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.
Bush veto'd 12 bills in total, 4 of them were overridden.
Compare this to Clinton, who had 37, Bush Sr, who had 44, Reagan, 78, Carter 31, Ford, with 66, Nixon with 43... Shall I go on?
The bs about him using the veto power is just that.. non stop bs from the left who doesnt have a clue..
Well of course he didn't veto nearly as many bills. Congress was the same as his party more than the others. Point being that along with the slim majority and the filibuster use of the GOP didn't leave the Dems with any actual power in 07 and 08, Bush and the GOP still got everything they wanted
I know WHY the numbers went up, But that doesnt change the fact that we have ALWAYS counted unemployment percentages and that this administration (and some of you posters) now wants everyone to ignore it. Thats NOT how it works... You dont go and just change the parameters on what gets counted because the CEO of the company changes, and then proclaim everything is getting better. You would consider a CEO doing this "fraud".. but somehow you just excuse this though because its Obama..
he did not.. This is the total national debt for those years.. WHERE IS THE SURPLUS? He had a decrease in debt as a PERCENTAGE of GDP, but that doesnt equate to a surplus in real dollars..
I don't have time to look up the actual surplus figures because I'm about to head out for the day, but keep in mind we are always paying interest on past debt. That is why the debt in those years rose despite having an actual surplus.
No one is changing what data is being counted. The jobs data report has come from the BLS for 70 years and President's whether it be Obama, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc always talked about the jobs totals as well.
Point being that along with the slim majority and the filibuster use of the GOP didn't leave the Dems with any actual power in 07 and 08, Bush and the GOP still got everything they wanted
Actually, the Republicans no longer got everything they wanted in 2007-08. Keeping Bush and the Republicans locked up in a little box where they could no longer do such harm was one of the significant results of the Thumping of 2006.
Last edited by saganista; 05-08-2010 at 12:02 PM..
Bush still retained all the power, he got everything he wanted. The Dems majority in the Senate was minute. The GOP used the filibuster over and over again and Bush used the veto. Not to mention the problems we had that led to the crash were years in the making.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
Well of course he didn't veto nearly as many bills. Congress was the same as his party more than the others. Point being that along with the slim majority and the filibuster use of the GOP didn't leave the Dems with any actual power in 07 and 08, Bush and the GOP still got everything they wanted
Does this mean you are backing away from your claims of veto, and we can move onto the fillibuster claim?
Tell me what bills were fillibustered that would have had a positive effect on the unemployment?
Actually, the Republicans no longer got what they wnated in 2007-08. Keeping Bush and the Republicans locked up in a little box where they could no longer do such harm was one of the significant results of the Thumping of 2006.
Translation: Dont blame Republicans for the incompetence of Demcorats to do anything through the 2007-2008 crash.. Thanks for playing
I don't have time to look up the actual surplus figures because I'm about to head out for the day, but keep in mind we are always paying interest on past debt. That is why the debt in those years rose despite having an actual surplus.
No, that's not it. Interest on the debt is like utility bills on government-owned buildings. There are no special effects on the debt. The principal reason why NET debt numbers climbed even while debt paydowns were ongoing is that the surplus funds collected throughout the year by Social Security were invested (as they always are) in US Treasury securities. Yes, that means that a surplus can result in a debt increase just as deficits typically do. This is because the issuance of any new Treasury security causes the debt to rise. However, the Social Security holdings of public debt are part of what's called intragovernmental holdings. The rest is called debt held by the public. That's you, me, the governments of China and Japan, and so forth. If you look at debt held by the public data for the time periods in question, the debt paydowns are readily apparent. It's just that they get covered up by the increases in debt resulting from Social Security surpluses when you NET the two pieces together. That's what <pghquest> is insisting on doing so that no one will be able to see any more of the drop-dead, smoking-gun evidence for the $363 billion of debt paydowns that occurred in FY1998-2000 that she wants to pretend didn't happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
No one is changing what data is being counted. The jobs data report has come from the BLS for 70 years and President's whether it be Obama, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc always talked about the jobs totals as well.
That's correct. The debt-to-GDP ratio has always been monitored as well. <pghquest> is merely trying to invent reasons to disqualfy long-standing indicators that happen to indicate that her arguments are bunk.
Translation: Dont blame Republicans for the incompetence of Demcorats to do anything through the 2007-2008 crash.. Thanks for playing
Laughable. Senate Republicans filibustered every major bill, breaking every existing record in the process. Bush further threatened to veto innumerable bills that were proposed. The Democrats had to run circles to make any headway in this toxically obstructionist environment, basically relying in the end on either tying things to bills that Bush had to have -- like his so-called "emergency" supplemental funding requests for wars that had been ongoing for years -- or by refusing to pass bills that the Republicans wanted unless they unblocked something that they wanted. Meanwhile, it is in the Executive Branch and at the Fed that the responsibility for oversight lies, and if necessary, for intervention as well. The SEC, CFTC, OTS, OCC, etc. are all executive branch agencies. They were all asleep. Not just in 2007-08, but also in 2002-06 when all the garbage that eventually culminated in the credit crisis was actually going on, this while Republicans in Washington acted as cheerleaders.
Laughable. Senate Republicans filibustered every major bill, breaking every existing record in the process. Bush further threatened to veto innumerable bills that were proposed. The Democrats had to run circles to make any headway in this toxically obstructionist environment, basically relying in the end on either tying things to bills that Bush had to have -- like his so-called "emergency" supplemental funding requests for wars that had been ongoing for years -- or by refusing to pass bills that the Republicans wanted unless they unblocked something that they wanted. Meanwhile, it is in the Executive Branch and at the Fed that the responsibility for oversight lies, and if necessary, for intervention as well. The SEC, CFTC, OTS, OCC, etc. are all executive branch agencies. They were all asleep. Not just in 2007-08, but also in 2002-06 when all the garbage that eventually culminated in the credit crisis was actually going on, this while Republicans in Washington acted as cheerleaders.
Ahh, the old fillibuster claim.. Fine, I'll bite again...
What bills were filibustered that would have helped the unemployment.. NAME THEM!!
How many would have impacted employment? I don't know, look thru, I suspect you could find quite a few.
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.
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.
