Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my General Interest ping list!. . .don't be shy.
Posted on 02/04/2004 10:39:26 PM PST by jmstein7
Blame Clinton!
If you're like me, then you're sick and tired of Kerry and his Democrat cohorts lying out of their pie-holes, blaming President Bush for a recession (and the consequential job losses) that CLINTON caused. The polls that show Kerry ahead cite the reason as "Bush cost us too many jobs." So, we can reverse that perception by merely getting the truth out -- and impeaching the Democrats' credibility in the process.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1071821/posts
The death-drop of the stock market did not begin with the Bush administration in January 2001, says the congressional Joint Economic Committee (JEC), but in March 2000 under the Clinton administration when it began its all-out attack on the entrepreneurs of the booming U.S. high-tech industry. Indeed, The Economist reports that this poisoning of the economic stream even may have begun in the late 1990s. According to JEC Chairman Rep. Jim Saxton, "The 2000 NASDAQ collapse also corroborates a variety of other data indicating that a sharp economic slowdown was under way by the middle of 2000."
The JEC also found that job losses began under Clinton as well:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1071825/posts
Virtually all of the net payroll job loss in recent years is accounted for by the manufacturing sector, and this decline in factory jobs began before the current Administration took office, Vice Chairman Jim Saxton said today. Opponents of the Administration have repeatedly claimed that its policies have caused the decline in manufacturing employment, but fail to explain how this trend began long before any changes in policy took place. The facts show that manufacturing employment reached a cyclical peak in 1998, trending downward thereafter. Consecutive monthly declines in manufacturing employment began in 2000. Moreover, manufacturing employment has been trending downward over a much longer period.
Despite the facts, Kerry and the Democrats continue to lie to the public -- and the media dutifully repeats their lies. Well, in the age of the internet, this will not stand!
Here is what YOU can do to get the word out:
1) Write A letter to the editor
Open the "Write for W" window by clicking HERE.
Write a letter to your editor denouncing Kerry and the Democrats for lying to the American people, blaming Bush for Clinton's sins and failures. For some more ideas, click here. Otherwise, here is a sample letter that you can use, edit, etc.
John Kerry and the Democrats have lied to the American people for too long. It has now been firmly established that the economic recession, and job loss, began while Bill Clinton was still in office -- but despite the facts, Kerry and the Democrats lie and blame Bush. This is outrageous.
On December 10, 2003, the congressional Joint Economic Committee released its official study showing that the recession began in the third quarter of 2000. Bill Clinton was still in office.
On January of 2004, the congressional Joint Economic Committee released it official study showing that the job loss that Democrats would like to pin on Bush began in July of 2000. Bill Clinton was still in office.
The fact is, the recession and job loss began on Bill Clinton's watch. President Bush inherited an economy that Bill Clinton destroyed. It is grossly disingenuous -- a flat-out lie -- for Kerry and the Democrats to blame Bush.
Make sure to put your ZIP CODE in the box at the top; then go ahead and SEND your letter!
Also, email the above sample to Brit Hume (he likes to get to the bottom of these things). Email Brit at:
2) Contact the RNC NRSC and Talk Radio and demand that they get the word out.
Email the RNC this story (or call or write them) and tell them to get this important fact out!
Republican National Committee | 310 First Street, SE | Washington, DC 20003
Phone: 202.863.8500 | Fax: 202.863.8820 | E-mail: info@gop.com
NRSC (National Republican Senatorial Committee)
| Ronald Reagan Republican Center | 425 2nd Street NE | Washington DC 20002 | 202.675.6000
http://www.nrsc.org/nrscweb/feedback/
Also, email Rush ( rush@eibnet.com ) and Hannity ( Hannity@foxnews.com ) and get the word out!
Call Rush at 1-800-282-2882
Call Hannity at 1-800-941-7326
4) Email O'Reilly the above story - he's wishy/washy these days, but he still likes to run stories like this about LIES.
Send the following (or your own letter) to oreilly@foxnews.com
Dear Bill,
John Kerry and the Democrats have lied to the American people for too long. It has now been firmly established that the economic recession, and job loss, began while Bill Clinton was still in office -- but despite the facts, Kerry and the Democrats lie and blame Bush. This is outrageous.
On December 10, 2003, the congressional Joint Economic Committee released its official study showing that the recession began in the third quarter of 2000. Bill Clinton was still in office.
On January of 2004, the congressional Joint Economic Committee released it official study showing that the job loss that Democrats would like to pin on Bush began in July of 2000. Bill Clinton was still in office.
