Republican Auto Worker

[rc38]

???

What about the real numbers in front of our face, from our goverment?

What the hell was he around for after he was found guilty? He should of been in jail.

 

Because the page came to his defense during the house ethics investigation.The page said they had sex when he was 17,Studds was 36 at the time.

Don't think this was tried outside the house ethics committee.

 

Just pulled a link from Google where Gerry Studds died Saturday mourning at the age of 69.

 

Gerry Studds dies at age 69

[methos]

As i see somebody has posted you some links about Harry Reid,also there was one in the Washington Times about both the land deal and the campaign funds for christmas bonuses.

 

The reason i brought this up was everyone here knows Hillary will run for the nomination in 08. Question is will she leave her seat if she wins the democratic nomination to run for president.

Not sure on the law with this,since Kerry was up for re-election during his run. I remember Dole left during his term,so not sure on the law with this.

 

Nancy Pelosi did vote for Gerry Stubbs to head several house postions.(five times actually)

 

Gerry Studds was found guilty of having sex with a underage page by the house ethics committee and censured.

He never resigned,but continued on many house committees.

 

The reason i bring up the things about Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi,is that they are the ones that would most likely be the leaders in the senate and house if the democrats win control.

 

Foley is a disgusting man to say the least,but he didn't have sex with one of his pages like Studds did.

 

And then the democratic party rewards him by voting him to run some of there house committees.

 

If he did not, it was only because none of the teens was willing. Hastert's aides and many others were at least partially aware of Foley's pedophilia several years ago, yet they did nothing. You denigrate the Democrats for voting for Studd's, while you say little of the Republican cover up of Foley, go figure?

 

Foley served as chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. As chairman, he sponsored several bills to protect children, all while he was soliciting sex from them, more Republican hypocrisy. You bring up Stubbs, but he never pretended to be anything other than a homosexual, while he did not advertise it, he did not deny it neither. The page he had sex with was of legal age. However, in my opinion, even if it was legal, it was immoral and he should have been expelled, in that I agree with Gingrich.

 

In addition to Foley, we now another page scandal brewing, Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz, who is now under investigation for taking a camping trip with two congressional pages.

 

I mean I am a Democrat, but I do try to look at issues with an open mind, If Reid or any other Senator is found to be guilty of criminal actions then get rid of them - Republican, Independent, or Democrat.

 

You seem a little hypocritical though, my god, the list of Republicans in trouble over Abramhoff, Foley, and other various scandals, and hardly a peep from you on them. As far as I am concerned, the whole Republican leadership is corrupt. Why do I say this? What was the first order of business for them after the 2004 election? Gutting the ethics committee, and relaxing the rules, f'n pathetic.

 

In the end, it is sort of like the chicken and the egg. I am through wasting time on this issue.

[dark270]

If he did not, it was only because none of the teens was willing. Hastert's aides and many others were at least partially aware of Foley's pedophilia several years ago, yet they did nothing. You denigrate the Democrats for voting for Studd's, while you say little of the Republican cover up of Foley, go figure?

 

Foley served as chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. As chairman, he sponsored several bills to protect children, all while he was soliciting sex from them, more Republican hypocrisy. You bring up Stubbs, but he never pretended to be anything other than a homosexual, while he did not advertise it, he did not deny it neither. The page he had sex with was of legal age. However, in my opinion, even if it was legal, it was immoral and he should have been expelled, in that I agree with Gingrich.

 

In addition to Foley, we now another page scandal brewing, Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz, who is now under investigation for taking a camping trip with two congressional pages.

 

I mean I am a Democrat, but I do try to look at issues with an open mind, If Reid or any other Senator is found to be guilty of criminal actions then get rid of them - Republican, Independent, or Democrat.

 

You seem a little hypocritical though, my god, the list of Republicans in trouble over Abramhoff, Foley, and other various scandals, and hardly a peep from you on them. As far as I am concerned, the whole Republican leadership is corrupt. Why do I say this? What was the first order of business for them after the 2004 election? Gutting the ethics committee, and relaxing the rules, f'n pathetic.

