The Return of the Clintonistas!!!

[xsited1]

Bush and Congress started a war with Iraq. WRONG! QUOTE]

Then who started the war? Who was the one pushing to start the war? Who was it that sent his Secretary of State, a noble man, to the UN to give a speech loaded with untruths and half lies?

Who was that? It was Booooosh! That is who it was. Well, he will retire to his ranch soon and tell his war stories about how he caught Saddam.

Nice. Congress assumes responsibility for starting wars.

 

[xsited1]

You are pushing a typical right wing myth. Republican congress outspends

a democratic congress 3 to 1. Also see if you can answer these questions,

then tell me again what party handles our economy better.

Which president produced:

1. The highest growth in the gross domestic product?
2. The biggest increase in jobs?
3. The biggest increase in personal disposable income after taxes?
4. The highest growth in industrial production?
5. The biggest rise in hourly wages?
6. The lowest Misery Index (inflation plus unemployment)?
7. The lowest inflation?
8. The largest reduction in the federal budget deficit?
answers at the bottom

The University of Nevada-Reno economics professor also uncovered the following while conducting the economic comparison between Republican and Democratic presidential administrations from 1949 to 2005:
• Unemployment Rate- Republicans 6.0%, Democrats 5.2%
• Change In Unemployment Rate- Republicans +0.3%, Democrats -0.4%
• Growth of Multifactor Productivity- Republicans 0.9%, Democrats 1.7%
• Corporate Profits (share of GDP)- Republicans 8.8%, Democrats 10.2%
• Real Value of Dow Jones Index- Republicans 4.3%, Democrats 5.4%
(in logarithmic growth rates)- Republicans 2.8%, Democrats 4.4%
• Real Weekly Earnings- Republicans 0.3%, Democrats 1.0%
• CPI Inflation Rate- Republicans 3.8%, Democrats 3.8%

which showed Real GDP Growth Rate (annual average) under Republican administrations now stood at 2.9% and Democratic administrations at 4.2%. Real GDP Growth Rate Per Capita was 1.7% for the Republicans and 2.9% for the Democrats. These results prompted Dr. Parker to conclude that “the economy has grown significantly faster under Democratic administrations, and more than twice as fast in per-capita terms.”

1. Truman; 2. Carter; 3. Johnson; 4. Kennedy; 5. Johnson; 6. Truman; 7. Truman; 8. Clinton. A Democratic sweep.

I'm not Right Wing and this is not a myth. The data is clear:

Taking Stock of the Parties

Over the last quarter of a century when the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, the stock market rose by an average of about 20 percent per year. When the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, the stock market only rose at an average annual rate of 6.9 percent for the Dow Jones and a tepid 5.1 percent for the Standard and Poor 500.

You do realize that Bush is an LBJ-style Democrat?

 

[xsited1]

Op-Chart - Bulls, Bears, Donkeys and Elephants - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

Congress controls spending. Your charts are meaningless.

 

[bk1983]

I'm not Right Wing and this is not a myth. The data is clear:

Taking Stock of the Parties

Over the last quarter of a century when the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, the stock market rose by an average of about 20 percent per year. When the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, the stock market only rose at an average annual rate of 6.9 percent for the Dow Jones and a tepid 5.1 percent for the Standard and Poor 500.

You do realize that Bush is an LBJ-style Democrat?

what kind of bs are you trying to spew? do you even consider spending

or increases in debt when you factor in our economy? you realize the borrow and
spend policy of the republicans only digs us further in the hole. Look at

the paragraph below the only time a republican congress reduced the debt

or cut spending was under the leadership of a democrat.

In the past 60 years when Republicans were in control of the presidency and both Houses of Congress, neither debt, nor government spending was ever reduced. The last time a Republican Congress reduced the national debt was in 1947, under Truman’s leadership.

Even though you may not understand it, the economy has alot more

factors then the dow and s&p. Here are the guidelines on judging a healthy

economy.

GDP growth,creation of jobs,indistrial production,hourly

wages,inflation,unemployment,and defecit. The only time all these factors

seen an approvement was when democrats were in control. So once again

you fail at your attempt, you cannot spin history. The Bush admin had 6

years of republican congress to push their agenda. I think the results speak

for themselves. Once again a democrat will have to come in and clean up

the mess of the careless borrow and spending of the republicans.

 

[xsited1]

what kind of bs are you trying to spew? do you even consider spending

or increases in debt when you factor in our economy? you realize the borrow and
spend policy of the republicans only digs us further in the hole. Look at

the paragraph below the only time a republican congress reduced the debt

or cut spending was under the leadership of a democrat.

