Valhalla Legends Archive

Quote from: peofeoknight on August 03, 2004, 02:21 PMOur economy is very robust right now. Employment is a lagging indictator, and employment has been up, so the economy has been on the up swing for quite some time.

OK, I will accept your conclusion if you will prove your premise.  show me that "employment has been on the up swing for quite some time".  Now since you are a reasonable person and can accept, and admit, the rare occasion where you might be wrong, if the data shows employment is not on the upswing, you will admit that employment does not support the economy being on the up swing?

In the last 9 months 1.4 million new jobs have been created. Hows that for an upswing?

Employment is a lagging indicator of weather we are in or out of a recession. It is often used to guage the economy. Employment is up and this shows that the economy is rather healthy at this point. Bush did not drive the economy down. It was on its way down under clinton, it could not sustain its growth and was moving downward. Then when 9/11 hit, the economy went into a death spiral. The tax cuts would have helped this, but unfortunatly they were stalled in congress for a year and a half, and cut down to an extent thast they were less effective then they could have been. Finally, where we are now, the econmy is back in an up swing and back in gear. Emplyment may not be up from where it was under clinton. Yes we have lost jobs since that point, but over the past while, we have been gaining jobs. Bush has been creating many new jobs, especially in the services.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/lc20030521.shtml <-- older article, but it talks about how the economy was already headed down hill before bush was in office.

Quote from: TehUser on August 03, 2004, 11:47 AM
This was too good to pass up.  It sounds to me like you're buying into a lot of right-wing propoganda about why they messed up the economy this badly.

Why do you automatically assume I listen to right week propaganda? In fact, the majority of my information comes from liberal media stations such as CNN. So, sadly, your assumption is incorrect and the majority of information is stuff I've applied from Government class and from information I  hear from the left.

Quote from: TehUser on August 03, 2004, 11:47 AMHistorically, in any other war, the economy THRIVES.  How do you think we got out of the Great Depression?  A war economy.  It's not war that takes a budget surplus (the first time we've had one in 40-some years, thank you, Clinton) and turns it into the largest deficit ever (thank you, Bush).

So, you're denying the fact that 9/11 had any effect on the state of the economy?

Quote from: TehUser on August 03, 2004, 11:47 AMYou can try to blame it on all of the factors you want, like people being afraid to spend money (*cough* BS *cough*)

Obviously you didn't watch financial news which stated this. That's one of the reasons why the economy started to fall, people weren't buying high priced items such as cars as much as they were before.

Quote from: TehUser on August 03, 2004, 11:47 AMYes, he lied about an affair (Oh my gosh, that's so totally un-American that a fair percentage of our morally upright population does it anyway).
Regardless, explain how that has anything to do with his ability to run a country.  (And if you even come close to saying, "If he'd lie about his private life, then he'd lie about politics." then you don't deserve to be a part of this argument.)  As far as Clinton goes, I think that history will look back and rank his abilities as president among the best we've ever had.

The President is a lot different than a normal person, people perceive American partly based on the president. It's a whole different story if a President has an affair versus some guy in Kentucky who works at Burger King.

---

President Clinton didn't go to war? (That quote isn't in Topic Summary )

What about Bosnia? He attacked them without UN consent, yet Bosnia never attacked us. Clinton had a chance to capture Osama thanks to Sudan three times, he did nothing.

On the other hand, Bush has liberated two countries, cripled Al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations, peacefully sent nuclear weapons inspectors to Korea, Lybia, and Iran. He caught Saddam who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. He caught many of the high profile terrorist leaders, and kept home security high enough to not allow another terroist attack back home.

Quote from: Arta[vL] on August 03, 2004, 10:39 AM
What's a 'daddy' comment? Please also point out my double standards.

I'm not mocking bush, I'm pointing out my reasons for thinking he shouldn't be re-elected.

"you" as in hardcore liberals.

Quote from: TehUser on August 03, 2004, 02:02 PM

Quote from: Hazard on August 03, 2004, 12:58 PM
Sounds to me like you're believing everything you see in the liberal media.

I don't need any media to tell me that the economy sucks now and that it didn't before Bush took office.  Anyone who lives even remotely close to a city is affected by this.

I live just outside a city, and I'm not affected by this.

Quote from: Hazard on August 03, 2004, 06:03 PM

Quote from: TehUser on August 03, 2004, 02:02 PM

Quote from: Hazard on August 03, 2004, 12:58 PM
Sounds to me like you're believing everything you see in the liberal media.

I don't need any media to tell me that the economy sucks now and that it didn't before Bush took office.  Anyone who lives even remotely close to a city is affected by this.

