Posted on 05/16/2014 4:16:41 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Our nation is built on $17 trillion dollar debt. I don’t think any of these Ivy League fools should be bragging.
There must be a kickback in there somewhere...
Conservatives were in charge of congress for the last six years of Clinton’s presidency. RINOS and democrats were in charge during Bush’s presidency. And Obama shouldn’t even be mentioned in the same sentence.
Yeah Hillary, I recall those times during the Bush presidency. That’s when we had jobs and homes and if we liked our healthcare we really could keep it.
Blaming President Bush isn’t working much anymore.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-blame-bush-era-may-be-at-an-end/
“But over the past year, polling data has begun to suggest that Bush is no longer quite the liability he once was for the GOP, and that most Americans no longer see the current economy as something Obama inherited.”
“Since April, Bush’s favorable rating has averaged 49.3”
What a hoot!!!!!
Due to the hi-tech and dot-com economic bubbles that rose under Bill, and were both bursting in early 2000, the economy was officially in recession before GWBush took office in late 2000. Can we say thanks Bill for the recession that began under you???
I had to educate our new local host his 2nd day on the air. He made the unfortunate mistake of Praising Bill Clinton for Welfare Reform, the Balanced Budget and lowered taxes through capital gains tax cut.
Brian Sussman made an unfortunate mistake of trying to give Clinton credit on the one hand while demonstrating his errors on the other.
I called in and thanked him for deciding to become a full time talk jock but I wanted to correct his view about Clinton’s legacy. Not to be contrarian or take away from him or Bill Clinton but they were just plain wrong and I asked I might quickly demonstrate why Clinton deserved zero Credit and when I am through who really should get the credit, without insulting anyone.
So I quickly went through them:
Contract with America, who wrote it? Newt Gingrich was his reply.
That is correct.
Now to clear the record I’ll go through them in the order I think is most powerful:
Capital Gains tax cut-
Was thought of as a response to Clinton’s raising of taxes and as a tool to keep the investment community well, investing and spurring additional investment. That was a Contract with America initiative and a well thought out position by Newt.
There was some horse trading and Newt gave away something no one really cared about to get it and the economy kept going with the result being unemployment dropping from 7% to 4% in a few short years.
The host immediately got the idea, said he would probably rephrase his thought at the end and asked me to continue.
Balanced Budget -
Again, Newt gave Clinton some bases that were already on the secondary list, devised by Dick Cheney, as alternatives for closure. Clinton got a win for his anti-military wing, we gave away something we didn’t care about and got what we wanted.
Welfare Reform -
this was the end goal all along and with a new Republican majority Congress it easily passed the House only to have Clinton veto it.
No problem. The President has the bully pulpit but was embroiled in a few distractions at the time which made it possible for Newt, Dole and few others to take their case directly to the American people who were sick of welfare queens.
Clinton was made aware the American people and the Houses were very much in the majority and very excited about reforming welfare. Still, he vetoed it again and then tried to make the argument he was going to co-opt the argument and reshape welfare reform as he saw fit.
It became very apparent the American taxpayer had, had enough and so had the houses. The pressure became to much and Clinton relented with nary a change to the original welfare reform act.
While he took credit for welfare reform it was never his idea, never became a priority until politically forced.
This was a Newt idea and part of the Contract with America which he shepherded.
Welfare Reform, the Balanced Budget and lowered taxes through capital gains tax cut.
and he hired Goldman Sachs to handle the country’s finances. and they screwed him and us.
Never heard of many mysterious deaths/disappearances on Bush’s watch,either.
The Hildebeast Team has very smart strategy wonks who are working out each the game plan to the minute detail. Right now they are tying her husband Bill to the Beast. They will make the case that the country under Clinton’s presidency, was prospering. If the Beast becomes President, the country will prosper again and the country will benefit with a two for one team in the White House. The Lame Stream Media will say nothing about the fact that the Republicans gained control of both the House and the Senate during the Clinton Presidency. It was the Gingrich revolution that gave Clinton his prosperous years. The LSM will make sure Americans forget that fact as it focuses on the “catastrophic” economic meltdown during the Bush Presidency. It my opinion that the crash of the mortgage market was engineered by the Dems as their October Surprise.
Hillary, I dare you to run on Obama’s record.
Economically, Jeb and W are at least as different as I and my brothers are. Spiking the argument is the fact that Jeb’s economic views are in much tighter agreement with Hillary herself than with W
“Economic Stewards”..........
Yes, of our money into their coffers. All three of them are thieves.
This is something conservatives have fumbled the political football on.
Wanting to seem somehow principled on politics it is agreed that Republicans are the same.
The simple fact is this:
The more the United States Federal Government has been controlled by Republicans, the better things have been for the nation.
This has been empirically true since at least the 1980s.
What clinton tries to claim is the revolution brought by Gingrich and Republicans in the mid 1990s. The resurgence of republicans in the late 1990s unleashed and economic boom. the did indeed bring surpluses and debt reduction.
Incidentally, poverty, unemployment and debt have all been managed more positively the greater Republican control.
I am all for having as conservative a congress as possible— with someone like Cruz in the lead. But pretending that Democrats are the same as Republicans is and has been pure political poison.
Even the Tea Party has leveled and reduced federal spending since 2010.
We need to acknowledge the empirical Republican path of success and stop pining for imaginary leaders that don’t exist.
I am someone who voted for Ted Cruz twice on his journey to victory but I have no shame in voting for Bush twice either.
We should not let Hillary get away with this theft of Republican success in the late 1990s that forced her husband to sign Welfare reform after he had vetoed it. Republicans stopped the health care insurance debacle started by hillary in 1993.
Democrat control of the Senate in 2007 ushered in the Great Recession— not Bush.
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.