U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
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 11-10-2006, 06:52 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
5,298 posts, read 5,681,624 times
Reputation: 8131

Advertisements

Quote:
All is good or better than when the dems were in? I have to disagree. I'm a middle class income person and when Clinton was in I was able to actually buy a house! After Bush, my real income has declined, even though I have been getting regular raises at work. My income, however, has not nearly kept up with the increasing cost of food, fuel, utilities, etc. So I am worse off now after six years of republican rule. I could NEVER buy a house now!

Shall we ignore the national debt? Clinton got it down to practically nothing. Only took six years for Bush to spend trillions. And don't bother with 'Katrina' and 'Iraq' being the culprits of all that spending. Most of it was mismanagement of our tax dollars and as far as I am concerned, outright looting of the treasury by select politicians and corporations. Iraqi oil was going to pay for the war, remember? Yeah, right. And many Katrina victims are still homeless!
I agree totally,it is time for a change and the time is now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-10-2006, 03:18 PM
 
Location: Navarre, Florida
327 posts, read 174,196 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by mystree66 View Post
I agree totally,it is time for a change and the time is now.
Maybe if you would save a little, you might be able to buy a house...Clinton did a decent job with the economy, but he also didn't have 9-11 or Katrina to deal with within a few years of each other...unless you are clueless, you MUST take that into consideration. There were some mistakes made by EVERYONE, but this country still has a great economy...I'm just saying it could have been a lot worse. Some Katrina victims cannot GO BACK to their homes (that's state and local government, my friend) if that's what you mean by "homeless".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2006, 04:44 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
12,775 posts, read 7,410,497 times
Reputation: 13043
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitney View Post
Good point about the flood insurance....same thing happens on the coast of NC. Federal government has to help out. Get real folks, build on the sand at waters edge and you just might have a problem....live in a basin and you might get under water!
I thought it was a federal mandate that people who buy houses in floodplains MUST have flood insurance? That's the way it is here in New Jersey, and probably around the country. I think the problems are with the insurance companies; they keep insisting that the damage was caused by high WINDS, not water! Unbelievable
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2006, 04:50 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
12,775 posts, read 7,410,497 times
Reputation: 13043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimbercuddles View Post
Maybe if you would save a little, you might be able to buy a house...Clinton did a decent job with the economy, but he also didn't have 9-11 or Katrina to deal with within a few years of each other...unless you are clueless, you MUST take that into consideration. There were some mistakes made by EVERYONE, but this country still has a great economy...I'm just saying it could have been a lot worse. Some Katrina victims cannot GO BACK to their homes (that's state and local government, my friend) if that's what you mean by "homeless".
I heard that there was a study done of the levees and it was decided to revamp them to hold up to a hurricane of Katrina's force and there were million of dollars set aside for that, but the work was never done because the Iraqi war started, so SOMEBODY made the decision not to do the work and instead the money went toward the war.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2006, 04:54 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
12,775 posts, read 7,410,497 times
Reputation: 13043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimbercuddles View Post
Maybe if you would save a little, you might be able to buy a house...Clinton did a decent job with the economy, but he also didn't have 9-11 or Katrina to deal with within a few years of each other...unless you are clueless, you MUST take that into consideration. There were some mistakes made by EVERYONE, but this country still has a great economy...I'm just saying it could have been a lot worse. Some Katrina victims cannot GO BACK to their homes (that's state and local government, my friend) if that's what you mean by "homeless".
Save a little...therein lies the problem. Wages are not keeping up with rising costs for necessities for the middle class. Sure, CEOs are doing great! But who cares about them? This country is 90% lower and middle class, and it is getting harder and harder to 'move up the ladder'. Maybe you personally are well off, but you are in the minority, my friend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2006, 04:55 PM
 
9,715 posts, read 12,970,628 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimbercuddles View Post
Maybe if you would save a little, you might be able to buy a house...Clinton did a decent job with the economy, but he also didn't have 9-11 or Katrina to deal with within a few years of each other...unless you are clueless, you MUST take that into consideration.
Clinton didn't have Katrina, he had Andrew. He didn't get 9/11 because he was busy chasing down Osama Bin Laden (remember the "aspirin factory bombing" that the Republicans went nutty about?) He got a smaller World Trade Center bombing. If anything, the Clinton administration was on top of the terrorism threat -- but the Bush administration decided it wasn't that important when they came into office. (This has been repeated in Congressional testimony over and over again.)