 

In the end, it is sort of like the chicken and the egg. I am through wasting time on this issue.

 

 

HEY, methos, not to change the subject , but as a respected democrat...how do you feel about the smoking bans(issue 4 and 5) in ohio....i'm for issue 5......but i was just curious to hear your answer....

 

thansk in advance!

[boldandlame]

???

What about the real numbers in front of our face, from our goverment?

one better

The first link, (debt as a % of gdp) shows the time frames where the debt/spending got out of control. During Reagan/Bush 1 tenure we had recession and tax cuts and cold war spending. The trifecta of fuck the middle class economics. So not only does the graph reflect the spending but it's set against the backdrop of an ailing gdp. Simple econ, revenue in expenditures out still apply to something as complex as the US economy. Same thing taht's going on now. Only difference is that the Chinese/Japanese/ Koreans are helping us out buying up our debt so they can push all their shit at Walmart. When republicans increase expenditures and decrease revenues it has meant and always will mean reduced standard of living/opportunity for the working class. We are way past a healthy debt/gdp ratio and we're busy killing Iraqis/Americans, and repressing gays, protecting poluters, outsourcing jobs, underfunding schools, preventing workers from forming unions, increased the number of Americans w/out healthcare, spying on our citizens etc... Our familys will be paying for this fiscal/social failure for generations to come.

Edited October 22, 2006 by boldandlame

[sprinter]

That is almost par for the course nowadays, scandalous? Hardly. In my opinion, the majority of them are either rotten or becoming so. That includes Democrats as well as Republicans. Elections are becoming so expensive, no party works for the interests of the people. I vote Democrat because there are still some among the party that do, although, that number is dwindling. Moreover, the Republican Party platform is anti-union, why would I vote against my economic interests. I might, and I do take a populist approach, in which no single issue draws my vote, but for me, there is very little appeal in their platform, and Republicans tend to vote in unison. So even if I did like a Republican candidate, the individual would likely succumb to party leaders, and with few exceptions, that is the case.

 

The bottom line is that the problems we face our not due to our elected officials, it is due to the ignorance and/or apathy of the electorate. Not enough people care anymore, and very few look at the candidates with an open and critical perspective.

 

Politics has become to partisan. Disinformation has become the norm, not the exception. It is no wonder many feel it is no use, but that sort of disdain and apathy only allows more corruption, and mis-truths to flourish.

 

It is becoming increasingly difficult to elect good officials, at least in my humble opinion. I have done some research in the past, and I am starting to see some solid movement in that direction, publicly financed elections. Certainly, it is not the ideal solution, but it seems a good one. But it still falls to a hopefully educated and informed electorate to sort out fact from fiction.

 

Of those that do get involved, very few keep current with the issues. Therefore, they rarely, if ever write their Representatives. No accountability and a lack of knowledge in the process is a recipe for exactly what we have disaster.

 

 

forget the democans or the republicrats, the same BS comes from either party. Both are killing the American middle class. People need to wake up to the fact that there are other qualified canidates to vote for. constitution party/ libertarian party

 

 

Tired of Corruption? Give Libertarians a Chance!

 

With new political scandal twists surfacing daily, the Libertarian Party offers a solution

 

 

(Washington, D.C.) During a recent candidate debate in Connecticut's 4th Congressional District, Republican incumbent Representative Chris Shays and Democratic challenger Diane Farrell spent considerable time going arguing with each other about how each major political party has reacted to allegations of scandal in the opposition party.

 

 

 

"There have unfortunately been plenty of Democrats and plenty of Republican members of Congress that have been involved in scandals," Libertarian Phil Maymin quipped during the televised debate. He concluded, "There has not been a single Libertarian congressman involved in any [final syllable(s) not intelligible due to loud applause from audience]."

 

 

 

With new political scandals surfacing frequently and new twists and spins of existing corruption probes hitting the mainstream media almost daily, the American public trusts neither major party to clean up the mess. While most recent polling indicates that Americans tend to trust the Democrats more than the Republicans this election cycle, USA Today reported "…a Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 75% believed the Democrats would have botched the Foley matter had he been one of theirs."

