How we can get Bill back as president

[HiveMaster]

I'm still trying to figure out how to get Reagan back... but I've pretty much given up hope.....

I guess Bush is the next best thing....

Since Reagan and Bush are at the same level mentally, you are right. It does not make a difference.

Look at it this way. You need brain surgery, and your choice is as follows:

A likable guy that made it thru medical school on the power of his dad's name more than anything else...
OR
A really smart dude, a Rhode scholar in fact, who just happens to screw around on his wife?

No offense to you moral high grounders...but I will take the better cutter any day.

No way would I want BC back; the accusations of monarchy (that should be leveled against the CURRENT POTUS) would drown out any good deeds the guy might be able to accomplish.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
WHY????

On his watch:

-107 consecutive months of economic expansion.
-Deficit of $290bn in 1992, to the largest surplus on record - $167bn in 2000.
-More jobs have been created than by any previous administration, an average of 248,000 a month, more than in the whole 10 years preceding.
- Unemployment, at 3.9%, is at its lowest in more than three decades.
-More people than ever own their own homes.
- Inflation at 1.9% in 1999 is at the lowest since 1965.
-Workers have seen real wages rise for five consecutive years.
-He has helped 7m Americans out of poverty, surpassing the record of Lyndon Johnson.

Oh yea it's the repulican congress I forget

No, it's the economic policies from the preceeding two admins that gave him that. Clinton cannot possibly be responsible for an economy that started before he took office, much less the economy in his first term. You have to be an idiot to believe any policy Clinton signed had an immediate effect on the economy.

Clinton was lucky enough to have served during the tech revolution that started before he took office, that's all. To credit him with the economy in the 90s is ridiculous.

Just how people like you love to blame Bush for the downturn in the economy, even though it started a full year befor he was elected. We are living under Clinton's legacy right now. The policies made in one term, aren't until the next two terms, possibly longer.

Carbony, I KNOW you're not this simplistic.

 

Originally posted by: technogeeky

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
You need to tell me why you think that everything is so constutional. Not that I agree or disagree with what you are saying - I wouldn't dare.

At the end of the day, the President has deliniated powers that are derived from the Constitution. Congress has powers reserved to it as well. Think of the Supreme Court as the referees. Everything does come down to the Constitution, you just don't hear about it in the media. The High Court decides tons of cases in a year, and you only hear about the ones that the media thinks have "sex appeal" - like Roe v. Wade, Bush v. Gore, executed retards....

But why exactly do you believe that so much of modern day politics has to do with the constitution?

Politics actually does not have anything to do with the "Constitution." See Marbury vs. Madison. THe court does not have jurisdiction over political questions.

The Constitution regulaes the exercise of power... a President has reserved powers... Congress has powers reserved to it... The States have certain powers reserved to it... It is all very complex, but there is a constant battle going on between the players. Just because you don't see it, does not mean that it is not there.

George Bush isn't supposed to have the power to imprision people without counsel, but I'll be damned if he can't right now.

Actually he does. There is Supreme Court precedent that allows this type of action.

This will be reviewed by the high court again... and it will be upheld.

1. No president has the power to suspend the Bill of Rights or any parts thereof. It is completely against everything that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights stands for.

2. You are still abiding by the powers delivered by the Constution. You may be speaking of implied powers derived from the Necessary and Proper clause, but this still does not mean that government officials are follwing prodecure.

coughLINCOLNcough

 

[PsychoAndy]

nothing like a writ of habeas corupus to break someones momentum

 

[outriding]

Just how people like you love to blame Bush for the downturn in the economy, even though it started a full year befor he was elected. We are living under Clinton's legacy right now. The policies made in one term, aren't until the next two terms, possibly longer.

i saw a graph of the economy all the way back before carter.. to sum it up

during carters term lower umemployment ( 5- 10 % ) with low interest rates
during regeans term higher umemployment ( 10-15 % ) with high interest rates
during bush sr term higer unemployment ( i cant remember but it was a bit lower than regeans but higher than carters ) high interest rates

during clintons term very low unemployment ( 3-8% ) with low interest rates.

if you add in lots of jobs with low interest rates that will stimulate the economy

everytime a right winger gets into office all they can do is complain about how it was the previous persons fault.

GET A FRICKING BACKBONE. and do something about it

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Where is the graph?

Carter presided over a time in American history where we were experiencing a phenomenon called "stagflation." This was characterized by both high unemployment and inflation... which typically do not go together.

Again... the president... by himself as president - can do little about the economy, except possibly manipulate the Fed...

