Siddhartha
Lifer
Why do people continue to bring up Clinton in response to criticism of Bush?
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Why do people bring up Clinton in response to criticism of Bush?
- Thread starter Siddhartha
- Start date
Siddhartha
Lifer
I do not remember the Democrats mentioning Bush Sr when everyone was smacking Clinton around.
That's because Bush Sr.'s administration was largely free of scandals. They used Reagan instead.
Please don't pretend that the Democrats are free of the blind partisanship that so many Republikans have been showing lately. The arguments used those eight years were just as full of half-truths, strawmen, and non-sequiturs. If you truly believe differently, then you're as blind and misled as those you malign today.
Siddhartha
Lifer
After thinking about this. I remember some people saying during Clinton's impeachment that the republicans are impeaching Clinton for lying about sex and pretty much gave Reagan a pass when he subjugated the US Constitution with the Iran-Contras arm deal.
LilBlinbBlahIce
Golden Member
Originally posted by: Lonyo
It's obvious people, they bring up Clinton because he was MUCH worse than Bush ever could be, I mean, he got it on with his secretary, god, that's much worse than anything Bush has done.
Exactly!
Clinton is easily one of the worst U.S. Presidents of the 20th Century. He did nothing while in office and gets much more credit that he deserves for the economy during his tenure. The tech boom is what fueled the economy of the 90's and when it went bust so did the economy. Any fool could have told you it would not last, he was just lucky and rode it out as long as he could. The credit buying during the 90's is what is causing people to be in bad shape now. They were living beyond their means and buying everyting on creidt. Now that the economy has slowed down, it's still growing you know, they are over extended and in bad shape. No fault but their own. To try and pin the downturn on Bush is foolish, just as it is foolish to give Clinton credit for the economy during his 8 years in office.
Are you saying the leaders of other countries during that time were bad leaders then? I mean, the tech boom helped other countries as well in the 90's economy wise, so obviously they did nothing and it was just the tech boom, and they got undeserved credit.
The tech boom affected the rest of the worlds economy too, yeah, he got lucky, he also tried to help in foreign relations such as in Israel/Palestine and didn't do too badly from my limited knowledge. He may not have been perfect, and he may have been lucky, but that doesn;t mean he was automatically crap, you Bush brown-nosing blind fool.
Ahh the name calling begins. What's next, going to dare me to meet you by the flag pole after school?
Yes, the tech boom had an effect on the rest of the world's economy as well as the economy of the U.S. Your point is? Clinton did little during his term. Point to something substantial he did? For the most part he rode out his term and did very, very little. After the Republicans took Congress in 94 Clinton shifted back to the middle and was very much a centrist President. He had to be because he could get nothing trough Congress, that was a very good thing in my opinion. Thank God his and Hillary's ill conceived universal health care plan was shot down early on. He tried to help foreign relations such as Israel/Palestine and did well? How exactly? For your information every President sine 1947 has tried to bring peace between those two groups, all of them unsuccessful. If you really want to look at Israel/Palestine during Clinton's 8 years it might interest you to know that Israel built more settlements on the West Bank and did more to anger the Palestinians than they had in a long time. At the same time the Palestinians were launching more and more attacks against Israeli civilians. Yeah, sounds like Clinton did a lot for that region. There has been more of a move towards peace in the region in the last 3-4 months than there has been since Carter was President.
CREDIT BUYING?? refer '80s and Reagan if you want to talk about CREDIT buying.
NO administration can TRULY control the economy, there isn't a WHOLE lot any president can do that will change the ups and downs of an economy the size of the US. HOWEVER, there are temporary stop gaps and measures that can make the economy seem better or worse than it is: Reaganomics is a perfect example. Reagan took deficit spending to an all time high, pumping up the economy, he also deregulated banks (good idea there :roll😉 and credit became as free as it's ever been in the history of the US economy. I as a freshman in college was able to get 3 credit cards with $1000.00 credit limits too. not a small amount of credit in those days. guess what, i maxed all of them, played the credit card to pay another credit card deal and managed to get by for about 2 yrs and then finally had to break down, stop spending all together and spend the next 6 months paying those cards off.
so what is my point, deregulation put LOTS of credit cards in LOTS of peoples hands and SUDDENLY there was an increase in the money supply, naturally since most of us are fools with money went out and SPENT SPENT SPENT, and naturally you have good economic numbers for a few years, but guess what, the rest of america like me all of a sudden realized they had to pay all that back, Sudden DECREASE in money supply.
Hence the '80's.
don't talk about clinton and free credit, '90's was NOTHING for credit compared to the '80's.
Look at the numbers on personal bankruptcy during the 80's and then compare them to the 90's and now. What do you see? More people are filing bankruptcy as a result of their credit spending in the 90's. What you also need to look at is how the companies that were soaring during the 90's were funded. That's right, credit. There were so many paper tiger companies out there it was ridiculous. Anyone with 1/2 a brain could see that the economic surge of the 90's was a false one and would not laugh. Hell, I'm no economist but I saw it coming and switched all my 401k holdings into safe areas like bonds and money market funds before it all went to hell. Luckily I came out very well because of that. Sorry to hear you ran up debt you couldn't afford. You know what though, that wasn't Reagan's fault it was yours. I doubt that Ronald Reagan held a gun to your head and forced you to run up that debt. Bottom line, be responsible for your own actions and take your medicine when the time comes.
busmaster11
Platinum Member
You're right. Clinton was unable to cut taxes to benefit big corporation while pretending that it spurs the economy and create jobs. Clinton was also unable to raise the unemployment rate to its highest in over a decade while claiming to do the opposite. Clinton was also unable to weaken air pollution with bogus pollution credits for big corporations as bushy was able to accomplish. Clinton was also unable to weaken endangered species and water quality acts and negate Kyoto all in one fell swoop.
Mostly, Clinton was unable to pull the wool over America with a false pretense for war, obligating us to provide troops to a place where they're being shot at like fish in a barrel with no end in sight.
Clinton was also unable to create an arrogant and isolationist attitude that was once only associated with redneck america, but is now the promary reason why the world hates us. Oh - yeah, conservitive nuts like you don't care, of course...
Yeah. Clinton wasn't able to accomplish any of that.
Your attempt at sarcasm is really weak. Face it, Clinton was a do nothing President who just happened to be in office during huge economic growth that he had nothing to do with. As for President Bush. He has the unfortunate duty of presiding over a slower growing, but more realistic, economy. Of course the brief recession, that started in mid to late 1999, was made worse by 9/11.