I live just outside a city, and I'm not affected by this.

I live in a large, highly liberal, military city. I'm not affected by this either.

If anything the job market in this town is better then it was a year or two ago. I know a lot of computer programmers in this town, they work for companies like bombardier, csx, modis, and so on. They do the business software, server aps, web sites, and all that those big companies require. You can still easily get a job in the tech industry even if some large companies out sourced to india. Just my $0.02 on employment, in my area atleast.

Quote from: Hazard on August 03, 2004, 09:21 AM

Quote from: hismajesty[yL] on August 03, 2004, 09:12 AM

Quote from: Snake on August 03, 2004, 09:04 AMTax cuts for the wealthy must be nice too. I'd vote for Bush too if he made my life nice by making it harder on the other 98% of america.
Atleast when another democrat was in the office our econimy was doing very well, compared to now when it's doing horrible.

The Democrat was too busy screwing office staff. During the Democrats time in office the country didn't have a humungous terrorist attack that dampend our financial stability and sent us into a repression because people were scared to spend money. During the Democrats time in office there also wasn't an expensive war/country rebuild going. Sure, Clinton lowered the national deficit, but there was a Republican Congress when that happened.

Yes, lets trust the man that can blatantly lie to his wife with a straight face about his promiscuity. Twice. That we know of.

The terrorist attacks were obviously being planned during the Clinton era, such an attack was admittedly not pulled off between Nov. 2 of 2000 when all the terrorirists were sitting in a cave watching CNN and commited on Sept. 11 of 2001. The planning must have taken several years. Where was all of this guys intelligence? The slacking in intelligence didn't just start when Bush took office, it was years of mistakes made under PRESIDENT CLINTON. There were no wars while Clinton was in congress because he was a patsy who wasn't willing to make the tough decisions to get involved in a major armed conflict, but lets not forget that he sent us into some sticky situations too that were politically unpopular. Also, study some economic charts pre-dating the Bush entrance into the White House, which is where all the Dems point and scream the downhill slope begins. It actually begins near the END of the CLINTON term. You might also consider that those few wealthy still pay the vast, vast, majority of taxes and everyone recieved a tax cut, it lumps to a larger sum the more wealthy you are.

Quote from: hismajesty[yL] on August 03, 2004, 09:12 AM

Quote from: Snake on August 03, 2004, 09:04 AM

QuoteThe issues aren't all about the war. And the part that is, I support kerry's desions to pull out of a war we shouldn't even be in. Just because we start problems and force these problems upon ourselves, doesn't mean we should keep doing it.

You support Kerry's decisions on the war? His decision was to go to war, and not support the troops with additional funding. Now that the nation as a whole is against the war, Kerry is changing his mind about it? Smooth.

He goes with whatever is going to get him elected. He says whatever he thinks will get him in the Oval Office. He votes for something, then decides to vote against it. He seems to have no convictions. He won't decide. He votes Yes to war, then No to fund the troops. He votes Yes for the Patriot Act, then No to the Patriot Act. Kerry changes his mind on everything. He is a brave war hero one day, then a anti-war lackey the next.

His personal life never effected the nation.
Facts are facts, the econimy was doing very well and when bush went into office, it just dropped sharply, there is hardcore proof of this. The wealthy got wealthier during the time also, kinda nice huh?

Yeah let's totally forget about the Republican Congress too.

Snake, look at any graph showing trends from 1998-2004. You will see that the economy began its recession during the second Clinton term before Bush was ever elected, and that it is now on the upswing.

Quote from: Hazard on August 03, 2004, 10:56 PM
Snake, look at any graph showing trends from 1998-2004. You will see that the economy began its recession during the second Clinton term before Bush was ever elected, and that it is now on the upswing.

I posted this article about it earlier in the thread infact.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/lindachavez/lc20030521.shtml
The economy had grown too quickly under clinton, and could not sustain it and started to down slope. Then when 9/11 hit it went into a death spiral. The bush tax cuts would hav alleviated it, but then they were held up in congress for a year and a half.

QuoteHis personal life never effected the nation.

You should watch the news more.

Quote from: hismajesty[yL] on August 04, 2004, 12:26 AM

QuoteHis personal life never effected the nation.

You should watch the news more.

his personally life was an embarrasment to the nation. What do you think the rest of the world was thinking? Plus if the president does not follow the law, what message does that conveigh? When I say he broke the law, I mean the whole lieing under oath thing. Thats why he was impeached, not because he made it with a chubby chick out of wed lock.

How did his personal life affect the way the nation is ran?