John Kerry is such a pussy.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

the supreme court did not "appoint Bush" to his first term. They made Florida abide by the laws of Florida that were in place at the time of the election.

EX-fucking-ACTLY.

Florida had very specific legal requirements regarding deadlines for recounts. The Florida Supreme Court -- overwhelmingly Democrat, I would add -- extended the deadlines for recounts (trying desperately to give Dems a chance to materialize Gore votes) with no basis in the Florida law. The U.S. Supreme Court simply said, "Prove where Florida elections law says you can extend this state law recount deadline the way you did. And they couldn't.

Quote

The accusations that cops kept black voters away from the polls, etc. were never proved. Not one person was found credible on those accusations.

True that. And it's funny, the heavily black areas tend to be heavily Democratic, and so if claims are made that the voting process in those areas hassled blacks, then it was Democrat politicos doing it.

Quote

Several liberal and conservative media organizations counted the Florida votes and in all, Bush came out the clear winner anyway.

Holy shit, yes. As someone living in the center of Palm Beach County at the time, as now, I can tell you that they tried desperately to find a way to count the votes so as to give Gore the edge, and they could not. Every day, I read three newspapers: the Palm Beach Post, the Miami Herald, and the Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel. They are all known for a liberal editorial bias. They all tried to recount in favor of Gore. They all could not manage it.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Ron 10]

Quote

You actually think that Clinton handed over a bad economy? That's the most absurd thing I have heard in years. He handed over a Surplus in the Treasury.

Read some. We were entering a recession. Then 9/11 happened.

A recession is a negative trend in an economy.

The largest attack on US soil followed 9 mths after Bush took office. Do you think that should help the economy?

You seem to not have been reading the papers, or watching the market 5 years ago.

Quote

I am much worse off today than I was when Clinton was in office.

Personal observations do not mean anything. I am much better off than when Clinton was in office. (I make twice what I did back then).

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

Not to mention the fact that the economy was going into a recession due to the .com bubble bursting, that DID occur under Clinton's watch.

You cannot blame Clinton for the .com bubble burst. PLEASE. What was he supposed to do? Tell VC firms not to throw money at any business plan that walked in with a '.com' at the end of the company name. Or tell investors not to pay $300+ a share for Broadcom when it was worth maybe $20 a share. The POTUS is not responsible for how the makets perform, he can 'influence' but he cannot wave a hand and have the S&P500 shoot up a few hundred points or come crashing down. Also the economy is cyclical, what goes up most come down.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Also the economy is cyclical, what goes up most come down.

With that recognized, why can't we agree that even IF the economy turned to shit under Bush, that it's just the luck of the draw and any booming economy will have to swing down sometime.

To the comment that under Clinton we had a "treasury SURPLUS" -- WHAT A LOAD OF SHIT.

First of all, I think you are thinking of a BUDGET surplus. Our country has carried a multi-trillion dollar national DEBT for decades. Supposedly, under Clinton, we had a BUDGET surplus, which meant that the government expected to take in more money than it had plans to spend.

That is not even in the same universe as getting rid of the fiscal debt of the government. That was always there. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Besides which, the farcical "budget surplus" under Clinton was fiscal chicanery at its most cynical.

I read in a newspaper article that when figuring the "money IN" column, Clinton's administration counted the proceeds of sales of lands owned by the federal government even though there were no buyers for this land. One example, if I recall correctly, was Governor's Island in NYC, the alleged $5 billion market value of which Clinton essentially included in the total money that the government had that year.

That's rather like owning a rare comic book that should be worth $25,000 and although not a single person is interested in buying it from you, you pretend that you have $25,000 that you could spend at any time because you own it.

Clinton's "surpluses" were a farce.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Casurf1978 0]

Quote

First of all, I think you are thinking of a BUDGET surplus.

Not really. Not once did I mention budget in my post. I'm talking specifically on Presidential influence on the financial markets. Someone mentioned the dot com bubble burst and it happening during Clinton's Presidancy. Was it Clintons fault? Hardly. Even before Bush v Gore 2000 the economy was already showing signs of a slowing down and whomever won that election was going to deal with an economy that was heading south.

[crwtom 0]

Quote

Then 9/11 happened..

The myth that 9/11 is directly resposible for the recession has
practically no basis. You look at SP500 or other indicators you
see a steady downslope right before 9/11, a sharp downward
spike fo a few dyas and an almost immediate bounce back to the
smae level after 9/11 than before (in fact even a little higher).
Some time after that the down slope fcontinues after 9/11as you
would have projected it from its behaviour before.