In the past 60 years when Republicans were in control of the presidency and both Houses of Congress, neither debt, nor government spending was ever reduced. The last time a Republican Congress reduced the national debt was in 1947, under Truman’s leadership.

Even though you may not understand it, the economy has alot more

factors then the dow and s&p. Here are the guidelines on judging a healthy

economy.

GDP growth,creation of jobs,indistrial production,hourly

wages,inflation,unemployment,and defecit. The only time all these factors

seen an approvement was when democrats were in control. So once again

you fail at your attempt, you cannot spin history. The Bush admin had 6

years of republican congress to push their agenda. I think the results speak

for themselves. Once again a democrat will have to come in and clean up

the mess of the careless borrow and spending of the republicans.

Nice rambling, but facts are facts. Whenever a conservative congress is in control, government spending goes down and the economy does better. The Bush administration along with Congress got us into a war. That will cause major problems. But it wasn't until the Democrats took control of Congress that major economic problems really started.

Obama will have control and so will the Democrats in Congress. Put your money in safe investments because things aren't going to get better until at least 2011.

 

[GigiBowman]

Let us not forget that the Clinton's go both ways. Clinton has had his share of big Bush on those steamy hot nights in small hotel rooms in little fishing villages as they toured together.

When was the last time we had an administration without a Bush or a Clinton?

The Bush Clinton Dynasty -   Bush & Clinton Forever

 

[Truthmatters]

Nice rambling, but facts are facts. Whenever a conservative congress is in control, government spending goes down and the economy does better. The Bush administration along with Congress got us into a war. That will cause major problems. But it wasn't until the Democrats took control of Congress that major economic problems really started.

Obama will have control and so will the Democrats in Congress. Put your money in safe investments because things aren't going to get better until at least 2011.

What a load of horseshit.

This problem was cited by the Republican SEC chairman as coming out of the GLB act written by Phil Gram and passed in 1999. Clinton signed it and should not have. To blame the current congress for this mess is complete stupidity.

 

[bk1983]

Nice rambling, but facts are facts. Whenever a conservative congress is in control, government spending goes down and the economy does better. The Bush administration along with Congress got us into a war. That will cause major problems. But it wasn't until the Democrats took control of Congress that major economic problems really started.

Obama will have control and so will the Democrats in Congress. Put your money in safe investments because things aren't going to get better until at least 2011.

You like being embarrased??

At no time since 1945 when Republicans have been in total charge of both elected branches of government have they ever reduced spending. They talk about it a lot, but they never deliver.

Also you probably dont know who was the last president before Clinton

to submit a balanced budget. Heres a hint, he was a democratic pres,

and the democrats were in control of congress at the time.

 

[Truthmatters]

Stock markets historically do better under Dems than Reps. - Jan. 22, 2004


The Cato institute is biased, heres the facts

 

[bk1983]

Nice rambling, but facts are facts. Whenever a conservative congress is in control, government spending goes down and the economy does better. The Bush administration along with Congress got us into a war. That will cause major problems. But it wasn't until the Democrats took control of Congress that major economic problems really started.

Obama will have control and so will the Democrats in Congress. Put your money in safe investments because things aren't going to get better until at least 2011.

Uhh the economy was slowing for quite some time, this was years

in the making. The direct result of failed economic policies, just because

you found out about this crisis on CNN a few months ago. Doesn't mean

thats when it started.

 

[xsited1]

What a load of horseshit.

This problem was cited by the Republican SEC chairman as coming out of the GLB act written by Phil Gram and passed in 1999. Clinton signed it and should not have. To blame the current congress for this mess is complete stupidity.

I would expect you to disagree. Nothing to see here...

 

[Truthmatters]

The facts dissagree with you and Cato.

 

[jillian]

Stock markets historically do better under Dems than Reps. - Jan. 22, 2004


The Cato institute is biased, heres the facts

Of course Cato is biased. The amusing part is they're still parroting the same things that have already proven disasterous.

 

[xsited1]

You like being embarrased??

At no time since 1945 when Republicans have been in total charge of both elected branches of government have they ever reduced spending. They talk about it a lot, but they never deliver.

Also you probably dont know who was the last president before Clinton

to submit a balanced budget. Heres a hint, he was a democratic pres,

and the democrats were in control of congress at the time.

You need to read the link I posted before you make a complete fool of yourself. Did you forget about the Republican-controlled Congress during Clinton's term? Overall non-defense government spending decreased by 0.7%. When was the last time that happened?