The Bush administration didn't have time to go after Osama because they were too busy trying to figure out how they could attack Iraq. Eventually, by manipulating information, they were able to get everyone behind them in this "War on Iraq" by relabeling it "The War on Terror" -- but people in the USA are finally seeing that the basis behind this war was a lie. (It appears the French, Germans, Chinese and Russians knew this from the start, since none of them wanted to get involved and actively fought us entering into Iraq.)

Now we have Iran and North Korea with WMD and we are fighting in a country that never had them. What a smart bunch of people we elected 6 years ago! (I'm putting blame on both sides since most of the Dems wouldn't say "I'm against the War.")

Anyway, I'm sure these issues will be debated for years into the future... Our government is so great! They freely provide us with fodder for debate for YEARS!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2006, 05:06 PM
 
9,715 posts, read 12,970,628 times
Reputation: 3315
You know, if I had to state what I think is the biggest difference between Clinton and GWB, I'd have to say it is this:

Clinton genuinely cared about the people of this country; Bush genuinely cares about the corporate interests in this country, particularly ones with ties to Texas and energy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2006, 02:28 AM
 
Location: Bothell, Washington
454 posts, read 640,399 times
Reputation: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50 View Post
Clinton didn't get 9/11 because he was busy chasing down Osama Bin Laden (remember the "aspirin factory bombing" that the Republicans went nutty about?) He got a smaller World Trade Center bombing. If anything, the Clinton administration was on top of the terrorism threat --

The Bush administration didn't have time to go after Osama because they were too busy trying to figure out how they could attack Iraq. Eventually, by manipulating information, they were able to get everyone behind them in this "War on Iraq" by relabeling it "The War on Terror"

Now we have Iran and North Korea with WMD and we are fighting in a country that never had them.

Anyway, I'm sure these issues will be debated for years into the future... Our government is so great! They freely provide us with fodder for debate for YEARS!
In Clintons own words he admitted that the Sudan government has Bin Laden, they offered him to Clinton. He said that there was not "enough evidence" to hold him, so he "begged" the Saudi's to take Bin Laden off his (Clintons) hands. We had him. Clinton let him go. If that is your idea of Clinton "chasing down" Bin Laden, then you are 100% right! But at least you admit the tie between Bin Laden and Iraq... the factory he bombed was in Iraq, so according to your own words, Clinton connected Bin Laden to Iraq and bombed an aspirin factory... on the eave of Impeachment.

Please don't forget about our fighting men in Afganistan... remember, that was the war to go after Bin Laden and track him down. Some how that does not jive with the "Bush had no time to go after Bin Laden" idea though, so I must have been mistaken about the reason for that war...oil?

As far as North Korea, A certain someone sold nuclear technology to north korea for "nuclear energy", with the assurance that they would NEVER use it for a weapon. You will NEVER guess who did that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2006, 02:40 AM
 
9,715 posts, read 12,970,628 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by the dufferz View Post
Please don't forget about our fighting men in Afganistan... remember, that was the war to go after Bin Laden and track him down. Some how that does not jive with the "Bush had no time to go after Bin Laden" idea though, so I must have been mistaken about the reason for that war...oil?
You are 100% correct on this. I think probably 99.99% of the American people feel justified with the war in Afghanistan. The mistake was taking the war to Iraq on the mistaken premise that Saddam had WMD. There was a LOT of information then -- from the UN, from other countries, from our own CIA, etc. -- that Saddam had NO WMD but Cheney and Bush and all those talking heads kept insisting he did.

Bush had no interest in chasing Bin Laden prior to 9/11. Ask Richard Clarke and the rest of the leftover Clintonistas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2006, 04:14 AM
 
Location: Navarre, Florida
327 posts, read 174,196 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier View Post
Save a little...therein lies the problem. Wages are not keeping up with rising costs for necessities for the middle class. Sure, CEOs are doing great! But who cares about them? This country is 90% lower and middle class, and it is getting harder and harder to 'move up the ladder'. Maybe you personally are well off, but you are in the minority, my friend.
We are not wealthy by ANY means. We don't live on credit, for the most part...only emergencies...we have learned to do without a lot of the modern conveniences that most people deem NECESSARY. A person could go broke just LOOKING at all of the different electronic gadgets! We drive dependable, older cars and have a limit of eating out to once a week. Seriously, remember our ancestors who actually had to work and farm the land to feed their families? People just want to complain about how horrible the government is...check out North Korea if you think it is so bad. Sorry if I sound a little bitter, it's not directed towards you.
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.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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