The only immediate reason that 9/11 could have been
economically devastating was that the data of incompleted
transactions that was hanging in the computers would have
been detroyed in the attacks. This is what cause the intiial
sharp downwards (togther with the fear of continued further
attacks). When people managed to back-up all the data and
it became clear that there were no immeduiate further attacks
folowing everything went basically back to normal on the
trading side. No assets that were in size large enough to have
a significantimpact on the national economy were detroyed in
the attacks.

The continued decline before and right after 9/11 depended
on other factors - overexpansion that was not compensated for
in either admisnitration, corporate mistrust after the scandals
without any "trustrestoring" regulatory measures by the sdmins,
etc.

The deline hits its low point fall 2002 and then stay there and
flat-lines for over a year. The casue for that time wise pretty
obvious - the uncertainties and enormous costs of the iraq war,
including the run-up when people were uncertin when if and how
it'll come down, the war itself and the long periods of instabilty
and uncertain and expanding costs after that.

Whatever your philosophy on tax breaks, to introduce a major
tax break at the beginning of such a period is nothing
short of idiotic. Tax breaks (without compesation by massive
cuts in govt spending - which never happened here) is basically
the govt gambling with money, putting it into the econoy hoping
the increase of volume of the economy will by quantity bring
much of the spent money back in.

If you know you're at the beginning of a time in which an
economic turn-around is nealy impossible b/c of wars and such
you're like the roulette player who stubbornly bets on a color
that has been glued shut with a chewing gum just - becuas it
seemed to work the last time. All the money bet during the time
the color is shut down is lost for sure.

And here you have your reason for a larger part of the
natioanl deficit -sheer stupidity and stubborness in the face of
much avise to the contrary. Conseuqneces? Some might say
the flush-out of the dollar is good for export - but eventually
the may lead to the euro taking over as the major oil/gas
currency.

Cheers, T

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[Ron 10]

Quote

The myth that 9/11 is directly resposible for the recession has
practically no basis

I also never said that.

I said we were in a recession in Clintons last year and that was handed over to Bush.

Then I said 9/11 happened.

If you think 9/11 didn't have any influence on the economy, you are insane.

People and companies drew back on plans to invest.

I never said 9/11 cause the recession....We were already in a recession.

I said 9/11 didn't help. Also two wars fronts don't help.

You basicly provide more proof on my point that Bush was handed an economy in recession.

We disagree on the influence of the 9/11 attack.

I can't see how anyone can't see how consumer confidence was shaken.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[rehmwa 2]

1) More arsenic in the water


That's another example of political misdirection. Both sides do it.
The Arsenic requirements were 'tightened up' under one of the previous admins, I think Clinton's watch. Fully approved and accepted. 1st change.

Just prior to leaving office, the Clinton admin also approved another unreasonable tightening again of the requirements which weren't ever implemented. 2nd change - last minute, extremely prohibitive and likely unenforceable.

The Bush admin only cancelled the 2nd shift, not the first. So under Bush, the requirements for arsenic are actually less than historical. So saying there is more arsenic in the water is a lie. There would actually be less due to the 1st rule change. Provided the 1st change is followed.

most points of argument like this between candidates follows this pattern.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[EBSB52 0]

Quote

1) More arsenic in the water



The Arsenic requirements were 'tightened up' under one of the previous admins, I think Clinton's watch. Fully approved and accepted. 1st change.

"That's another example of political misdirection. Both sides do it."

Show me where the Dems do this with some kind of similar example that matters, not some wag the the dog BS.

"Just prior to leaving office, the Clinton admin also approved another unreasonable tightening again of the requirements which weren't ever implemented. "

So you're saying that allowing more arsenic in the water is unreasonable...... okeedokee. Let's talk the Ergonomics Bill that Clinton and OSHA started, Bush axed as the first thing he did when he entered office. Also a bad (unreasonable) thing to do, right? I mean, paving a fast-track means for the working people that get carpel tunnel to get medical attention is unreasonable for corporate profits.

"2nd change - last minute, extremely prohibitive and likely unenforceable."

Besides, with the right flavor coolaid arsenic actually tastes good.

"The Bush admin only cancelled the 2nd shift, not the first. So under Bush, the requirements for arsenic are actually less than historical. So saying there is more arsenic in the water is a lie. "

No, the failure to allow the Clinton-initiated effort did increase the amount of arsenic in the water by not following the previous president's legislation to lower it.