Please. Read the Constitution. You might be surprised at how little power the president has.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: outriding

Just how people like you love to blame Bush for the downturn in the economy, even though it started a full year befor he was elected. We are living under Clinton's legacy right now. The policies made in one term, aren't until the next two terms, possibly longer.

i saw a graph of the economy all the way back before carter.. to sum it up

during carters term lower umemployment ( 5- 10 % ) with low interest rates
during regeans term higher umemployment ( 10-15 % ) with high interest rates
during bush sr term higer unemployment ( i cant remember but it was a bit lower than regeans but higher than carters ) high interest rates

during clintons term very low unemployment ( 3-8% ) with low interest rates.

if you add in lots of jobs with low interest rates that will stimulate the economy

everytime a right winger gets into office all they can do is complain about how it was the previous persons fault.

GET A FRICKING BACKBONE. and do something about it

Do what? This is what kills me. Liberals always think government can create employment. How?

What government can do is leave business alone and reduce taxes to foster investment. This has benefits a few years down the road. But NOTHING (and I mean NOTHING) you do now will create jobs immediately. It just isn't going to happen.

And you are STILL conveniently ignoring the fact that the recent economic slump started a full year before Bush took office. You are also ignoring the double digit inflation and massive unemployment that plagued the Carter admin. I lived through Carter. It wasn't pretty at all. He wasn't a bad man, just a micro-manager that turned everything he meddled with to sh!t faster than any other president I've seen. Historically, every president who has tried to micromanage has been a disaster... this is one of the main reasons I was against Gore. Gore would have been another Jimmy Carter.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

I leave this thread depressed...

I can't believe that your Precinct Judge allows some of you people to vote.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: HiveMaster

I'm still trying to figure out how to get Reagan back... but I've pretty much given up hope.....

I guess Bush is the next best thing....

Since Reagan and Bush are at the same level mentally, you are right. It does not make a difference.

Look at it this way. You need brain surgery, and your choice is as follows:

A likable guy that made it thru medical school on the power of his dad's name more than anything else...
OR
A really smart dude, a Rhode scholar in fact, who just happens to screw around on his wife?

No offense to you moral high grounders...but I will take the better cutter any day.

No way would I want BC back; the accusations of monarchy (that should be leveled against the CURRENT POTUS) would drown out any good deeds the guy might be able to accomplish.

you mean bush? he went to harvard MBA, not med school. notably, he was denied entrance to UT MBA. and for some reason people automagically think harvard is better...

and its rhodes scholar. pretty good way to dodge the draft, if you ask me. far better than bush's time in the air guard.

 

[Raincity]

You should be thanking Allan Greenspan for all the economic growth and prosperity during Clintons administration.

Rain

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: outriding

Just how people like you love to blame Bush for the downturn in the economy, even though it started a full year befor he was elected. We are living under Clinton's legacy right now. The policies made in one term, aren't until the next two terms, possibly longer.

i saw a graph of the economy all the way back before carter.. to sum it up

during carters term lower umemployment ( 5- 10 % ) with low interest rates
during regeans term higher umemployment ( 10-15 % ) with high interest rates
during bush sr term higer unemployment ( i cant remember but it was a bit lower than regeans but higher than carters ) high interest rates

during clintons term very low unemployment ( 3-8% ) with low interest rates.

if you add in lots of jobs with low interest rates that will stimulate the economy

everytime a right winger gets into office all they can do is complain about how it was the previous persons fault.

GET A FRICKING BACKBONE. and do something about it

A good chunk of your stats are off..or being twisted.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: Raincity
You should be thanking Allan Greenspan for all the economic growth and prosperity during Clintons administration.

Rain

I do.

Three things Greenspan has said always stick in my mind- "Inflation is my #1 enemy. I will do whatever it takes to control it." 2. " The goverment needs to balance the budget and pay off the debt" and 3. In his report to Congress last Sept he said that as of the end of Aug. the economy was recovering. Obviously 9/11 knocked the sh!t out of it. I wonder how much worse it would have been if GW hadn't bailed out the airlines?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer

Originally posted by: Raincity
You should be thanking Allan Greenspan for all the economic growth and prosperity during Clintons administration.

Rain

I do.

Three things Greenspan has said always stick in my mind- "Inflation is my #1 enemy. I will do whatever it takes to control it." 2. " The goverment needs to balance the budget and pay off the debt" and 3. In his report to Congress last Sept he said that as of the end of Aug. the economy was recovering. Obviously 9/11 knocked the sh!t out of it. I wonder how much worse it would have been if GW hadn't bailed out the airlines?

Actually it looks like only a few airlines took the govt loans after seeing what the govt was going to require for the deal.
I will see if i can find the link on this.

 

[Amused]

Talk about twisted stats...

The yearly average unemployment rates during the Reagan admin:

1981 7.5
1982 9.5
1983 9.5
1984 7.4
1985 7.1
1986 6.9
1987 6.1
1988 5.4
1989 5.2

Source: Statistical Abstract of the United States

After weathering the last three years of the already existing recession, Reagan's admin saw a steady decrease in unemployment.