And you keep talking about a Democratic President. The President doesn't control spending. Please, please, please, TRY TO READ THE ARTICLE. TRY TO GET THE DATA. TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE BASIC BEFORE YOU POST.

 

[xsited1]

Of course Cato is biased. The amusing part is they're still parroting the same things that have already proven disasterous.

Biased left, biased right? Just where would a Libertarian organization be biased?

No, the data proves what they are saying. You folks say a lot of great things, but your words are not supported by the data. Try again.

 

[xsited1]

The facts dissagree with you and Cato.

Right.... And somehow historical data has changed over the years. What are you smoking?

 

[bk1983]

You need to read the link I posted before you make a complete fool of yourself. Did you forget about the Republican-controlled Congress during Clinton's term? Overall non-defense government spending decreased by 0.7%. When was the last time that happened?

And you keep talking about a Democratic President. The President doesn't control spending. Please, please, please, TRY TO READ THE ARTICLE. TRY TO GET THE DATA. TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE BASIC BEFORE YOU POST.

I understand it perfectly this is the point I was trying to ram

through your thick skull. Out of the 4 democratic presidents who paid down

the debt, three did it with democratic congress in power. Also did you miss

the fact I posted? When republicans were in the white house and controlled

congress, they were never able to reduce spending or pay down the debt.

So again, you are wrong on all fronts. You need to get a better grasp on

basic economics.

 

[xsited1]

I understand it perfectly this is the point I was trying to ram

through your thick skull. Out of the 4 democratic presidents who paid down

the debt, three did it with democratic congress in power. Also did you miss

the fact I posted? When republicans were in the white house and controlled

congress, they were never able to reduce spending or pay down the debt.

So again, you are wrong on all fronts. You need to get a better grasp on

basic economics.

You've included data when Democrats were more conservative and Republicans were even right of that. You need to keep up with the changing of the parties. For example, would you call Bush a conservative? Of course not. That would be silly. Would you call JFK a conservative? Fiscally, of course. The Republicans in Congress during the Clinton Administration were definitely fiscal conservatives. The Democrats in Congress during the Reagan Administration were definitely NOT fiscal conservatives. See the point? You can't just take data from the 1940s and say, "hey, check this out! Democrats and Republicans did this and this and this for the economy." However, if you look at their fiscal policy, you can see exactly where they are coming from.

And as far as the spending goes since Bush took office, yes, two wars were started. Spending always goes WAY UP when that happens. Moral to the story: don't start unnecessary wars.

 

[bk1983]

You've included data when Democrats were more conservative and Republicans were even right of that. You need to keep up with the changing of the parties. For example, would you call Bush a conservative? Of course not. That would be silly. Would you call JFK a conservative? Fiscally, of course. The Republicans in Congress during the Clinton Administration were definitely fiscal conservatives. The Democrats in Congress during the Reagan Administration were definitely NOT fiscal conservatives. See the point? You can't just take data from the 1940s and say, "hey, check this out! Democrats and Republicans did this and this and this for the economy." However, if you look at their fiscal policy, you can see exactly where they are coming from.

And as far as the spending goes since Bush took office, yes, two wars were started. Spending always goes WAY UP when that happens. Moral to the story: don't start unnecessary wars.

Really? Thats funny because republicans controlled congress for

the first 6 years of Reagans term. Spending only decreased in the last

2 years of his term, guess what party was in control during the last 2 years?

Maybe you dont wanna hear it, but spending went down in the last 2 years

when democrats were in majority. Also I am distinguishing between the

two parties, I am not talking about conservatives. But rather how republican

policies have consistently failed.

 

[bk1983]

You've included data when Democrats were more conservative and Republicans were even right of that. You need to keep up with the changing of the parties. For example, would you call Bush a conservative? Of course not. That would be silly. Would you call JFK a conservative? Fiscally, of course. The Republicans in Congress during the Clinton Administration were definitely fiscal conservatives. The Democrats in Congress during the Reagan Administration were definitely NOT fiscal conservatives. See the point? You can't just take data from the 1940s and say, "hey, check this out! Democrats and Republicans did this and this and this for the economy." However, if you look at their fiscal policy, you can see exactly where they are coming from.

And as far as the spending goes since Bush took office, yes, two wars were started. Spending always goes WAY UP when that happens. Moral to the story: don't start unnecessary wars.

Would you call the current stock of republicans in congress fiscal conservatives?