 

 

 

"From DeLay to Foley to Ney, Republicans are certainly bearing the brunt of corruption charges at the moment. But let's not forget that when the Democrats were in power, they faced the majority of scandal headlines, too," said Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory. "We shouldn't forget about Democratic Louisiana Representative William Jefferson of cash-in-the-freezer fame, either."

 

 

 

A primary problem, according to Cory, is that political power is a corrupting influence. He advocates a return to the days of citizen legislators, as opposed to today's career politicians -- who must begin raising money the day they are elected for their next political race.

 

 

 

"Most Libertarian Party candidates are not career politicians, but own their own businesses or are employed in the private sector," Cory said. "Electing members of 'The Party of Principle' would have a decided impact in reducing the amount of scandal and corruption coming from inside the beltway. I'd like to encourage the millions of Americans who don’t trust either major party to send a strong message to Washington by casting their first Libertarian vote on November 7."

 

 

 

The Libertarian Party is fielding over 600 candidates for public office this election cycle, including candidates in Tom DeLay's and William Jefferson's scandal-tarred districts.

[F150MANBDV]

forget the democans or the republicrats, the same BS comes from either party. Both are killing the American middle class. People need to wake up to the fact that there are other qualified canidates to vote for. constitution party/ libertarian party

Tired of Corruption? Give Libertarians a Chance!

 

With new political scandal twists surfacing daily, the Libertarian Party offers a solution

(Washington, D.C.) During a recent candidate debate in Connecticut's 4th Congressional District, Republican incumbent Representative Chris Shays and Democratic challenger Diane Farrell spent considerable time going arguing with each other about how each major political party has reacted to allegations of scandal in the opposition party.

 

 

 

"There have unfortunately been plenty of Democrats and plenty of Republican members of Congress that have been involved in scandals," Libertarian Phil Maymin quipped during the televised debate. He concluded, "There has not been a single Libertarian congressman involved in any [final syllable(s) not intelligible due to loud applause from audience]."

 

 

 

With new political scandals surfacing frequently and new twists and spins of existing corruption probes hitting the mainstream media almost daily, the American public trusts neither major party to clean up the mess. While most recent polling indicates that Americans tend to trust the Democrats more than the Republicans this election cycle, USA Today reported "…a Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 75% believed the Democrats would have botched the Foley matter had he been one of theirs."

 

 

 

"From DeLay to Foley to Ney, Republicans are certainly bearing the brunt of corruption charges at the moment. But let's not forget that when the Democrats were in power, they faced the majority of scandal headlines, too," said Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory. "We shouldn't forget about Democratic Louisiana Representative William Jefferson of cash-in-the-freezer fame, either."

 

 

 

A primary problem, according to Cory, is that political power is a corrupting influence. He advocates a return to the days of citizen legislators, as opposed to today's career politicians -- who must begin raising money the day they are elected for their next political race.

 

 

 

"Most Libertarian Party candidates are not career politicians, but own their own businesses or are employed in the private sector," Cory said. "Electing members of 'The Party of Principle' would have a decided impact in reducing the amount of scandal and corruption coming from inside the beltway. I'd like to encourage the millions of Americans who don’t trust either major party to send a strong message to Washington by casting their first Libertarian vote on November 7."

 

 

 

The Libertarian Party is fielding over 600 candidates for public office this election cycle, including candidates in Tom DeLay's and William Jefferson's scandal-tarred districts.

 

I've been reading this thread and as another Libertarian I could'nt agree more brother !

That old axiom about "power currpts....." has never been more true ! Both parties have been guilty forever....not just the last 12 years !

 

If you read some of the founding fathers papers, especially Madison, they believed VERY STRONGLY about the "citizen politician" as a servent of the will of the people.....WE ARE after all a REPRESENTATIVE REBUBLIC.....NOT a Democracy.

Their job is to represent our will.....unfortunately over the decades people have been happy to walk away

from the responsibility to be engaged in the functioning of their government as a result of becoming who we are....the GREATEST country ever conceived by man and blessed by God.

