to shape, nothing much happened. People in technology are the unsung heroes of that effort.
Clinton's efforts against terrorists were hardly "limp wristed" and prime example of conservative obstruction. The Muj were essentially a US conservative creation of dirt poor religious zealots fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. To US conservatives, this was a "fun" way to embarrass the Soviets and mette out retribution for Vietnam. For the US in general, this was a proof of concept for the very same terrorists who had animosity for the west in general. It was George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan that sent serious funding to Osama Bin Laden. Clinton identified Bin Laden as a threat but American Conservatives laughed at him, saying he was "wagging the dog" to obscure the witch hunt they had going to get him out of office. They blocked efforts that Clinton initiated to send special forces to get Bin Laden and let him have missiles instead.
The Clinton impeachment had nothing to do with "lying" and everything to do with usurping power and embarrassing the opposition. The same goes for shutting down the government, twice. The Conservatives took, what were severe government powers and used them as weapons in trivial partisan bickering..with grave consequences. As 9/11 has shown.
Clinton's speech was a rambling 48 minutes of how he did such a good job he should be reelected.
Basically Clinton wasn't able to muck it up during his term regardless of how hard he tried. But he definitely left a steaming bag of crap for Bush and now Obama.
Clinton's speech was a rambling 48 minutes of how he did such a good job he should be reelected.
Basically Clinton wasn't able to muck it up during his term regardless of how hard he tried. But he definitely left a steaming bag of crap for Bush and now Obama.
Clinton/Gore balanced the budget, generated surpluses for fy 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000 amounting to about $400 billion. The surplus was used "off budget" to buy back an equal amount of public debt. The entire debt would have been paid off by now if Bush had not been elected...actually his brother and his concubine Katherine Harris stole the election in Florida.
From 106th Congress:
A. Purpose and Summary
The bill, H.R. 4601, the Debt Reduction Reconciliation Act
of 2000, provides for reconciliation pursuant to section 213(c)
of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2001
to reduce the public debt.
The purpose of H.R. 4601 is to reduce the debt held by the
public by the amount of any additional on-budget surplus in
fiscal year 2000. The bill would establish an off-budget
account in the U.S. Treasury, called the Public Debt Reduction
Payment Account. If the Congressional Budget Office's revised
estimate of the fiscal year 2000 on-budget surplus is higher
than specified in the fiscal year 2001 Congressional budget
resolution, the increased amount would be automatically
appropriated to the account, and the statutory debt limit would
be reduced by an equivalent amount. Funds in the account could
be used only to reduce the debt held by the public. The
reduction in the debt limit emphasizes Congress's intent to
reverse years of increasing debt and rising debt limits. The
bill would also require the Secretary of the Treasury and U.S.
Comptroller General of the United States to report to Congress
on how the funds were used to reduce the debt.
Newt Gingrich and company -- for all their faults -- have received virtually no credit for balancing the budget. Yet today's surplus is, in part, a byproduct of the GOP's single-minded crusade to end 30 years of red ink. Arguably, Gingrich's finest hour as Speaker came in March 1995 when he rallied the entire Republican House caucus behind the idea of eliminating the deficit within seven years.
Skeptics said it could not be done in seven years. The GOP did it in four.
Now let us contrast this with the Clinton fiscal record. Recall that it was the Clinton White House that fought Republicans every inch of the way in balancing the budget in 1995. When Republicans proposed their own balanced-budget plan, the White House waged a shameless Mediscare campaign to torpedo the plan -- a campaign that the Washington Post slammed as "pure demagoguery." It was Bill Clinton who, during the big budget fight in 1995, had to submit not one, not two, but five budgets until he begrudgingly matched the GOP's balanced-budget plan. In fact, during the height of the budget wars in the summer of 1995, the Clinton administration admitted that "balancing the budget is not one of our top priorities."
No, Bill Clinton Didn't Balance the Budget | Stephen Moore | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary
Befuddled dem delegates still unclear about the definition of the word "it"..........
Befuddled dem delegates still unclear about the definition of the word "it"..........
...and you don't know the difference between "is" and "it"...
LOL. The wingnuts are out in force. Clinton made one hell of a speech, and nailed the GOP very well. Very little in that speech to critisize. On target, and specific.
