Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-30-2011, 06:48 AM
 
5,756 posts, read 4,002,227 times
Reputation: 2308

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by california-jewel View Post
Your right on this one. Bill does not take much to figure out. Predictable he is, as the sunrise not so sure, sunset maybe?

Bill would not be opening up his trap, if he felt Obama did not need the help. Honestly i do not feel that Obama is sure about anything, except defeat, which he seems to not want any part thereof.

If Obama knew what the hek he was doing and truly had a great plan, Bill would not be stepping up the the plate.
Bill should keep his mouth shut and quit helping Obama because he should be pushing Hillary stock to the DIMOS to run in 2012.Then he'd be the First Gentleman in HIS-TO-RY and when Hillary is working on matters of State,really governing leading this nation for the people he can play in his old stomping grounds...maybe have a CIGAR....JMO
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-30-2011, 07:00 AM
 
1,461 posts, read 1,530,436 times
Reputation: 790
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Clinton bascially help statr mnay of the housif measures that lead to this recessio and mnay of the easy credit polcies.Reagan left him a huge amount of what he called peace dividiend when leaving office. Unlike the present presdient Reagan left office after taking over during a recessio and had great growth numbers when he left. He was so popualr that there was actually Democrats for Reagan. But even Clinton was smart enough tto warn on Obama that as he said "you can govern from the left" Obama should have listened to him as he learned that as governor his first term in Arkansas.Now Obamna sees hinslef overwhelm by dependent groups all wanting more of the pie they do not contribute to.
Hold on, wasn't Bush I, after Clinton? Fact is Clinton inherited a mess from Bush. Look at it by President - debt as a percentage of GDP. Reagan was the first President since before Roosevelt to see the national debt rise as a percentage of GDP. Under Reagan the national debt went up 20.6% (both terms combined); Bush I it went up 13%; Clinton it went down 9.7% (both terms combined); Bush 2 it went up 27.8%. Clinton also inherited a recession; he knows what he is speaking about. Source of stats is the CBO - Historical Data on the Federal Debt page.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2011, 07:04 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,879 posts, read 77,534,878 times
Reputation: 22753
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
We would not be where we are today, if Bill Clinton had not signed NAFTA or the 2000 China Trade Act.

That was the knife through the heart of America.
Yep. Handed our jobs over to China w/ that move.

If we were manufacturing ANYTHING . . . we wouldn't be in this fiscal mess. So how about when we are all taking a little stroll down memory lane, let's get the facts straight.

Bill Clinton started this roller coaster ride.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2011, 07:07 AM
 
Location: Texas State Fair
8,560 posts, read 11,221,957 times
Reputation: 4258
Bill Clinton Blames Republicans For Present Economic Woes

Thanx to the gawdz of mercy, Clinton can never again be President of the U.S. I'd be willing for Clinton to head the U.N. if it would leave the U.S. Yes, and take him with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2011, 07:08 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,548,114 times
Reputation: 27720
Again..the Dems had 2 years to get the US financial house in order and they did nothing but pass spending bills and even ignored the 2010 budget.

Are you all forgetting that ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2011, 07:14 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,879 posts, read 77,534,878 times
Reputation: 22753
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Again..the Dems had 2 years to get the US financial house in order and they did nothing but pass spending bills and even ignored the 2010 budget.

Are you all forgetting that ?
Actually, the DEMS should have submitted 3 budgets by this juncture in the road. Yet, nada and their fearless leaders spend all their time politically posturing and engaging in obstructionist tactics.

It is painfully obvious to me what is going on. The DEMs know that once things fall apart, interest rates will rise, and our T-bills will be yielding a higher interest rate.

Pension plans will then tick up w/ higher interest rates. Unions and gubment workers are the only folks who have a pension plan anymore, lol.

At the same time, when the average American sees interest on credit cards and mortgage loans go up, the DEMs can say - "All the GOP's fault."

It is simple politics - at a high cost to the average citizen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2011, 07:24 AM
 
24,434 posts, read 23,092,690 times
Reputation: 15033
I always said Clinton was smart enough to know that he wasn't smart enough to try tinker with the economy, foreign trade, nuclear treaties, etc. When he did try to he screwed up but he was generally smart enough to leave things go and let things take care of themselves and they did for the most part. He had enough distractions to keep himself occupied. I wish Bush and Obama had realized that they just didn't have the gray matter to institute grand policy changes, had they even been a little smarter they would have seen the need to make some drastic corrections in their plans. Oh, well.
Clinton was lucky, sure. He inherited record low oil prices thanks to Bush Sr. He was in the right time and the right place when the internet bubble expanded and got out just as it was rapidly deflating. His last 2 years in office were rocky and tarnished his image and things started going south. Yes, he did set the stage for some major future US failures. Globalization, banking deregulation, as stated by Fiddlehead, no domestic oil policy, some military fiascos( Somalia, The Balkans). But he let things alone enough and we were better off. Its when the President tries doing something we often get screwed. Bush and Obama are more than proof of that.
BUT, since Obama is only following Bush 43's playbook and the Clintons have far more influence and control over Obama than people want to admit, he has to take some blame for our current problems. Its still more proof that when the President does something, we get screwed. We also have to accept that regardless of party, the President gets his orders and follows them, and Bush, Obama, Clinton, have and will all do the same thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2011, 09:59 AM
 
3,045 posts, read 3,195,506 times
Reputation: 1307
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
I have to say... Bill Clinton sure does talk a lot... I don't know any past presidents that keep talking like they mean something after they are out of the office... does anyone know of any past president that talked that much after leaving the office?? So Bill Clinton blames Bush... now that nobody cares about Bush, he wants to blame the Republicans... how original... I hate rhetoric... it serves no other purpose then to make people STUPID... and there is plenty evidence of that in this thread... watching them cheer RHETORIC...
You hate rhetoric yet instead of actually attacking his arguments themselves, you just used rhetoric. Makes a ton of sense. How was it that you said rhetoric made people sound?

Quote:
Thanx to the gawdz of mercy, Clinton can never again be President of the U.S. I'd be willing for Clinton to head the U.N. if it would leave the U.S. Yes, and take him with it.
FYI, he had a higher approval rating on leaving office than Reagan. Perhaps someday you can put your child-like emotions away and debate like a grown up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2011, 10:11 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,156,622 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
Speaking to a group of liberal group activists in Washington, Clinton said, “Partly because the Republicans who control the House and have a lot of pull in the Senate have now decided, having quadrupled the debt in 12 years before I took office and doubled it after I left, that it’s all of a sudden the biggest problem in the world.”
So President Clinton supports the Tea Partiers then? Because thats the only possible conclusion, that Clinton thinks the deficits and debt is the problem and Obama is wrong for asking for the debt ceiling to be raised again.

Btw sick, if Clinton had balanced budgets and surpluses, why were they raising the debt ceiling at the very same time?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2011, 10:16 AM
 
29,407 posts, read 22,026,302 times
Reputation: 5455
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
We would not be where we are today, if Bill Clinton had not signed NAFTA or the 2000 China Trade Act.

That was the knife through the heart of America.
Thank you BentBow. I was reading along wondering if anybody would remember the bill he signed to allow our jobs to be outsourced all over the world. Then like a true dem turns around and blames the fiscal crisis on the other side and the lefty kooks eat it up like flies to poop. It's the same sad act played out over and over and democrats are too stupid to realize they're being played.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top