 

It is very sad when I hear on the radio during Hannity's "man on the street" section where most people dont have a clue who their most powerful leaders are but can instantly identify such idiots like Alec Baldwin, Paris Hilton, and Jessica Simpson !!!! As citizens in this most blessed land we have a responsibilty to become

informed voters and NOT just follow the "party line".

Until that happens Im sorry to say that we all desearve EXACTLY what we get !

 

There is plenty of blame to go around....total disgust and apathy with the "status quo", sound bytes generation, lack of comprehensive civics education in our public schools ( which is 1 of many reasons why

I have been homeschooling my daughter for the last 6 years now ! ).

 

In conclusion the only thing I could add is that if anybody needs a reason, a very personal reason, why they should seriously consider beginning to vote for Libertarian candidates Ill give you 1...... HR 25

Do yourself a favor....GOOGLE IT ! Educate yourself on the incredible power of this legislation to unleash the

greatest wave of prosperity the world will ever see( created by man ) that would touch ALL LIVES.

Investigate it, NOT JUST THE SOUND BYTES....and contemplate how this WOULD affect you and your family

in a VERY REAL WAY on a daily basis directly in your quality of life and your opportunities for realizing

your hopes and dreams.

The 2 main parties will NEVER consider such a life changing legislation but it is gaining bipartison support, hard to believe, but its true....unfortunately it really needs a grass roots wave, which as been gaining

momentum lately.....here in VA the Demogods have been running negative and totally misleading ads

referencing HR 25 aimed at a local Republican candidate.

 

If you believe in limited government as like was originally envisioned by Madison and Jefferson, if you believe the best thing that government can do for this economy is get the hell out of the way and allow the

American spirit drive this engine to unprecedented levels, if you belive that government is supposed to be a servent of the people's will then you need to seriously consider, and educate yourself on the Libertarian party as a true viable option and the true inheritor of the vision of our founding fathers.

 

If you're still not sure I invite you to take a very simple test on this website....see for yourself where you stand on the Libertarian party as an option that more closely represents you.

 

http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html

 

We get EXACTLY the government that we vote for....we have ONLY ourselves to blame if we are not

satisfied with the results.

 

Need more information ? You might be surprised.....

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-score/lib...ecb040632ff4e5f

 

Libertarian 2006 Vote....who represents YOU ?

http://www.vote-smart.org/index.htm

Edited October 22, 2006 by F150MANBDV

[Atlas]

For 3 years it went down when we were running a surplus!!

2000 it was 236 billion +++++

2001 we had a budget defecit thanks to Bush.

The rich want the debt to keep them rich, we borrow their money.

The 2001 budget was authored by the Clinton administration. Bush's first budget was for fiscal year 2002.

[boldandlame]

forget the democans or the republicrats, the same BS comes from either party. Both are killing the American middle class. People need to wake up to the fact that there are other qualified canidates to vote for. constitution party/ libertarian party

Tired of Corruption? Give Libertarians a Chance!

 

With new political scandal twists surfacing daily, the Libertarian Party offers a solution

(Washington, D.C.) During a recent candidate debate in Connecticut's 4th Congressional District, Republican incumbent Representative Chris Shays and Democratic challenger Diane Farrell spent considerable time going arguing with each other about how each major political party has reacted to allegations of scandal in the opposition party.

 

"There have unfortunately been plenty of Democrats and plenty of Republican members of Congress that have been involved in scandals," Libertarian Phil Maymin quipped during the televised debate. He concluded, "There has not been a single Libertarian congressman involved in any [final syllable(s) not intelligible due to loud applause from audience]."

 

With new political scandals surfacing frequently and new twists and spins of existing corruption probes hitting the mainstream media almost daily, the American public trusts neither major party to clean up the mess. While most recent polling indicates that Americans tend to trust the Democrats more than the Republicans this election cycle, USA Today reported "…a Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 75% believed the Democrats would have botched the Foley matter had he been one of theirs."

 

"From DeLay to Foley to Ney, Republicans are certainly bearing the brunt of corruption charges at the moment. But let's not forget that when the Democrats were in power, they faced the majority of scandal headlines, too," said Libertarian Party Executive Director Shane Cory. "We shouldn't forget about Democratic Louisiana Representative William Jefferson of cash-in-the-freezer fame, either."