The fact is, the recession and job loss began on Bill Clinton's watch. President Bush inherited an economy that Bill Clinton destroyed. It is grossly disingenuous -- a flat-out lie -- for Kerry and the Democrats to blame Bush.
Please go over the heads of the pinheads in the media and get the truth out to the people!
Thank you!
YOUR NAME
YOUR CITY, STATE
5) Email ALL your friends this page and tell them to write, call, fax, etc. This is too important an issue to remain silent on any longer.
If you think of any other action that FReepers can take, please post it to this thread.
Thanks!
You might be 100% correct in your claim. However -- right or wrong -- people who are w/out jobs and who are suffering financially absolutely, positively will not accept an "it's the previous guy's fault" defense from a sitting president, no matter who that prez is.
_______________________________________________________
“President Bush’s main economic policy -- the large tax cut of last year was not responsible for any of the current damage [to the economy]. Indeed, given the twin shocks of 9/11 and the post-Enron stock market decline, the short-term stimulus created by the tax cuts has turned out to be fortuitously well timed.” (Editorial, “Negative Al Gore,” The Washington Post, October 5, 2002)
Economic Statistics Confirm U.S. Economy Was Shrinking While Clinton Was In Office. “America went into recession long before the terrorist attacks of September 11th. … The new figures suggest … that the economy grew more slowly in … 2000 than was previously thought: GDP rose by 3.8% (compared with last year’s estimate of 4.1% and an initial figure of 5%).” (“Unwelcome Numbers,” The Economist, 8/3/02)
Market Indicators Confirm Recession Started On Clinton’s Watch. According to the Council of Economic Advisors, “it was widely recognized that the economy was weak coming into 2001.”
* The NASDAQ peaked on March 10, 2000;
* The S&P 500 peaked on March 24, 2000;
* The Dow Jones peaked on January 14, 2000;
* Manufacturing employment started falling in August 2000;
* Industrial production started falling in July 2000; and
* Manufacturing trade and sales started falling in April 2000.
(Council Of Economic Advisors, Talking Points, 9/20/02)
Congress’ Joint Economic Committee Says Signs Of Economic Slowdown Were Apparent In Mid 2000. “By mid-year 2000 … signs of an economic slowdown began to proliferate; it became apparent that an economic slowdown was underway. A number of key economic and financial indicators provided evidence of such slower growth and suggested that future growth could weaken. A brief summary of important elements of this evidence, for example, would include the following:
* Real GDP slowed from a robust 5.6 percent annualized growth rate in the second quarter of 2000 to 2.2 percent and 1.0 percent in the third and fourth quarters, respectively, before rebounding modestly to 1.2% in the first quarter of 2001.
* Key components of GDP such as real consumption expenditures slowed after mid-year as real income growth moderated, stock market values fell, employment gains lessened, and consumer confidence stalled and then deteriorated. Movements in retail sales generally corroborated these developments.
* Gross private investment also contributed significantly to this general slowdown with most key investment categories registering actual declines by the fourth quarter and advances of non-defense capital goods (ex-aircraft and parts) orders falling sharply after mid-year (on a year-over-year basis).
* The index of leading indicators trended down after January 2000.
* Employment advances slowed dramatically after mid-year. Gains in total non-farm payrolls, for example, averaged about 256,000 per month for the 2 1/2 years prior to mid-year 2000 and 44,000 per month after mid-year 2000. The average workweek also decreased after mid-year.
* The manufacturing sector also has weakened significantly since mid-year 2000. Industrial production, capacity utilization, the Natural Association of Purchasing Managers index, as well as manufacturing employment and workweek have all registered significant declines since mid-year 2000.
* Financial equity markets began to deteriorate about mid-year 2000 as well.