I don't know what graph you saw, outriding, but it was either wrong, or you have no freakin' idea how to read a graph.

Carter's admin saw the start of double digit inflation AND double digit mortgage rates. These led to the recession that Reagan corrected... and as I pointed out, it takes YEARS to correct bad economic policy.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: LH
Well lets see, Enron fiasco, Global Crossing fiasco, WorldCom fiasco, Xerox fiasco, and the others that will work their way out of the wood work soon, all happened under Clintons watch. They got busted under Bush's watch. Though the average american has an IQ of 70, and will say all the economic fiascos are Bush's fault, even though they are not. All these current economic problems have nothing to do with the Bush admin. They are all problems started in Clintons 2nd term. Were they Clintons fault? No because he didnt have real control over it either. Clinton did for the most part ZERO for the economy or the country.

errs veto was over-ridden by the republican cong and dodd and dashel were bought and paid for on the demo side. So no it was'nt his fault.

Carbony, I KNOW you're not this simplistic.
This thread is
And anything would be better than so-called president bush.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
Originally posted by: LH
Well lets see, Enron fiasco, Global Crossing fiasco, WorldCom fiasco, Xerox fiasco, and the others that will work their way out of the wood work soon, all happened under Clintons watch. They got busted under Bush's watch. Though the average american has an IQ of 70, and will say all the economic fiascos are Bush's fault, even though they are not. All these current economic problems have nothing to do with the Bush admin. They are all problems started in Clintons 2nd term. Were they Clintons fault? No because he didnt have real control over it either. Clinton did for the most part ZERO for the economy or the country.

errs veto was over-ridden by the republican cong and dodd and dashel were bought and paid for on the demo side. So no it was'nt his fault.

Nor was it Bush's fault. It was NO ONE'S fault but the men who committed fraud.

But then, liberals can NEVER blame an individual or group of individuals for a crime. Noooo, it's everyone else's fault from the president to the guy's parents.

 

[junkyardDawg]

during carters term lower umemployment ( 5- 10 % ) with low interest rates

you gotta be kidding

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

WTF low interest rates during Carter's admin?

 

[mastertech01]

I guess he could get a sex change, and change his name to Billie Fitzgerald Clinton, and become the first woman president.... kinda..

I can see the liberals SWARMING the polls now...

He couldnt become Vice President because the natural succession could place him in an office he cannot hold by law.

 

[Chaotic42]

I'd love to hear the Rush show after that happens. lol

 

[ShotgunSteven]

If ignorance is bliss, we have a lot of happy people posting in this Thread. :disgust:

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: SaltBoy

Originally posted by: DevilsAdvocate
There cannot be a smart, good God. Else there would no Republicans.

That is really brilliant. Did you come up with that all by yourself?

No, Bill Clinton did. He had to do something...

Wow, what a smart, funny remark. I guess your IQ is higher than the average Republican to think of a remark that funny. What is it, 60?

Go back to sucking off that guy with the minority of votes.

P.S. I'm not a Democrat whining about Gore's loss, I'm a commie bastard who'd love to see every Republican get slaughtered for the next Faces of Death video.

 

[StattlichPassat]

Originally posted by: Beau6183
Why in God's great name (or in any concious state if you're athiest [gotta do the whole PC thing]) would we want to do that?

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: Beau6183
Why in God's great name (or in any concious state if you're athiest [gotta do the whole PC thing]) would we want to do that?

THINK OF THE CHILDREN! (Last ditch Left Wing response that they always use to try and convince people that their ideas are right and ought to become law.)

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
WHY????

On his watch:

-107 consecutive months of economic expansion.
-Deficit of $290bn in 1992, to the largest surplus on record - $167bn in 2000.
-More jobs have been created than by any previous administration, an average of 248,000 a month, more than in the whole 10 years preceding.
- Unemployment, at 3.9%, is at its lowest in more than three decades.
-More people than ever own their own homes.
- Inflation at 1.9% in 1999 is at the lowest since 1965.
-Workers have seen real wages rise for five consecutive years.
-He has helped 7m Americans out of poverty, surpassing the record of Lyndon Johnson.

Oh yea it's the repulican congress I forget

- The economy is lagged, our current economy is the result of him, his economy was the result of the previous president... and let's not forget that the previous economy was fake, look at all these big corporations that never really had any money
- Yea too bad we weren't able to keep our money and use it ourselves
- Woohoo, gotta love thos McDonald's jobs
- You're going to have to cite a source on that one
- Thanks Alan Greenspan. Now we're in a recession. Woot!
- You mean labor unions. Ya know, the rest of the country counts too, not just who happens to be a poor democrat.
- I think you're on Crack. Getting put on welfare doesn't not count as help out of poverty.