 

A primary problem, according to Cory, is that political power is a corrupting influence. He advocates a return to the days of citizen legislators, as opposed to today's career politicians -- who must begin raising money the day they are elected for their next political race.

 

"Most Libertarian Party candidates are not career politicians, but own their own businesses or are employed in the private sector," Cory said. "Electing members of 'The Party of Principle' would have a decided impact in reducing the amount of scandal and corruption coming from inside the beltway. I'd like to encourage the millions of Americans who don’t trust either major party to send a strong message to Washington by casting their first Libertarian vote on November 7."

 

The Libertarian Party is fielding over 600 candidates for public office this election cycle, including candidates in Tom DeLay's and William Jefferson's scandal-tarred districts.

 

LOL- Three words- SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT- We have a two party system that that does not allow power sharing. No third party has ever replaced(morphed but not replaced) a major party. Libertarians are not career politicians due to the fact that hey don't win, which by the way is why they don't get into trouble. No power-no corruption. Scandal is part of the process because people are part of the process. Deal with it, sink your teeth in and do it till you die, but don't delude yourself with pie in the sky notions of a party of super characters free from the vices that plague existence. :shrug: I do understand how people get discouraged but change has to come from within, us and the system.

[mikem12]

The difference is that 40% of the support for Republicans is based on their supposed support for "moral values". It's one thing stuffing money in the freezer, it's quite another when a prominent Republican - Foley - is a pedophile. Even worse, when so many fellow Repbulicans ignored or possibly even hid the fact. Therefore exposing more pages to abuse - now that is pathetic.

 

 

 

what was that Dems name?? Frank I think, got caught with his pants down with a page or intern. The Dem only wanted to censure him, though. What BS.

[methos]

forget the democans or the republicrats, the same BS comes from either party. Both are killing the American middle class. People need to wake up to the fact that there are other qualified canidates to vote for. constitution party/ libertarian party

Tired of Corruption? Give Libertarians a Chance!

 

With new political scandal twists surfacing daily, the Libertarian Party offers a solution

(Washington, D.C.) During a recent candidate debate in Connecticut's 4th Congressional District, Republican incumbent Representative Chris Shays and Democratic challenger Diane Farrell spent considerable time going arguing with each other about how each major political party has reacted to allegations of scandal in the opposition party.

 

 

 

"There have unfortunately been plenty of Democrats and plenty of Republican members of Congress that have been involved in scandals," Libertarian Phil Maymin quipped during the televised debate. He concluded, "There has not been a single Libertarian congressman involved in any [final syllable(s) not intelligible due to loud applause from audience]."

 

 

I was able to catch most of that debate; however, I was not very impressed with Phil Maymim. I was much more impressed with the Green Party candidate, whose name escapes me. He was a little rough around the edges, due to a lack of hygiene and proper dress, but he was well spoken on some of the issues.

 

I have to agree with Bold , the only reason in that they are not corrupt is they don't have power. What is that quote - "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely". The people in office are not the problem; it is the apathetic and ignorant electorate. I guess that is why many prominent legislators tend to focus on education. Maybe this generation is screwed, but there is always hope for the next?

[sprinter]

LOL- Three words- SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICT- We have a two party system that that does not allow power sharing. No third party has ever replaced(morphed but not replaced) a major party. Libertarians are not career politicians due to the fact that hey don't win, which by the way is why they don't get into trouble. No power-no corruption. Scandal is part of the process because people are part of the process. Deal with it, sink your teeth in and do it till you die, but don't delude yourself with pie in the sky notions of a party of super characters free from the vices that plague existence. :shrug: I do understand how people get discouraged but change has to come from within, us and the system.

 

The career politicians are causing the trouble. Big corporations are funding them and they don't give a crap about the people who they are supposed to represent. Term limits need to be set. Average people need to be elected. Stop electing the elitist who can trace their bloodline back to the royalty in Europe.

