U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-10-2010, 06:20 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,469 posts, read 20,112,307 times
Reputation: 8384

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Of course it would not have been a thing of the past, but Afghanistan would have been more stable than it is today if we continued to focus on it.

We did not go into Iraq because it is where the nerve gas was thought to be, we went to Iraq because the Bush administration wanted to go to war with Iraq, and started making to focus in on Iraq prior to 9/11.

We were already acting to prevent more Americans from being killed by going after those who attacked us and those with the means of attacking us. We then decided to take the fight AWAY from those we needed to act agains,t those who were our gravest threats to focus on an area that wasn't, getting more than 4,000 Americans killed in the process and not paying for it.


I included the videos in the hopes people would watch them and not waste everyone's time with more regurgitated leftist propaganda.


YouTube - Democrats Hypocrisy Over The Iraq War


You can't continue to try to rewrite history in the age of youtube.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-10-2010, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
19,030 posts, read 15,489,709 times
Reputation: 3957
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Clinton inhertied a recovery and Bush inherited a recession.
Bush did not inherit job loss.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2010, 06:42 PM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
19,872 posts, read 22,790,353 times
Reputation: 7186
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Clinton inhertied a recovery and Bush inherited a recession.
In your fevered imagination maybe.
Shall we look at REALITY?

Here's the monthly unemployment rate numbers:

The United States Unemployment Rate (http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp - broken link)

Bush inherited an economy with unemployment at 4.2% - some recession eh? Not only that, but it REMAINED below 5% until he had been in office for EIGHT MONTHS.
There WAS a recession in 2001, but it didn't BEGIN until MARCH - 2 months after Bush was in office. GDP was STILL POSITIVE - not stellar mind you, but STILL POSITIVE until the 3Q/01 (FIVE MONTHS after Bush was sworn in) - and as I said, unemployment remained very very low for 6 months beyond that.

Early 2000′s Recession | RECESSION.ORG
U.S. GDP shrinks in 3Q - Oct. 31, 2001

So, by virtually ANY standard - unemployment OR GDP - Bush did NOT inherit a RECESSION. That's outright lie.

Ken
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2010, 06:53 PM
 
429 posts, read 466,717 times
Reputation: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
The stimulus, all that borrowed money, was spent exactly as it was intended. It lined the pockets of BO's supporters and chummed the corporate donor waters. The message is unmistakable. Support the Democratic Party and their will be plenty of this borrowed bailout/stimulus money to come. Its purpose was to buy the next election and in the years to come our kids will get the bill.
This is why we need to take the corporate lobbyist puppeteers out of DC!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2010, 07:45 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,469 posts, read 20,112,307 times
Reputation: 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
In your fevered imagination maybe.
Shall we look at REALITY?

Here's the monthly unemployment rate numbers:

The United States Unemployment Rate (http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp - broken link)

Bush inherited an economy with unemployment at 4.2% - some recession eh? Not only that, but it REMAINED below 5% until he had been in office for EIGHT MONTHS.
There WAS a recession in 2001, but it didn't BEGIN until MARCH - 2 months after Bush was in office. GDP was STILL POSITIVE - not stellar mind you, but STILL POSITIVE until the 3Q/01 (FIVE MONTHS after Bush was sworn in) - and as I said, unemployment remained very very low for 6 months beyond that.

Early 2000′s Recession | RECESSION.ORG
U.S. GDP shrinks in 3Q - Oct. 31, 2001

So, by virtually ANY standard - unemployment OR GDP - Bush did NOT inherit a RECESSION. That's outright lie.

Ken


Sorry, my bad...

Clinton inherited and economy on the rebound. Bush inherited an economy on the decline.

Better that way?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2010, 07:50 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,509,868 times
Reputation: 9363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Bush did not inherit job loss.....
You obviously have access to data that the federal government doesnt have. Do you want to share it with us, or should we just take your word over the governments?
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/graphics/LNS14000000_217770_1276221315370.gif (broken link)
The recession Bush inherited was far greater than many other recessions in the past..
http://timecuriouscapitalist.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/six_recessions.gif?w=597&h=372 (broken link)
Btw, one other thing Bush inherited was a negative growth in GDP adjusted for inflation
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2010, 07:51 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,469 posts, read 20,112,307 times
Reputation: 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorCal77 View Post
This is why we need to take the corporate lobbyist puppeteers out of DC!


In that case I'll see you at the Tea Party.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2010, 07:59 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,509,868 times
Reputation: 9363
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
Bush inherited an economy with unemployment at 4.2% - some recession eh? Not only that, but it REMAINED below 5% until he had been in office for EIGHT MONTHS.
You mean around the time of 911? How convenient
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
There WAS a recession in 2001, but it didn't BEGIN until MARCH - 2 months after Bush was in office. GDP was STILL POSITIVE - not stellar mind you, but STILL POSITIVE until the 3Q/01 (FIVE MONTHS after Bush was sworn in) - and as I said, unemployment remained very very low for 6 months beyond that.
The BLS says your wrong.. You see the unemployment rate starting to go up 01/01? Thats not 3Q.. http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/graphics/LNS14000000_217770_1276221315370.gif (broken link)
BTW, Since when do you blame the president for the actions which take place during their first year in office? Arent you one of the ones who blame Bush for everything going on in Washington, still today? Now that its Bush, you want to give him the blame for actions which took place before he was sworn in..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2010, 08:29 PM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
19,872 posts, read 22,790,353 times
Reputation: 7186
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Sorry, my bad...

Clinton inherited and economy on the rebound. Bush inherited an economy on the decline.

Better that way?
Not really.
It's true as far as it goes, but it's STILL extremely misleading.
Clinton DID inherit an economy on the rebound - but unemployment WAS still pretty darned high when he came into office (7.3%) and ALL THROUGH his Presidency that unemployment rate dropped and dropped and dropped for the FULL 8 YEARS with only an accasional very slight increase before dropping again, so that in his final full month in office he handed Bush an economy with an incredible 3.9% unemployment rate - the lowest level since 1969!!!!!!
So, while Bush may have inherited an economy that was "on the decline" it was "on the decline" from an incredibly good position. Even the GDP numbers - while definitely on the weak side - were NOTHING like the gawd-awful GDP numbers GW left behind.

The fact is, the position GW inherited was a WHOLE LOT better than the one he left behind - by ANY STANDARD. In truth he inherited a pretty darned healthy economy and handed off a complete wreck. This is true whether you are looking at GDP, unemployment, stock prices, the deficit situation - pretty much WHATEVER. It was ALL wrecked by the time he left office. It was truly a monumental achievement of national destruction.

Ken

Last edited by LordBalfor; 06-10-2010 at 08:39 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2010, 08:38 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,509,868 times
Reputation: 9363
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordBalfor View Post
Even the GDP numbers - while definitely on the weak side - were NOTHING like the gawd-awful GDP numbers GW left behind.
You mean these GDP numbers?

They slid the whole time Clinton was in office until the point that Real GDP was lower than the nominal GDP for the first time since who knows when...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top