In short, there can be little doubt that a significant economic slowdown or retrenchment began about mid-year 2000 in the last quarters of the Clinton Administration.” (“Assessment Of The Current Economic Environment,” United States Congress Joint Economic Committee, 7/01)
Clinton’s Chairman Of Council Of Economic Advisors, Joseph Stiglitz, Said Recession Started During Clinton’s Tenure. “It would be nice for us veterans of the Clinton Administration if we could simply blame mismanagement by President George W. Bush’s economic team for this seemingly sudden turnaround in the economy, which coincided so closely with its taking charge. But … the economy was slipping into recession even before Bush took office, and the corporate scandals that are rocking America began much earlier.” (Joseph Stiglitz, “The Roaring Nineties,” The Atlantic Monthly, 10/02)
Stiglitz noted that during the Clinton Administration “the groundwork for some of the problems we are now experiencing was being laid. Accounting standards slipped; deregulation was taken further than it should have been; and corporate greed was pandered to ….” (Joseph Stiglitz, “The Roaring Nineties,” The Atlantic Monthly, 10/02)
Clinton Administration Grossly Overestimated Strength Of The Economy. “Hidden in the morass of statistics, there is proof that the Clinton administration grossly overestimated the strength of the economy leading up to the 2000 election. Did the federal government join Enron and WorldCom in cooking the books? … Most startling, the Commerce Department in 2000 showed the economy on an upswing through most of the election year, while in fact it was declining.” (Robert Novak, Op-Ed, “Sunny Clinton Forecast Leaves Cloud Over Bush,” Chicago Sun-Times, 8/8/02)
Drop In Investments In First Half Of 2000 Contributed To Recession. “A plunge in investment that began in the last half of 2000, along with the declines in equity markets, was an important force in the recession.” (Council Of Economic Advisers, “Strengthening America’s Economy: The President’s Jobs And Growth Proposals,” 1/7/03)
A Publication of the RNC Research Department
In 1997 Alan Greenspan warned investors of irrational exuberance and we didn't listen. Early in 1999 Alan Greenspan started raising interest rates to slow the economy down, an attempt to arrest inflation. Unfortunately this coincided with the price of oil tripling. This spike in oil prices would have slowed the economy without Greenspan's help and vice versa. We got double wammied. Hence the recession that started in March 2000, nine months before Bush took office.
| Upper Valley Free Press | Daryl L. Hunter - Publisher |
| Citizens For A Freer America |
Normally, I'd agree with you that Presidents unjustly get the credit/blame for these types of things, but... I see the dot-com boom and bust as directly relating to Clinton, though perhaps not in a cause and effect way. Both Clinton and the dot-coms were the proudcts of perception: too much hype and wishful thinking, with absolutely no foundation or substance to match it. Clinton and the dot-coms were symptoms of each other and of a general "golden age" fallacy among the public.
On the flip side, Bush actually does deserve some of the credit for the rebound we're currently seeing. From the psychological standpoint, the fact that he's addressing the issue of 9/11 head-on is reassuring to a very jittery market. The tax cuts have also helped, and will continue to help. Jobs, as predicted, lagged the recovery, but started to pick up around the first of the year. Barrign any kind of disaster, the jobs market will be booming long before the election.
We will buried by these Libs unless the Repubs realize they must step 'up to the plate' and hit the ball when it is forever lobbed at their heads.
Sick of it, personally. . .and yes, I will keep spreading the word; but we need some serious help, big time.
It may take a decade or two for the actual history to be written, but Bill Clinton's dozens of criminal and treasonous activities while in the White House will eventually be revealed.
I'm conservative and if it comes to a choice between any democrat and President Bush, I vote for Bush. Having said that the administration has been silent on the matter of outsourcing jobs. Plain and simple. If they don't do something about it they deserve the blame, plain and simple. Let's face it a jobless recovery is not going to help the President. Now some of the problem can be laid at the feet of Paul O'Neil, the President let him hang around the Treasury department far too long. But in the end the President let loyalty trump the health of the US economy. If we are not in better shape this summer look for Bush to be in political trouble. It may not be fair but it is politics.
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my General Interest ping list!. . .don't be shy.
The Microsoft Anti-trust Government and Lawfirm co-operation and power grab was when high tech business leaders began to make new plans.
The Microsoft Anti-trust Government and Lawfirm co-operation and power grab was when high tech business leaders began to make new plans.
Of course.
A new manager spends a week at his new office with the manager he is replacing. On the last day the departing manager tells him: "I have left three numbered envelopes in the desk drawer. Open an envelope if you encounter a crisis you can't solve."
Three months down the track there is a major drama. Everything goes wrong - the usual stuff - and the manager feels very threatened by it all. He remembers the parting words of his predecessor and opens the first envelope. The message inside says: "Blame your predecessor!" He does this and gets off the hook.
About half a year later, the company is experiencing a dip in sales, combined with serious product problems. The manager quickly opens the second envelope. The message reads, "reorganise!" This he does, and the company quickly rebounds.
Three months later, at his next crisis, he opens the third envelope. The message says: "Prepare three envelopes."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