[mikem12]

The career politicians are causing the trouble. Big corporations are funding them and they don't give a crap about the people who they are supposed to represent. Term limits need to be set. Average people need to be elected. Stop electing the elitist who can trace their bloodline back to the royalty in Europe.

 

 

I do agree we think because they label themselves as Dem/Rep that theyare going to do what is right for us and the country. I also agree with term limits, once they get in it is damn hard to get them out.

 

Does any one remember when the last time there was a politician, on either side, who wasn't a millionaire before the got elected? I know there were many afterward.

 

Mike

[udontkno]

I think it is time for a Labor Party-third party that looks out for the working people. The Republicans look out for big business and if that means screw the working people by allowing illegals to come in and undercut our wages, than thats ok, if that means negoitiate more bad trade deals so our labor can be exported, than thats ok, that is as long as the big companys can make their money. The Dem's are just as bad, they also want to allow workers visa's for illegals. But at least they are against poor trade deals. Dont buy in to the Rep's being moral, they dont give a shit about abortion, gay marriage or anything else. They say it to get the holy rollers to vote for them and then nothing changes except the holy rollers lose their job. You need to vote for your job and if these people dont want to change the trade agreements than dont vote for them. As far as morality, start with your family and take lessons from the Amish people!

[napfriend]

Even more reason in why it should not have happened again. I am only vaguely familiar with the scandal you mention, both a Repbulican and Democrat was involved, correct? However, Studds had a relationship with a male page, both later held a press conference, together, to say they were both adults. He was not drugged or raped, but given the age, that is debatable and certainly, disgusting.

you got busted...stop trying to back-pedal! you should have all the facts before you come on here to sling mud....just keep drinking that UAW kool-aid

[dark270]

you got busted...stop trying to back-pedal! you should have all the facts before you come on here to sling mud....just keep drinking that UAW kool-aid

 

 

keep drinking that foley glass!

[MW72]

Has a 8 trillion $$ DEBT helped your kids and their kids??????????

By the time Bush leaves it will be $$9 TRILLION and growing.

Bush brags that in 5 years we will cut the Budget Debt in half to only $$200 Billion a year from $4 bills

WHEN CLINTON LEFT WE HAD 3 YEARS WITH NO BUDGET DEBT AND A $$236 BILLION SURPLUS

LETS SEE $$ A POSITIVE 236 BILLION OR A NEGATIVE $400 BILLION WHICH IS BETTER???

+236 - -400 = A DIFFERENCE OF 636 BILLION THANKS GOP FOR THE 4.2 TRILLION DEBT YOU ADDED ON IN 6 YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! JUST THINK IN 6 MORE YEARS WE COULD TOP $$$11 TRILLION YA THAT'S GREAT ECONOMICS

Harry will not run the Senate Hillary will.

The Fact is the GOP is going to loose power NOV.7 unless they don't count the votes like they did in FLORIDA NOV.00

If you look back at Clinton's speeches about the surplus, you will see that it was always a "projected" surplus. He also continued to push the time frame back for this "surplus" First it was 2006, then it was 2008-09, etc... There never was an actual surplus. Unfortunately, it was the Republicans who pushed Clinton to balance the budget in the 90's. Remember when they shut down the Government? If ever there was a surplus, that would be a date that is celebrated as a redletter date in history.

[boldandlame]

There never was an actual surplus. Unfortunately, it was the Republicans who pushed Clinton to balance the budget in the 90's. If ever there was a surplus, that would be a date that is celebrated as a redletter date in history.

Since you're wrong I assume you're buying. :beerchug: Does the Bozo costume come with the big red nose? If you paid separately you got ripped off.

The budget surplus existed from 2000-02' or so maybe through 03', no matter. The budget surplus came from more receipts than expenditures for that period. Look it up and try again. The projected surplus extended past his presidency and was probably more fiction than fact as it was partly based on stock market bubble. But what killed any responsible mgmt of the budget was the tax cuts and the war. And that shit you can blame on BushCo.

[Bluecon]

First thing is there was no major recession during the Reagan or Bush 1 years.

 

The balanced budget was forced on Clinton by Gingrich and the other Republicans. (this is why the budget was not balanced when Clinton had a Democrat Congress)

Clinton shut down the government to fight cutting the budget . Welfare reform was also from Gingrich and the Republicans.