That's like saying you have $1,000 dollars in the bank, you have another thousand to deposit, but are robbed on the way to the bank. Subsequently, you never really lost that 2nd thousand because it was never deposited. That...... is dangerous thinking.

"There would actually be less due to the 1st rule change. Provided the 1st change is followed."

Let's go back before mass industrialization and give Bush credit for that level also. This vicarious credit, acting as if Bush is to credited for Clinton's good deed of both events, is nuts. Let's be more direct, instead of this, "political misdirection" as you call it, and quit misdirecting credit/blame. Look, Clinton lowered it twice, Bush repealed the last one - that simple.

"most points of argument like this between candidates follows this pattern."

Right, hiding and misdiecting the negative deeds, claiming victory for doing things that aren't the doing of said politician. Nice job of you misdirecting the arsenic issue to that of - just politicians being politicians....

How 'bout the rest of that large list of Bush goodies I gave you?

[rehmwa 2]

Read it again and stop shouting.

You read each paragraph so completely wrong that I don't even know where to start.

The short is, the current arsenic laws are tighter than ever before - so saying that this admin raised the levels is childish and just feeds dem talking points - it's ploy. That means in the direction of goodness for the simple minded.

The law that the dems complain about is one that was never cut in in the first place and was submitted on the way out purely as bait for this type of accusation (i.e., a setup) and is only good as a political ploy or in inane threads like this bit.

as far as the rest of your list, I think this one has enraged you enough for now. (BTW, I think I did credit Clinton with the first change despite your obvious bias.)

I know it's early in the morning, but you really need a nap. Although it is fun, I have a feeling it won't be soon, so I'm back to work.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[EBSB52 0]

Quote

(BTW, I think I did credit Clinton with the first change despite your obvious bias.)

I know it's early in the morning, but you really need a nap. Although it is fun, I have a feeling it won't be soon, so I'm back to work.

"Read it again ..."

Why, it wasn't that good the first time.

"...and stop shouting."

Are you talking to me or the voices in your head?

"You read each paragraph so completely wrong that I don't even know where to start."

But you refuse to substantively define your meanings, just offer up insult.

"The short is, the current arsenic laws are tighter than ever before - so saying that this admin raised the levels is childish and just feeds dem talking points - it's ploy."

Right, as a result of Clinton, and they would be more strict but for Bush.

"That means in the direction of goodness for the simple minded."

Is that your little voice telling you that?

"The law that the dems complain about is one that was never cut in in the first place and was submitted on the way out purely as bait for this type of accusation (i.e., a setup) and is only good as a political ploy or in inane threads like this bit."

Just like the Ergonomics Bill that OSHA and Clinton started, Bush killed. Ya, just a bunch of fodder..... (rollseyes)

"as far as the rest of your list, I think this one has enraged you enough for now. "

I'm not enraged. I'm not even upset. How aboutthese from the list - we'll see how you justify these:

3. Record budget deficit
must be the fault of Congress..... oh wait, Bush has control of all of the gov incl the US Sup Ct... oops

4. Most job losses since Hoover, then refused to extend unemp beneifts
must be 9/11.... I wonder how importing jobs overseas helped this out? Bush said that it is a good thing to export jobs, and that was in the middle of an attempted recovery after 9/11.... man has his priorities.

5. First time the US blatantly refused the UN, dissassociating us from them.
Real smart to tell the UN to screw themselves

6. Most secretive administration ever
public addresses and open books are way overrated

7. Entered a war without probable cause, and lied about all of it with the notion of WMD's
well, he did. No pc, lied and then told us some crap about the Iraqis being better off now than before - like he cares about the Iraqi people.

8. Allows Mexican truck on the road even without safety, smog, or insurance requirements of the US truckers
is this a good thing too?

9. Gave tax benefits to corporations that sent jobs overseas, and has been quoted as saying it's a good thing to outsource jobs.
as cited above....welll????

10. Patriot Act - please, let me hear you defend it.
include the TSA and the ability of them to yank airmen's licenses w/o cause, sneek and peek searches and all the fun.

11. Largest stock market drop since Hoover
I'm sure all of Clinton's fault (rollseyes)

12. massive tax cuts for rich
It's a good thing, right?

13. State budget shortfalls lead to college tuition increases
college isn't for the poor, right?

14. First criminal to enter office & first pres with military history to not voluntarily make his record public record
this is in case you give me some, 'descency back into the White House' bull

Tell ya what, let's be fair - post a list of all the great things he's done.