Clinton pushed for National Health Care (and failed miserably) and was the backer of the Kyoto treaty. (where he also failed)

 

George Will tells the truth about the economy--

 

""Worst economy since Herbert Hoover," John Kerry said in 2004, while that year's growth (3.9 percent) was adding to America's gross domestic product the equivalent of the GDP of Taiwan (the 19th-largest economy). Nancy Pelosi vows that if Democrats capture Congress they will "jump-start our economy." A "jump-start " is administered to a stalled vehicle. But since the Bush tax cuts went into effect in 2003, the economy's growth rate (3.5 percent) has been better than the average for the 1980s (3.1) and 1990s (3.3). Today's unemployment rate (4.6 percent) is lower than the average for the 1990s (5.8) — lower, in fact, than the average for the past 40 years (6.0). Some stall.

 

 

Economic hypochondria, a derangement associated with affluence, is a byproduct of the welfare state: An entitlement mentality gives Americans a low pain threshold — witness their recurring hysteria about nominal rather than real gasoline prices — and a sense of being entitled to economic dynamism without the frictions and "creative destruction" that must accompany dynamism. Economic hypochondria is also bred by news media that consider the phrase "good news" an oxymoron, even as the U.S. economy, which has performed better than any other major industrial economy since 2001, drives the Dow to record highs."

 

"President Bush's tax cuts were supposed to cause a cataract of red ink. In fiscal 2006, however, federal revenue as a share of GDP was 18.4 percent, slightly above the post-1962 average of 18.2. And the federal budget deficit was $247.7 billion, just 1.9 percent of the $13.1 trillion GDP. That is below the average for the 1970s (2.1), 1980s (3.0) and 1990s (2.2)."

 

 

 

 

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/will101906.php3

[fmccap]

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Inves...Inevitable.aspx

 

Sadly, the same can be said for Americans. The use-your-house-as-an-ATM phenomenon is exactly why the economy recovered in the wake of the last stock bubble. I don't think there's any reason to believe that Americans won't find themselves in a similar predicament to what some of the Aussies are experiencing right now. But that's not what the market thinks at the moment -- and therein lies the disconnect that I have been discussing for some time.

[dark270]

First thing is there was no major recession during the Reagan or Bush 1 years.

 

The balanced budget was forced on Clinton by Gingrich and the other Republicans. (this is why the budget was not balanced when Clinton had a Democrat Congress)

Clinton shut down the government to fight cutting the budget . Welfare reform was also from Gingrich and the Republicans.

Clinton pushed for National Health Care (and failed miserably) and was the backer of the Kyoto treaty. (where he also failed)

 

George Will tells the truth about the economy--

 

""Worst economy since Herbert Hoover," John Kerry said in 2004, while that year's growth (3.9 percent) was adding to America's gross domestic product the equivalent of the GDP of Taiwan (the 19th-largest economy). Nancy Pelosi vows that if Democrats capture Congress they will "jump-start our economy." A "jump-start " is administered to a stalled vehicle. But since the Bush tax cuts went into effect in 2003, the economy's growth rate (3.5 percent) has been better than the average for the 1980s (3.1) and 1990s (3.3). Today's unemployment rate (4.6 percent) is lower than the average for the 1990s (5.8) — lower, in fact, than the average for the past 40 years (6.0). Some stall.

Economic hypochondria, a derangement associated with affluence, is a byproduct of the welfare state: An entitlement mentality gives Americans a low pain threshold — witness their recurring hysteria about nominal rather than real gasoline prices — and a sense of being entitled to economic dynamism without the frictions and "creative destruction" that must accompany dynamism. Economic hypochondria is also bred by news media that consider the phrase "good news" an oxymoron, even as the U.S. economy, which has performed better than any other major industrial economy since 2001, drives the Dow to record highs."

 

"President Bush's tax cuts were supposed to cause a cataract of red ink. In fiscal 2006, however, federal revenue as a share of GDP was 18.4 percent, slightly above the post-1962 average of 18.2. And the federal budget deficit was $247.7 billion, just 1.9 percent of the $13.1 trillion GDP. That is below the average for the 1970s (2.1), 1980s (3.0) and 1990s (2.2)."

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/will101906.php3

 

 

 

tell that to the workers that got laid off in the early eighties.......moron!

[boldandlame]

First thing is there was no major recession during the Reagan or Bush 1 years.

From 1/Q 87-3/Q 90 real gdp was down by 6%. That's called recession, period. What's next? Oh yeah, here's more of your bullshit-

Clinton pushed for National Health Care (and failed miserably) and was the backer of the Kyoto treaty. (where he also failed)

And now there 4 million more Americans w/out healthcare. Yea BushCo! :cheerleader:

But since the Bush tax cuts went into effect in 2003, the economy's growth rate (3.5 percent) has been better than the average for the 1980s (3.1) and 1990s (3.3).

Too bad that has'nt trickeled down to working folks. Nice Republican bankrupsty rates! But at least we can say the stock market is up. Yea BushCo!

Today's unemployment rate (4.6 percent) is lower than the average for the 1990s (5.8)

This does not reflect what is actually going on due to the fact that workers don't get counted after they stop drawing unemployment. They do howver get counted in other ways, like poverty rates. Which, as you can see, goes up when Republicans are in office. Wy to go BushCo! :happy feet:

And the federal budget deficit was $247.7 billion, just 1.9 percent of the $13.1 trillion GDP.

If the deficit is huge (except) as a % of GDP it does not matter because it is furhter compounding the debt probelm. The only reason I brought up the deficit is because some other idiot(not you that time) posted that there was never a surplus. Why would you point to a gdp/deficit ratio when you must acknowledge that it is contributing to a debt we are gonna choke ourselves out on? :titanic:

[Bluecon]

From 1/Q 87-3/Q 90 real gdp was down by 6%. That's called recession, period. What's next? Oh yeah, here's more of your bullshit-

Recession from 87 to 90?

Just baloney. Give me something to back that up.

I have know time to argue economics with a person with no factual knowledge of the subject.

Edited October 24, 2006 by Bluecon

[Trimdingman]

I do not agree with limited terms for elected government office; just as long as elections are held often. That goes against Democracy. The people should be allowed to elect whomever they want, and anyone who is born here should have the right to run. We have that in Canada, and have had no problems with it. Trudeau lasted a long time, but we finally threw the bum out. (actually he quit before the shit hit the fan and let Turner, his nemises, take the hit. I know what you Liberals are going to say: Mulroney did the same thing to Kim Campbell, Jean Chretien did it to Paul Martin). Maybe we should allow them to stay in power long enough for everyone to see how incompetant, or competant that they are. If Clinton had served a third term, I doubt that he would have lasted the whole four years. The whole thing would have played out. Instead what you got was an abbreviated version. We elect them, or kick them out. What can be simpler than that? Why do you Americans need to have a babysitter?

Edited October 24, 2006 by Trimdingman

[partsisparts]

Instead of all this arguing ask yourselves a question.

Am I better off now or during the Clinton presidency?

It's that simple.

[Trimdingman]

Instead of all this arguing ask yourselves a question.

Am I better off now or during the Clinton presidency?

It's that simple.

 

 

Clinton didn't have to deal with 9/11. If he had properly responded to the first attack on the WTC, maybe 9/11 would not have happened. What Ford is doing now, has nothing to do with which government is in power. It is NOT that simple. Some people are better off, some are worse off, some are about the same. On average, people are better off. The prosperity enjoyed during the Clinton years was not because of him, but in spite of him. He rode the coattails of the two previous administrations.

 

[ For the politically uninformed, they were Ronald Reagan, Republican, the best man who ever lived, and the first president not to die while in office in over 100 years who was elected in a year ending in a 0; who told his wife, Nancy, after being wounded in an assassination attempt in 1981, "I forgot to duck" I loved that man. He served from 1980-1988; and his VP, George Bush Sr., who served from 1988-2002.]

 

Reagan returned America to its destiny.

Edited October 24, 2006 by Trimdingman